U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2010, 05:30 PM
 
41,817 posts, read 48,570,821 times
Reputation: 17828

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
WTC 7 did not topple to one side, but came down evenly.
You expect it to fall over like a tree? LOL.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2010, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
82,170 posts, read 75,506,488 times
Reputation: 105209
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Very simple explanation, you had burning material buried under mountains of debris at the WTC site. Less oxygen and it will burn much longer. You can perform a very simple experiment yourself to confirm this. Build a fire and once it gets down the coals take half the coals and bury them in a hole. When your above ground fire has completely extinguished and is throwing no more heat you can dig up your buried coals that will still be very hot and burning.
...and as you remove the debris on top and the oxygen feeds the fires below, they will flare up again.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Ohio
23,508 posts, read 17,602,895 times
Reputation: 20409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backspace View Post
It is a factor if the contents of the building include a couple thousand gallons of jet fuel.
Not relevant.

I've never investigated an arson, but I am a school-trained arson investigator. To estimate burn time we use the SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 2nd Edition, 1995, Page 3-197.

I will now proceed to rain all over your parade.


To do the math, we'll need some initial data:

Fuel Spill Volume (V) 7000.00 gallons
Fuel Spill Area or **** Area (A****) 22700.00 ft2
Mass Burning Rate of Fuel (m") 0.051 kg/m2-sec
Effective Heat of Combustion of Fuel (DHc,eff) 43000 kJ/kg
Fuel Density (r) 810 kg/m3
Empirical Constant (kb) 1.6 m-1
Ambient Air Temperature (Ta) 77.00 °F

Gravitational Acceleration (g) 9.81 m/sec2
Ambient Air Density (ra) 1.18 kg/m3

Pursuant to the FEMA Report, the government admits that each aircraft had less than 10,000 gallons of aviationfuel, in this case, JP-5.

The Report also claims that approximately 3,000 gallons of JP-5 burned off during the initial impact.

For these calculations, it is assumed that all remaining 7,000 gallons remained on the floor of impact and that no fuel spilled onto the floors below. The NIST Report claims that some fuel spilled down into the "utilitiy core shaft" (both FEMA and NIST are loathe to admit that the towers were built on a central core and insist maintaining the false suggestion that the towers were "steel frame buildings").


At this point, I'd like to say that this data is the best case scenario for the government. In other words, I'm and doing everything humanly possible to prove the government's case here.

Each floor was approximately 1 acre in size. Half the floor space or about 22,700 square feet are used in the calculations, since realistically, the central core would have prevent fuel from flowing to the other side of the floor.

Again, using the SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 3rd Edition, 2002, Page 3-25.

Q = m"DHc,eff (1 - e-kb D) Adike
Where Q = pool fire heat release rate (kW)
m" = mass burning rate of fuel per unit surface area (kg/m2-sec)
DHc,eff = effective heat of combustion of fuel (kJ/kg)
Af = A**** = surface area of pool fire (area involved in vaporization) (m2)
kb = empirical constant (m-1)
D = diameter of pool fire (diameter involved in vaporization, circular pool is assumed) (m)

Pool Fire Diameter Calculation
A**** = pD2/4
Where A**** = surface area of pool fire (m2)
D = pool fire diamter (m)
D = √(4A****/p)
D = 51.818 m

Heat Release Rate Calculation


Q = m"DHc,eff (1-e-kb D) Adike
Q = 4624815.52 kW 4383492.65 Btu/sec

4,383,492 BTUs per second would not possibly create temperatures in the range sufficient to even cause any stress of the steel. This becomes obvious momentarily.

tb = 4V / pD2n
Where tb = burning duration of pool fire (sec)
V = volume of liquid (m3)
D = pool diameter (m)
n = regression rate (m/sec)

Calculation for Regression Rate
n = m"/r
Where n = regression rate (m/sec)
m" = mass burning rate of fuel (kg/m2-sec)
r = liquid fuel density (kg/m3)
n = 0.000063 m/sec

Burning Duration Calculation
tb = 4V/pD2n
tb = 199.56 sec 3.33 minutes

The flash fire from the JP-5 would have burned off in about 3 minutes and 20 seconds. Based on video evidence of WTC 2, that's fairly accurate.


Again, this is the best case scenario for the government. If I were to incorporate NIST's claim that fuel spilled down the utility shafts in the central core, then the volume of fuel decreases and the burn time is significantly reduced to less than the 3 minutes.

One can conclude that an entire floor being engulfed in flames is a physical impossibility. Video evidence shows people looking out of the impact areas, which further proves the fuel fires were out and not as extensive as FEMA and NIST claim.


The math here corroborates that.

And now time for every one to read and weep:



After 90 minutes of fire burning at a 1000° C or 1832° F

your

deflection

is

a

whopping

1 mm (and yes that's millimeter).

Those of you who would like to know why the Mandarin Oriental Hotel and a dozen other hotels and high rise buildings ranging from 33 stories to 80+ stories did not fall over or topple, I just told you why.

Steel deflects only 1 mm after 90 minutes at temperatures in excess of 1000° C or 1832° F and that is not catastrophic.

And you can raise the fact that an airplane impacted the building. So what?

Since when does the impact of anything against something cause the crystal or molecular structure to realign?

Never.

The impact had no effect on the steel, and it certainly didn't affect its tensile strength or other properties. And for those who don't understand the design of the WTC, the core, which was undamaged according to FEMA and NIST provides the vertical support, while the exo-skeletal frame-work of the WTC provided lateral support which allowed the towers to flex under high wind or other stress, like the impact of an airplane.

I'm sure some idiot will say that 767 is larger than a 707, well no kidding, but in science we deal with mass, not size. A 707 and a 767 both have the same mass. Why? Because the 707s were built with steel and aluminum, while the 767s (and 757s) were built with aluminum and plastic like mylar and carbon-graphite compounds.

For those of you who would like to watch a controlled demolition, here's a very nice site with video from 4 different angles (directions).

http://www.magazine.uc.edu/exclusives/sanders.swf (broken link)

and another:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q08y6cFsTw

Note that it only took 520 pounds of PBX.

The actual collapse time is about 8.6 seconds, and note that WTC1 and WTC2 which were nearly 4 times taller only took a second or two longer to totally collapse.

For the WTCs, you could have used the same amout of PBX. It wasn't necessary to wire every floor, they could have done every other floor, every 3rd floor or even every 5th floor.

This is not a very complicated conspiracy. Apart from the Principals, maybe 5 or 6 well-placed conspirators would be all that's needed to pull it off.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,100,556 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by POhdNcrzy View Post
Well I waited and waited for somebody else to cover this but no one stepped up so here goes....

In early February 2009 the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Beijing was ignited by fireworks and very thoroughly burned. Casualties were nominal because the hotel was under construction and almost finished but basically vacant when the fire struck.

According to the New York Times (02/11/2009), the responsible party, the China Central Television network, apologized to the nation for "the severe damage the fire caused to the country's property". According to the Times, the hotel was "destroyed".

Interestingly enough, unlike the World Trade Towers on 9-11, although the Mandarin hotel was severely and thoroughly burned and "destroyed", it did NOT collapse and implode into a "fine white powder" in nine seconds.

HHHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!

The NY Times article has an accompanying photo of the burned hotel. Although the fire clearly burned through every level of the steel-frame hotel, not a single floor of the hotel collapsed and in fact the steel frame was left completely intact, although severely blackened and charred.

I now open the floor to debate, as it were....

I missed the part about the bulding soaked in jet fuel. I wish the wacky truffers would give it up already. Or at least get with the birthers and the JFK wackos so we can keep an eye on you......

Last edited by shorebaby; 11-17-2010 at 07:13 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 06:30 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
67,405 posts, read 50,839,995 times
Reputation: 38462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Not relevant.

I've never investigated an arson, but I am a school-trained arson investigator. To estimate burn time we use the SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 2nd Edition, 1995, Page 3-197.

I will now proceed to rain all over your parade.


To do the math, we'll need some initial data:

<BIG SNIP>


This is not a very complicated conspiracy. Apart from the Principals, maybe 5 or 6 well-placed conspirators would be all that's needed to pull it off.


You've overlooked one very important factor:

In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,100,556 times
Reputation: 3146
I find conspiracy nuts fascinating, here is a great article about the kooks and what motivates them.

Why People Believe in Conspiracies: Scientific American

"Conspiracy theories connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency. Add to those propensities the confirmation bias (which seeks and finds confirmatory evidence for what we already believe) and the hindsight bias (which tailors after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened), and we have the foundation for conspiratorial cognition."

And another good one.

Independent Sources » Blog Archive » Why do otherwise smart people believe conspiracy theories?

And specifically fo our 9/11 nuts.

Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition Homepage

"Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise..."

My goodness have we seen alot of that here!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 07:04 PM
 
41,817 posts, read 48,570,821 times
Reputation: 17828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
And for those who don't understand the design of the WTC, the core, which was undamaged according to FEMA and NIST provides the vertical support, while the exo-skeletal frame-work of the WTC provided lateral support which allowed the towers to flex under high wind or other stress, like the impact of an airplane.
So you're suggesting the floors could stand on there own without the the exo skeleton? LOL That's basically what this statement implies which would be false.

The floors provide lateral strength to insure to the exo skeleton which provides vertical strength cannot buckle. Remove either of the two and you have a severely compromised structure. Remove both in this case and you have disaster.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 07:32 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,949 posts, read 8,540,452 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Not relevant.

I've never investigated an arson, but I am a school-trained arson investigator. To estimate burn time we use the SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 2nd Edition, 1995, Page 3-197.

I will now proceed to rain all over your parade.
You forgot to copy and paste all of the 911 truther info from the other forums where you found it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2010, 08:08 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
82,170 posts, read 75,506,488 times
Reputation: 105209
core, which was undamaged according to FEMA and NIST

ROFL, there's a new one. The core was undamaged, lolol. I don't think I've ever heard anyone try to make that claim before!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2010, 12:18 AM
 
Location: Rhode Island (Splash!)
1,150 posts, read 2,587,703 times
Reputation: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
For those of you who would like to watch a controlled demolition, here's a very nice site with video from 4 different angles (directions).

http://www.magazine.uc.edu/exclusives/sanders.swf (broken link)

and another:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q08y6cFsTw
Hey, wait a minute, that looks awful familiar...

Thanks for your post, you really stimulated some bird-brains to come make their droppings all over my thread in response! Whatever keeps it at the top of the reads is fine by me...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:17 PM.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top