Christians for 9/11 Truth

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Kerosene, under ideal conditions, burns at a maximum temperature that's about half that necessary to melt steel. This is according to the laws of physics. Yet the government version of events claims that the kerosene fire melted the steel.
brian

The adiabatic flame temperature of Kerosene is (in ideal conditions) 2093 Deg C. The melting point of Carbon steel is 1425 - 1540 Dec C.

And you don't need to reach the absolute melting point to make steel "melt" anyway (as any middle-ages blacksmith will tell you). So why do truthers keep asking this question?

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Also, there has never been a plane crash in history where the black box was not found. In this case, four planes crashed, and none of them were recovered. huh.

Not true

The Black Boxes - 911myths

 

[Thekla]

Here is a documentary which focuses on the Jersey Widows, some of their questions, and publically available information that gives more information re: these questions than the 9/11 Commission was able to uncover. Not a "conspiracy" piece.

9/11: Press for Truth


We're a democracy; let's put the question of a further investigation to referendum.

 

[Paulos23]

Just because this thread is crying out for it:

911Myths

I researched 9/11 after so many conspiracies started popping up. Hate to say it, but I haven't found one claim by the 9/11 conspiracy buffs true.

 

[Thekla]

I think conspiracies are born, in part, of a failure to make full information public, to make a commitment (and follow through) on complete discovery, and a past history of deliberate obfuscation (foreign policy is full of this sort of thing).

The initial refusal of the government to investigate, the numerous inconsistencies in statements made by members of the administration, the ongoing response to each question as "too offensive for my consideration" (as well as out of the loop and I don't remember) remind me of Iran Contra, etc.

 

[RealitySlap]

No. It happened going on 10 years ago now. If you want the truth, buy and read (government reports) like the rest of us did.

Followed by:

"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." --Plato

The irony is quite amazing.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

The people who should be on a funny farm are not 911 Truthers but those who think skyscrapers with steel cores can roll down into themselves in 14 seconds, and that the "momentum" from 10 to 30 light upper stories can crush the backbone of the lower 70 - 90 stories like magic.

Stack ten paint cans and lift the top one up 3 feet above the rest, and drop it on the other nine. See if it crushes them. It's called Newtonian physics. Upward static force (resistance) counteracts downward momentum. Newton's laws were not suspended for one day.

No - it's called (and as an engineer I'm going to be brutally honest here) an article written by someone who doesn't understand structural engineering, impulse force or physics AT ALL. 10 paint tins? - oh good grief.

Kerosene (jet fuel) only burns at around 500 F in open air and steel needs close to 2,750 F to melt, maintaining significant strength even at 2,000 F.

2000F? Ummm - you can hot work steel at that tempreature.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

And anyway all this begs the question of Building 7, which was never hit by a plane and had no jet fuel (kerosene) in it. It fell straight down, perfectly symetrically, at free fall speed. Anyone who can't see it was a demolition is delusional.

And yet no truther has produced a single photo or video showing people planting charges in a busy building in the middle of New York. Not one. No one has come forward, no receipts, no missing explosives - nothing. That's delusional.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

A flight school drop-out, Hani Hanjour, could not have performed a 7,000 ft., 280 degree corkscrew dive which is beyond the skills of many top gun military pilots, in a plane which handled like a Mack truck.

This is just going to get repeated over and over isn't it?

Well I'll spell it out - the 7,000 ft., 280 degree corkscrew dive never happened. It was speculation by an air force navigator from this site.

Read more here. Debunked. Again.

 

[Supreme]

The truth of 9/11 is that a bunch of extremist Muslims hijacked a few planes one day and drove them into some towers after terrorist training. I don't find that hard to believe.

What I do find hard to believe is all the nonsensical theories, including this Christians for 9.11 truth nonsense.

 

[Ayersy]

Stack ten paint cans and lift the top one up 3 feet above the rest, and drop it on the other nine. See if it crushes them. It's called Newtonian physics. Upward static force (resistance) counteracts downward momentum. Newton's laws were not suspended for one day.

They're cylinders, stronger than the snape of the towers. Even then, though, if someone where to put a strong dent in the side of one of the paint cans, it would weaken the structural integrity, almost like flying a plane into the side of a building.

Here's an example. Get an empty coke can. Stand on it, with one foot, and balance yourself. It is able to hold your weight, because of the shape of the cylinder. Now, if you get someone to just tap the side of the can with a pencil or pen, it will crumble, because one side of the can isn't able to hold the weight.

Now, imagine that, but on a larger scale. There you have it.

 

[circa02]

Why is this so hard for Christians to even contemplate? We defy every scientist in the world regarding creation and evolution, but when some, not all, scientists make these claims about 9/11, there's no questioning? What's harder to believe, a cover up by the worlds most powerful government and militarily, or a talking snake? I really don't understand this.

 

[Paulos23]

I'll be brutally honest too; if you are an engineer I sure wouldn't want you touching my structure. You don't need to be an engineer to see the official story is impossible, it's high school physics. Do you really think the "momentum" from 20 light floors can "push" down the other, much heavier 80 or 90 floors? You believe in magic. Calculate the static upward resistance of 35,000 tons of 47 vertical steel columns (of the 96,000 tons of steel in a tower 35,000 to 40,000 tons of it was in the core backbones.) The columns got narrower and lighter toward the upper floors, common sense engineering.

There is a great paper on the amount of energy that was transfered during the collapse. I suggest you read it.
http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

It should be enough to know that in the official reports the buildings were misrepresented as "hollow" cores. 35,000 tons of steel backbone is anything but hollow.

No, it is not hollow. But that core only supported 60% of the building load, the outside walls held the other 40%. The floors tied the two together. Once the outer wall was damaged in the impact and the floors where compromised that the process of collapse began. The fires helped it along, but once the towers were hit it was only a matter of time.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

I'll be brutally honest too; if you are an engineer I sure wouldn't want you touching my structure. You don't need to be an engineer to see the official story is impossible, it's high school physics. Do you really think the "momentum" from 20 light floors can "push" down the other, much heavier 80 or 90 floors?

Like I said - they (and you) don't understand how structures, impulse force etc work. That is plainly obvious from your comment above. It isn't "high school physics", its engineering structures. The "weight" of the floors below has nothing to do with the collapse - you should know that. Quoting how heavy they are is irrelevant.

The fires could not have reached these temperatures, and you got the max burning temperature of kerosene off by about a 1000C. I hope you don't make those kind of errors in your engineering calculations.

Wrong. I simply quoted the adiabatic flame temp under ideal conditions and mentioned this in my post. So, no - I don't make "those kinds of errors". The temperature you claimed is not as hot as a match flame, and yet it's plainly obvious the tower fires were hotter than this.

It requires a mechanically forced air supply over fuel in a closed chamber, like a bellows in a forge or blast furnace, to get to those kinds of temperatures. Weak convection currents aren't the same.

And yet a house fire can easily reach almost 1000 deg C using only items in the struture for fuel. Hmmm - might be a problem there.

PS - I'm still waiting for a "truther", any truther, to tell me where flight 77 from the pentagon went.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Neat trick, when you don't have an answer, just deny it ever happened or that anyone ever said it. You seem to be very invested in denying the truth, why is that? Every "debunk" you cite is pure fiction. Why are you working so hard at it? Most people would say, hmm that's interesting, I guess there are a few questions..

Google the National Transportation Safety Board "Flight Path Study AA77", which states:

“[Flight 77] started a right 330-degree descending turn to the right. At the end of the turn, the aircraft was at about 2,000 feet altitude and four miles southwest of the Pentagon. Over the next 30 seconds, power was increased to near maximum and the nose was pitched down in response to control column movements.”
​

Wait - I thought it was 280 degrees. At least that's what your post claimed

"A flight school drop-out, Hani Hanjour, could not have performed a 7,000 ft., 280 degree corkscrew dive which is beyond the skills of many top gun military pilots, in a plane which handled like a Mack truck."

So now it's changed. Neat trick there. But obviously I'm "working so hard at it" because I'm with the CIA or something.

Lets go to the 9/11 Commission report:

"At 9:29, the autopilot on American 77 was disengaged; the aircraft was at 7,000 feet and approximately 38 miles west of the Pentagon.59 ....

At 9:34, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport advised the Secret Service of an unknown aircraft heading in the direction of the White House. American 77 was then 5 miles west-southwest of the Pentagon and began a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet, pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington.

So in 5 minutes, the 757 has descended 4800 feet - your quote, your figures.
Which is 960 fpm. Which is less than the recommended rate of descent for that aircraft (in some cases about half the recomm rate)

So your "corkscrew topgun spiral whatever" is debunked. Again

Now - where did flight 77 go?

 

[circa02]

where did all of the video recordings surrounding the Pentagon go, or all four black boxes?

 

[MacNeil, D.]

I'm glad we've kept the Trvth of this conspiracy confined to the lunatic fringe.

 

[circa02]

"the lunatic fringe", isn't that what secularists call religious people? I guess it must be true.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

"the lunatic fringe", isn't that what secularists call religious people? I guess it must be true.

Its what I call the 911 Trvthers.

 

[Paulos23]

"the lunatic fringe", isn't that what secularists call religious people? I guess it must be true.

Not all athiests think religious people are lunatic fringe.

I am assuming secularists are athiests, unless your using some other deffinition.