General Discussion

yellowcanine

(36,705 posts)

107. You obviously don't have much experience with large fires.

Tue Oct 14, 2014, 04:21 PM

Oct 2014

"To be perfectly honest with you, I'm not even a "truther," or whatever." Right. Sure you aren't. You just carry their water for them.

You don't even need fuel to melt steel. In major warehouse fires steel beams often start sagging considerably. If the fire is allowed to continue burning they will often eventually collapse. And the trade center buildings were not a two story warehouse. A lot of extremely hot material collapsed into a small area, mixing with plenty of oxygen with lots of combustible materials. That combined with the kinetic energy of the collapse of a tower would generate a tremendous amount of heat. And anyone who has watched a major fire has seen paper get lofted into the air and escape from a fire. Watch footage of the trade center fires on 9-11. There was paper everywhere.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

147 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Man Who Tricked Chemtrails Conspiracy Theorists [View all] zappaman Oct 2014 OP

Just spray 'em with vinegar... SidDithers Oct 2014 #1

I miss Spiralhawk, Berlum and whatever other identities she had... zappaman Oct 2014 #2

Oh my God, that thread again! NuclearDem Oct 2014 #3

Funnier than this? zappaman Oct 2014 #4

Two very separate schools of comedy. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #6

I've always been a fan of the classics. name not needed Oct 2014 #136

Not quite as funny as melting chicken wire... n/t cherokeeprogressive Oct 2014 #24

Another DU classic... SidDithers Oct 2014 #35

Thanks for bring that up...za RobertEarl Oct 2014 #27

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #46

He'll insist it's still coming. jeff47 Oct 2014 #51

What will happen to the tons of waste? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #52

Post removed Post removed Oct 2014 #60

Not real? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #62

Too easy with you AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #64

or just here to make anti-nuke advocates look bad. zappaman Oct 2014 #65

OMG! Are you series? This thread about chem trails got Analyst? Major Hogwash Oct 2014 #92

No. You don't appear that way at all. RobertEarl Oct 2014 #66

I don't appear intelligent to you? AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #67

Your posts define you, not I. RobertEarl Oct 2014 #68

Since everything is Bizarro world to you AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #69

No. I forgive you. RobertEarl Oct 2014 #70

you aren't a serious poster, quit playing games with us CreekDog Oct 2014 #141

This is weird RobertEarl Oct 2014 #143

Wasn't he thrown out of the E & E group? zappaman Oct 2014 #145

Answer zappaman Oct 2014 #53

I thought the sea star 'melting' was a problem related to Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #79

Shhhhhh! zappaman Oct 2014 #81

acidification RobertEarl Oct 2014 #87

That thread is outdated because we now know the starfish are being killed by Ebola. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #117

That's real? Atman Oct 2014 #9

I wish they wouldn't include us truthers in other crazy conspiracies Politicalboi Oct 2014 #5

We know you can't help it. zappaman Oct 2014 #8

So because Harry Houdini wasn't really a spy that means Standard Oil wasn't really a conspiracy? Electric Monk Oct 2014 #21

Did Standard Oil establish a monopoly through a mind control machine? NuclearDem Oct 2014 #61

Your lack of understanding of physics doesn't mean it's a conspiracy. FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #12

+1 HuckleB Oct 2014 #131

They should - they're just as crazy. Drunken Irishman Oct 2014 #15

No, they're not. Atman Oct 2014 #23

And the Sandy Hook denialists have lots of claims of off-the-record jeff47 Oct 2014 #38

Yes, because claims of "off the record birth certificates" are exactly the same... Atman Oct 2014 #40

The fact that you believe one does not make it true. jeff47 Oct 2014 #49

we live in a country questionseverything Oct 2014 #54

Think about who the victims were. jeff47 Oct 2014 #75

I like how no one elses suggestions add up. But yours are concrete. Atman Oct 2014 #82

To quote Dr. Tyson.... Oktober Oct 2014 #86

Because yours are based on a misunderstanding of how structures are built jeff47 Oct 2014 #122

There was no heat load on the lower floors. Atman Oct 2014 #124

Because cars aren't crushed when they hit things. jeff47 Oct 2014 #125

You don't have to explain anything to me. Atman Oct 2014 #126

You make way too many assumptions about what I know. Atman Oct 2014 #127

"You can't melt steel with jet fuel." zappaman Oct 2014 #128

Actually, there are photographs of molten steel pouring out of the towers. Atman Oct 2014 #129

No there aren't. zappaman Oct 2014 #130

really, come on you are killing us here- snooper2 Oct 2014 #142

so we have established that the cia did pull off a huge ct questionseverything Oct 2014 #99

No, it actually wasn't that huge. (nt) jeff47 Oct 2014 #121

Why did there have to "hundreds of thousands" involved? Atman Oct 2014 #55

"I don't think Bush could masturbate without assistance" zappaman Oct 2014 #56

Because that's what it would take for it to be "MIC forced" or "pulling other strings" jeff47 Oct 2014 #74

I live in New England. Don't give me that "build a house" shit. Atman Oct 2014 #78

A large building has a hell of a lot more inertia than a house cpwm17 Oct 2014 #112

Wrong. zappaman Oct 2014 #113

Physics fail! cpwm17 Oct 2014 #114

Oh man I somehow missed that one! Now I understand the reference to melting chicken wire. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #120

And a 2 story barn falling down from neglect is exactly like a skyscraper hit by a plane. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #119

It is exactly the same.Made up shit! nt Logical Oct 2014 #59

+1 n/t tammywammy Oct 2014 #26

Kind of hard to argue with...but many people will, and do. Atman Oct 2014 #19

PNAC had me at "a new Pearl Harbor." nt valerief Oct 2014 #29

Yeah, but we're supposed to pretend none of that ever happened. Atman Oct 2014 #32

And when we did launch some interceptors Cheap_Trick Oct 2014 #33

...because prior to 9/11, supersonic flights over the US were illegal. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #77

Gee, I think we could've bent the rules for an emergency such as this. Cheap_Trick Oct 2014 #90

Even if we did "bend the rules" just that one time... NuclearDem Oct 2014 #93

Uh, we have a new invention called "radar" Cheap_Trick Oct 2014 #98

Yes, I'm aware of radar. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #102

Did you see how long it took them to intercept Payne Stewart's plane? hack89 Oct 2014 #105

You might want to look up what after-burners do to fuel consumption.. EX500rider Oct 2014 #80

Maybe if we'd sent up interceptors as soon as the first plane's transponder was switched off Cheap_Trick Oct 2014 #91

And again, how exactly were they supposed to locate the aircraft? NuclearDem Oct 2014 #95

The DoD has no way of knowing if a transponder is turned off hack89 Oct 2014 #137

Do you understand what top speed does for fuel consumption? hack89 Oct 2014 #88

I'd start here: EX500rider Oct 2014 #73

Can't trust Popular Mechanics. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #76

One of the greatest lines ever. NCTraveler Oct 2014 #36

These guys are almost as humorous as the chem-trail guys FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #41

Jet engines didn't fall to the street. Fusilage didn't fall to the street. Atman Oct 2014 #42

the hell they didn't jberryhill Oct 2014 #83

Whoopsie! zappaman Oct 2014 #84

Inconvenient... at best. LanternWaste Oct 2014 #101

"Jet engines didn't fall to the street. Fusilage didn't fall to the street." NCTraveler Oct 2014 #94

Same argument is made about the Pentagon plane. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #108

Correct, that was a dumb thing to say. Atman Oct 2014 #97

Bullpuckey jberryhill Oct 2014 #100

"Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel" NuclearDem Oct 2014 #103

You obviously don't have much experience with large fires. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #107

And then giant structures conveniently fall perfectly into their own footprint. Atman Oct 2014 #110

Yeah, over 40 buildings were damaged by the WTC falling "perfectly into their own footprint." zappaman Oct 2014 #111

There you go again, using actual facts as evidence. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #116

Yeah you are "not a truther" you just use exactly the same (false) arguments. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #115

Also, nice Gish Gallop once your original statement was quickly proved false. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #109

I was going to mention that jberryhill Oct 2014 #132

It wasn't a "dumb thing to say", it was an absolutely untrue and false thing to say jberryhill Oct 2014 #134

"it won't matter that each of them is untrue and false - it's the volume of them which is yellowcanine Oct 2014 #135

20 year military vet here AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #45

Don't try logic on these fools FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #47

I feel compelled somedays AnalystInParadise Oct 2014 #48

+1000 thank you for this! nt Logical Oct 2014 #58

Almost everything you said there is totally made up shit. Wow, you scare me. nt Logical Oct 2014 #57

"I can't understand it, therefore, it's not true." NuclearDem Oct 2014 #63

"leave NO debris anywhere near the buildings." EX500rider Oct 2014 #71

Planted. zappaman Oct 2014 #72

You ever think that there is a reason? Oktober Oct 2014 #85

Interesting, I did not think we are allowed to even bring up this subject. Rex Oct 2014 #7

Nothing wrong with discussing a hoax. zappaman Oct 2014 #11

I mean the 'word that shall not be said on DU'. Rex Oct 2014 #14

Good luck! zappaman Oct 2014 #17

Will do. Rex Oct 2014 #25

investigation is being demanded by 400 Shasta residents J_J_ Oct 2014 #10

We need a Conspiracy Theory Tax. You want your favorite theory investigated, pay up. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #118

Best idea ever! zappaman Oct 2014 #123

That's great. FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #13

I handle discussion with the chemtrails folks this way... stevenleser Oct 2014 #16

That's a good idea! zappaman Oct 2014 #18

The mentally ill don't handle actual science well. SwankyXomb Oct 2014 #31

Well now that's just like asking them to give up their hopes and dreams. logosoco Oct 2014 #39

I'not a chem-trail conspiracy guy, but your test is impossible. lob1 Oct 2014 #44

Keep trying or hire a plane FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #50

There are a couple of reasons why your objection isn't quite right. stevenleser Oct 2014 #104

I'll even help out here Quackers Oct 2014 #89

Excellent! Well done! stevenleser Oct 2014 #96

Love this! zappaman Oct 2014 #106

Ha wheniwasincongress Oct 2014 #20

My elderly dad believe all this hokum procon Oct 2014 #22

So, your Dad is aware? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #34

"the military ... did use airplanes to disperse chemicals into hurricanes?" Yeah and so what? yellowcanine Oct 2014 #138

Agent orange in VN? RobertEarl Oct 2014 #139

No, because I do not claim those chemicals are causing "Chemtrails" yellowcanine Oct 2014 #140

Well RobertEarl Oct 2014 #144

Science, Bob. zappaman Oct 2014 #146

I had a lady ask me if I knew what those streaks in the sky were. Turbineguy Oct 2014 #28

TV is used to influence our thinking. The govt doesn't need chemtrails. nt valerief Oct 2014 #30

How did you keep from busting out laughing right then and there? FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #43

Chemtrails only work on crazy people jberryhill Oct 2014 #133

I loved Chemtrail Central....best place to troll paranoids on the net. ileus Oct 2014 #37

There have been multiple experiments, including 9/11 groundings... hunter Oct 2014 #147