Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (5692)	3/18/2004 11:57:46 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Which is why, imho, the imbeciles who ordered employees to stay at their desks and work while the buildings they were in were fuming at the top should be publicly flogged. Flogging's not good enough. HUNG. Assuming, of course, any of them survived. It's a pretty good bet other people died because of them. As anyone who has studied construction can tell you, steel structures cannot stand fire, unless their structural steel is encased in cement. The 2 classic methods used to be cement or asbestos. Cement is still used and is better, but obviously a lot heavier (meaning ultimately the building can't be as tall) and a lot more expensive. Thank you. I've been fighting this idiocy for 2 years and these conspiracy nutcases keep spreading their "THAT FLAME COULDN'T HAVE MADE THE BUILDING COLAPSE!" bunk.

To: zonder who wrote (5692)	3/19/2004 11:52:39 AM
From: Michelino	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Yes, the innumerate theories as to how the buildings came down are examples of loony polemics. The science and "the evidence" behind them is similar to that used to prove that the moon landing didn't take place or that the "face on mars" is artificial. With so many of us believing that a bowling ball will fall faster than a marble; even the simplest explanations that rely on physics or engineering will fall on deaf ears.

To: zonder who wrote (5692)	3/19/2004 12:59:58 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20039

<<<That is unfortunately quite impossible in highrise buildings (like the twin towers in question) because the weight of the necessary cement becomes impossible to bear for the structure.>>> Nonsense. The Empire State building is entirely reinforced concrete. <<<Steel structures are designed with the amount and thickness of steel that will, in case of fire, permit the building to stand for an amount of time that will permit its occupants to escape. I don't recall the textbook requirement but it is something like a half hour. Then it will go down, because structural steel loses its strength after a certain temperature.>>> You appear to be making this stuff up as you go along. There has never been a case of a steel building collapsing as a result of fire, and the WTC buildings were specifically engineered to withstand the impact of a 707. You're also confusing fire rated barriers with total destruction. Generally, residential buildings require 1 hour fire rated barriers between areas such as attached garages and ceilings. For commercial buildings, the requirement is generally 2 hour rated barriers. Also, much of the WTC steel was encased in concrete. Not all of it, from what I understand, but you can go to the NIST site to view photos of some of the steel which still shows concrete residue stuck to it. The floors were 4 inches of concrete poured over steel plate, and were engineered to support over 300,000 pounds PER FLOOR. For an exceptional collection of photographic and video evidence of controlled demolition of the towers, I highly recommend this site: home.comcast.net