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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (175218)	11/17/2005 7:59:28 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'll leave you to determine for yourself why the buildings collapsed. Take the time to study WTC #7. It was not hit by any plane, so there wasn't any aviation fuel to burn and weaken the steel. There was not enough fuel in the planes to heat the steel to the weakening point in WTC 1 and 2 either, by the way. It would be like trying to weaken a crowbar with a propane torch. The heat you apply is conducted away...and you have a 1/4 mile of crowbar to heat up. Keep in mind also that never before in history has a steel building collapsed from fire. On 9-11, three buildings collapsed, and one of them only had a couple of very small fires burning in it...#7. For fire resistance steel is much better than wood. Happy hunting, Orca