<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Feb 2, 10:32 pm, "John Barrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > >> >> > [snip] >> >> > Run your "experiment" again but add some pure oxygen such as was >> >> > escaping from the on-board breathing oxygen tanks on the >> >> > airplanes that were crashed into the WTC. >> >> > No need to do it. We have the pictures of live humans waving from the >> > gaping holes in the towers where the planes crashed. We have the >> > testimonies of the fire fighters that the fires were not that hot and >> > minor. The fuel of the plane which is mainly in the wings were severed >> > outside the netting and much of them burnt outside in the fireball >> > that is visible in all the videos. Futhermore, the black soot that was >> > visible to the naked eye is indicative of bloody cold flame. Also, the >> > probability of the oxygen tanks oriented in such a way to inject >> > oxygen onto the steel as in a oxygen cutting torch is extremely low. >> > These cylinders have a 1000-3000psi of pressure which makes them into >> > a rocket or an explosive under uncontrolled gas release. And they >> > would not contaminate the molten metal with any sulfur. Either the >> > atmosphere inside was oxidising or reducing. If it was oxidising, how >> > did the sulfur in huge quantities contaminate the molten metal pools? >> > The official lies to explain sulfur is from the plaster wall. But that >> > requires a reducing atmosphere with finely divided and intimately >> > mixed reactants in a calciner where they are continuously rotated and >> > run for several hours. Yet the fires ran not even for an hour before >> > the building collapsed. >> >> OK - given all that -- you are left with only one conclusion (or at least >> I >> am) -- progressive structural failure, the loss of support where the >> plane >> hit was sufficient to put excessive stress on the remaining structural >> members, resulting in a catastrophic sequential failure > > I dont think you have seen any actual structural failures, esp > progressive. > That happens often in earthquake and they have stacked floors. There > is > famous picture of an earthquake on these websites and in the videos. > Futhermore > due to erratic stops and goes in the progressive failure, the > structure falls on the side esp a big bldg like WTC1&2 should have > fallen from the tipping torque to one side. That did not happen. only > controlled demolition bldgs fall down straight. > >> -- it doesnt take >> exotic chemical mixes to put excessive mechanical stress on a system... >> just >> chop out enough supports.. it may take time for the remaining supports to >> deform enough to reach the failure point.. but they will get there, as >> demonstrated -- occams razor dude -- the least hypothesis is usually the >> right one -- and I get enough conspiracy theory crap out of my dad -- >> makes >> a good movie -- but doesnt pan out in real life -- too many >> whistle-blowers >> around !! > > Occams razor is applicable to nature's works. human works are not > amenable to it. Besides, the official fairy tale is the conspiracy > theory. > >> The city I live in is installing those red-light cameras to catch >> light-runners -- my dad likes to claim that they manipulate the yellow >> time >> to catch people in the intersection and increase revenue from traffic >> tickets -- I told him to shut up until he got out there with a stop watch >> and proved it -- and I say the same to you -- PROVE it -- then make some >> noise -- conjecture and conspiracy theories without proof are a waste of >> everyones time. -- how do you know the sulphur was in large quantities ?? >> did you do a chemical analysis ?? or can you produce one done by a >> reputable >> metalurgy company ?? > > These pillars are not machinable steel. the sulfur here was excessive. > we are talking about intergranular corrosion, not that teeny amount > used for imparting machinability and that is not nowadays needed. It > only for cheap and rough chinese type crap and i am not sure even > there if someone would ruin their steel mills by adding this kind of > corrosive sulfur shit. come on dude ... dont mix categories. > >> Ohhh and by the way -- high sulphur steels are regularly used for >> machined >> components -- was the amount of sulphur detected incosistent with what >> may >> have been present due to the use of high sulphur steels ?? (where is that >> metalurgy report again ??) > > yeah a damn fool would put sulfur in the bolts and load bearing > elements such as the bolts of aircrafts and space shuttle. > > Besides how do you explain the completely pulverized building ?????? > if not for explosives. > >
have your read THIS ?? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list