Toymods Car Club Inc: The Outhouse => September 11 Conspiracies... :P

Toymods Car Club
www.toymods.org.au

F.A.Q.

Home

Members

Toymods » The Outhouse » September 11 Conspiracies... :P Show: Today's Posts :: Show Polls Email to friend

Author

Topic

gt20v
Regular

Registered:
July 2002

Re: September 11 Conspiracies... :P

Tue, 06 January 2004 06:00

draven wrote on Tue, 06 January 2004 01:14

too much fuel, not enough air, hence burning RICH, not lean.

oops, sorry dravan, sorry used the wrong word, yes, it's burning rich, and rich mixture is low in temp. compared to lean mixture as it's actually much hotter when there's more oxygen (up to a certain level) as the chemical reaction is much quicker and releases much more heat..

thermal conductivity of concrete is bad, that's why double brick / concrete homes are cool in summer and warm in winter

If Bill says there's 56 tonne of fuel, and if there's 2 planes, with 2 towers destroyed, we will need at least 1,680,000 litres of air for the 100 tonne of fuel to start burning at ideal temp.
that's 840,000 2L milk bottles lined up around the holes of the WTC, and remember when something burns, it vaporises, change to gas, and expands, this will push any further fresh air away, the oxygen doesn't get "attracted" to the fuel, in an engine the air is "sucked" in (thus the correct combustion ratio), and in a metal furness (wrong spelling I know) the air have to be blown towards the flame, so the burning temp. inside the 2 towers won't be too much hotter than any normal home fire, and that is no way enough to melt steel! (The fire will take longer to put out as there's consistently new fuel to keep the fire going, but it's not going to be hot, no way enough to melt steel!)

ed_ma61: don't be stupid, all the "guesses" that you listed can be proven in a test environment, you're not even working at the problem and just try to simply say someone is wrong without trying to prove that it's wrong.

What's wrong with a good close educated guess? After all, the stupid media report of the jet fuel burning hot inside the tower is a PURE SPECULATION, it's a very bad one too!
* There was no numbers crunching
* there was no investigation
* the report was released the next day
* they did not even try to test if the jet fuel can really melt the huge steel supports
* there was no laboratory testing after the accident
* they did not even take the "molten" steel to analyse the damage, didn't find out how they was damaged, but instead exported them all as scrap metal ASAP
* there's no "super computer" simulation of the physical forces of the upper floors
* SO HOW THE HELL DID THEY GET THE CONCLUSION IN THE REPORT???

now why didn't you (ed_ma61) goes to the media report and tell them it's a stupid guess? But instead accepts the media report with all your trust? I'm teaching you to think here (like it or not)

[Updated on: Tue, 06 January 2004 06:14]

[Report message to a moderator]

[Message index]

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Sat Jul 5 07:53:10 UTC 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.013405084609985 seconds

.:: Contact :: Home ::.