Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays
so all the idiots that believe 9/11 was a government conspiracy makes the claim that the fire isn't hot enough to melt the steel.... and you're making the opposite argument?
|
Not really... this was an article published september 13th, 2001.... The assumption was that a 800 C raging inferno made the building collapse... NIST later examined 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500 degrees F and the others not above 1200 F... NIST claim on their part that this was enough for the building to collapse...
Quote:
i was simply quoting one of the architects who was saying (as you so well ignored) that the buildings were not built to withstand the impact of a commercial jet. there are countless interviews with these guys and this question always comes up and its always answered. you are confusing some sort of made up idea with fact. what they might have hypothesized the building could have survived and saying 'we built it specifically to withstand XYZ' are not the same thing.
its like saying "the Titanic is unsinkable" when that was never a claim of the builders... it was a claim of the media.
|
what?!
Frank DeMartini was an architect who works as the World Trade Center?s construction manager..
Same thing with Hyman Brown...
In other words... the builders...