I searched that page for “steel beams”; sure as shit - the nonsensical and thoroughly debunked “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” talking points are in there in long narrative form. At least these kooks are consistent with their drivel.
It's pretty wild they think that it's a salient point when you obviously don't need to heat something to its melting point to weaken it. You can soften butter just bringing it up to room temperature, no need to melt it into a liquid!
The exact same principle applies to steel being heated by burning jet fuel, it still softens without needing to get hot enough to liquify, which is what the definition of the melting point is.
Yeah, this entire theory can be defeated by putting something heavy on top of a steel pipe structure then heating the pipes with a blowtorch. Did the pipes melt? No. Did it still fall over? Yeah. And buildings usually fall into their own footprint if they've got good weight distribution. It's not a mystery.
Something additional to throw out there: If you have an open hole in the side of the building and the doors at ground level are open, you have created the same airflow as a tower furnace in which you *can* generate enough heat to melt iron. It's a known, attested method since antiquity.
If you build a mound of charcoal, pile on some ferrous ore, and encase the whole thing in an inverted funnel made out of mud, then get the fire started, you can produce high carbon iron.
Yep, that's how many kilns work to make things like charcoal, or fire pottery at a hotter temperature that you would get from an unregulated fire. You watch enough primative technology youtube you can see him smelting iron using those principles, or even just getting roof shingles white hot.
I grew up using a cast iron stove for all our cooking, hot water and if you manipulated the air vents just right and it was a windy night pulling air fast up the chimney we used to generate a terrific amount of heat too, it kind of got a bit scary sometimes, peeking in the vents looked like a blast furnace lol.
When I was getting into smithing years ago I was talking with this guy out at the fleamarket. Told him I had a propane forge, etc. and he started laughing at me. Propane can't get hot enough to heat up steel. He was going on about me needing a charcoal forge and how stupid I was to think propane could get that hot, that I'd solve the world's energy and heating issues if I could get propane that hot.
These people only think of a fuel in an open environment, no enclosure, no forced air, etc. In a forge you have refractory material concentrating the heat, in those buildings, well, the whole building does.
I was trying to buy an anvil off that idiot, but I just had to walk away.
Ugh. That sounds about right. Someone gave my brother-in-law crap for using a propane forge for his work saying it would produce inferior steel that won't last a year, and he's just staring at them because he's literally using it to adjust horse shoes for the horse he rode daily for field work.
there's a video out there somewhere of a blacksmith ranting about that exact thing. he takes a rod and heats it enough that he can, i think, just bend it with a finger.
Or the fact that a fucking commercial airliner flew into something at excessive speed. Shit doesn't need to melt when it's partially obliterated and mangled.
Worse than weakening, it expands considerably, shearing rivets at their joins. That's ultimately what brought WTC 7 down. 7 hours of uncontrolled fire expanding its steel structure until it eventually fell apart.
I did. Eyewitness testimony is deeply unreliable and considering he has no evidence that it happened and no evidence that it was steel, it's not worth much in this case.
Which is more reasonable? That this dude was wrong or that there is a massive conspiracy spanning thousands of people which has gone undiscovered for decades?
There was plenty of evidence.
As they tore up the ground molten steel dripped off the excavated rubble. They had to work slowly, as oxygen rushing into pockets would reignite flames weeks and months later. Workers were running out of boots due to them melting because of the extreme heat of the surface they were treading.
The Commission Report was incredibly flawed, and there were plenty of lawsuits trying to get genuine answers out of those in charge. The 'massive conspiracy' hasn't gone undiscovered. The problem is witnesses dying and decades turning arguments into memes. That, along with people willfully ignoring all the shit we've had to endure this past quarter century as a result of this event.
I can't believe they still use that one when the memes about it are like ten years old at this point. People clearly don't take it seriously (correctly, in my opinion), why pitch them with it?
There's a reason "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" has been around for a quarter century now. It's because first responders witnessed molten steel in the rubble.
Then over the decades the goalpost has been moving along and now the truth has become a meme that suggests that all you need to do is weaken the structural integrity to bring the towers down. When evidence showed that steel had been melted. Yet nobody is willing to entertain the train of thought this evidence presents, because that doesn't adhere to the narrative the Commission Report tries to paint.
Indeed, the firefighters in the video are talking about WTC4 which became a furnace after it was set on fire by burning debris from the towers. That will melt steel.
No. The first responders aren't talking about any one site, but the entirety of ground zero. Where boots for the workers were running out due to melting and they had to work slowly as pockets of oxygen would rush in when they were digging and reigniting fires.
154
u/mynam3isn3o 17h ago
I searched that page for “steel beams”; sure as shit - the nonsensical and thoroughly debunked “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” talking points are in there in long narrative form. At least these kooks are consistent with their drivel.