weaken steel beams enough to compromise their structural integrity and cause the floors of a tower to collapse and cause a cascade of critical failures
It’s comments like these that show that people don’t actually research anything, they just regurgitate “sound bites” that give off the impression of being science but are actually misdirection. It makes us feel smart without having to put in any effort. So we parrot ourselves into ignorance and all it takes is complacent media that asks no real questions.
Yes it sounds plausible that fires weaken a building. But it doesn’t matter how plausible something sounds, if the evidence contradicts it, you don’t reject the evidence, you reject the theory.
NIST, who investigated the WTC disaster, said in its report “no steel was recovered that reached temperatures hot enough to weaken”. And no, the issue is not simply the failure to recover it.
NIST, who investigated the WTC disaster, said in its report “no steel was recovered that reached temperatures hot enough to weaken”. And no, the issue is not simply the failure to recover it.
It’s comments like these that show that people don’t actually research anything, they just regurgitate “sound bites” that give off the impression of being science but are actually misdirection. It makes us feel smart without having to put in any effort. So we parrot ourselves into ignorance and all it takes is complacent media that asks no real questions.
I would love to read this if you point me to where in their analysis this quote is from. Given the rest of the NIST’s reporting on the matter, it sure seems like the only issue is the failure to recover it.
So what can jet fuel do?
I would imagine it is pretty good at powering jet engines…
I find that suggestion surprising.
Indeed?
I will allways upvote SG-1 memes
Wish I could upvote my own comment twice
weaken steel beams enough to compromise their structural integrity and cause the floors of a tower to collapse and cause a cascade of critical failures
Including causing a ough of an earthquake to cause building 7 to collapse.
It’s comments like these that show that people don’t actually research anything, they just regurgitate “sound bites” that give off the impression of being science but are actually misdirection. It makes us feel smart without having to put in any effort. So we parrot ourselves into ignorance and all it takes is complacent media that asks no real questions.
Yes it sounds plausible that fires weaken a building. But it doesn’t matter how plausible something sounds, if the evidence contradicts it, you don’t reject the evidence, you reject the theory.
NIST, who investigated the WTC disaster, said in its report “no steel was recovered that reached temperatures hot enough to weaken”. And no, the issue is not simply the failure to recover it.
It’s comments like these that show that people don’t actually research anything, they just regurgitate “sound bites” that give off the impression of being science but are actually misdirection. It makes us feel smart without having to put in any effort. So we parrot ourselves into ignorance and all it takes is complacent media that asks no real questions.
I would love to read this if you point me to where in their analysis this quote is from. Given the rest of the NIST’s reporting on the matter, it sure seems like the only issue is the failure to recover it.
Melt dank memes
Burn hot enough to undermined the structural integrity of steel beams.
Melt steel deez
Deez nuts amirite
Turn the residents of Scotland into communists, apparently.