☰
×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules
-5

Jet fuel burns hot enough make steel glow red and weaken to failure when under load.

submitted by Thought_Criminal to Truth 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 13:46:15 ago (+4/-9)     (youtu.be)

https://youtu.be/4LFZA0Rx1gg?t=359



14 comments block

sort by: hot new top old low

[ - ] SumerBreeze 4 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 13:59:02 ago (+4/-0)

No jet hit wtc7

[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 14:01:32 ago (+0/-0)

deleted

[ - ] Thought_Criminal [op] 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 14:48:58 ago (+1/-0)

Then they should say that, and shut up about the jet fuel- it is a red herring.

[ - ] happytoes 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 16:19:26 ago (+2/-1)

That "jet fuel cannot melt steel beams" is a psyop intended to take attention away from WTC7.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 12, 2022 08:26:37 ago (+0/-0)

Jet fuel combusted with compressed air in a combustion chamber can reach very high temperatures. The temperature of kerosene combusted in atmospheric air can barely reach 700f. The video is full of shit. Aluminum melts at 600 degrees, I've seen car fires from oil lines catching on fire, the aluminum engine doesn't melt. Aluminum valve cover still intact after a 10 minute engine bay fire.

[ - ] ThisGuy 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 12, 2022 10:57:57 ago (+1/-1)

The Grenfell Tower burned for 24 hours basically all that was left was the steel and it didn't fall. The freefall speed of the towers is also a dead giveaway. There was no resistance on the way down. Not to mention the pictures that show beams with diagonal cuts in them and the pool of basically lava in the basement for weeks afterwards full of thermite. The official story is bullshit.

[ - ] ThisGuy 2 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 20:18:06 ago (+2/-0)

They act like there was one beam being blasted by an oxygen rich fire holding up the whole building. Fuck these kikes. They're lying and they know it.

[ - ] usedoilanalysis 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 12, 2022 08:28:01 ago (+0/-0)

They used an oxyacetylene torch, much hotter than kerosene vapors burns in open air.

[ - ] ThisGuy 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 12, 2022 10:53:37 ago (+1/-1)

Exactly. That fires heat just doesn't happen in nature.

[ - ] Bufordxl 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 12, 2022 00:06:43 ago (+0/-0)

Why didn't the 'Towering Inferno' building 'collapse'? That torch was mixed with O/2 and directed on a small area. Yes steel melts but there were no Flames that hot or they would have been seen in the edited pics with the smoke.

[ - ] deleted 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 20:14:15 ago (+0/-0)

deleted

[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 15:04:31 ago (+1/-1)

Bullshit. Notice the editing in the time it took to heat that 1 beam up.

And the pancake theory has been disproven, even by NIST. Remember "Total Global Collapse" from their report?

[ - ] ThisGuy 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 20:15:27 ago (+1/-1)

Not to mention free fall speed of collapse.

[ - ] Reawakened -1 points 1.6 yearsSep 11, 2022 20:41:02 ago (+0/-1)

It's funny. When he does his drink can demonstration, the drink can clearly topples to side with the damage. It doesn't collapse into its foot print, unlike WTC 7.

What kind of force was pushing down on the center of the beams in WTC 1 and 2 like in the experiment? How many would have to fail before you actually saw the kind of failure they are talking about?

What about floors below and above that didn't fail. Wouldn't they stiffen the columns? Wouldn't the beam fail because of plastic deformation before they could pull the columns in?

It would be laughable if it wasn't so pitiful.