Originally posted by: event8horizon
beau-
so why was nist denying molten steel at the sites in the beginning.
beau said
"Second, the debris pile was very hot, some measurements reading over 2,800 degrees. "
thats hot enough to melt steel isnt it??
so are all these peoples claims to see molten steel correct now. im aware that other metals are also mixed in.
http://video.google.com/videop...ist+molten+steel&hl=en
how did an office fire reach these temps.
and that engineer that saw "vaporized" steel, he thought the steel beam "vaporized" first then fell into the pit.
thats how one would expect to analyze the towers collapse. by analyzing the steel. have office fires ever caused steel to evaporate or vaporize.
now do u remember that nasa flyover that showed "hot spots". column 79 was right on one.
now i ask u, if they pulled column 79 out of the pile and it showed what engineers said looked like "evaporation" or "vaporation", would u like to find out why.
So what?
Honestly, I think those questions all have reasonable answers that you're just ignoring, but it doesn't really matter because all you've got is vague questions, absolutely NO comprehensive theory or support for that theory, and insinuations that because you don't understand everything, the only logical explanation is a vast conspiracy. Instead of nitpicking events to death based on your limited understanding of the science and engineering involved, how about a step by step theory of what "really" happened to WTC 7, along with supporting evidence to back it up?
Of course we know why no such theory has EVER popped up in the many, many pages of discussion on this topic...it's the beauty of a good conspiracy theory. By attempting to cast doubt on the official story, the conspiracy theorist believes he or she is somehow "proving" that the official story is wrong. But while sometimes folks like you raise interesting questions, they NEVER rise of the level of disproving the official explanation of proving an alternative one. Conspiracy theories are, for lack of a better term, a hole in human reasoning. When people think they've discovered a lie from the government, you turn confirmation bias into a religion, and the mere questioning of the official story becomes as good as proof. But the fact that it sounds good to you doesn't make it sound logic.
