Would you mind if I correct your numbers a bit? Jet A1 fuel burns at about 290°C/600°F on open air (at least wiki says so), but there a catch. Skyscraper is like a giant chimney so it's quite possible that the fuel burnt at much higher temps. Also it's not just the jet fuel that burns, airliners have 15 minutes oxygen supply on board (in case of in-flight decompression) and that oxygen could have been feeding the flame during the first few minutes. There is also oil and a lot of plastic materials that burn at surprisingly high temps (Check out Swissair 111 crash).
Steel melts at about 1000-1700°C/2000 - 3000°F, it depends a lot on it's composition, but you don't really have to liquefy a metal bar to bend it. I'm sure that 800°F is enough for a metal bar stressed with hundreds of tons of concrete to start bending and twisting.
Steel is also a very good thermal conductor, so if you heat up it on one end, it gets hot on the other one very fast. That could possibly explain why the towers started to crumble down from the lowest floors...
Don't get me wrong, I take the conspirators side in this case 'cause a lot of their ideas make sense. Chilly and pretty terrifying one, but it does. It's just these few wild theories like explosives in the basement that take the credibility away from them...
A note about the whole "The steel couldn't have melted at that heat" story. I remember seeing that when heated to something like 800 degrees F, steel loses 90% of it's strength. Unless the steel beams of the WTC were designed to take ten times the weight that they ultimately held, then it is still quite likely that the steel within the tower buckled because of the extreme heat.
Don't quote me on the exact numbers, but I do specifically remember that steel lost the majority of it's strength when heated to temperatures that jet fuel could achieve.
Fair enough, i'm properly borred last couple of days so this got me interested again.. There's also a thing with "live" images of the collapse from major TV stations helicopters. Practically all of them zoomed in the picture just prior to the tower/s collapsing. So the picture is zoomed out, then a gradual zoom-in and just when the zooming stops, the collapse starts?! Mind fu*k..
Either a mind f*ck or a f*cking coincidence. Quite possibly there wasn't just the cameraman in the helicopter, so somebody else might have spotted that the building was about to fall and told the cameraman to take a better shot?
Seriously, why do you have to see a glimpse of conspiracy EVERYWHERE?
Do you know that you don't have to melt metal to make it weak. For example copper loses most of it's strength if heated over 140 or 150 degrees celcuis. So you don't need to melt (as in making it liquid) metal for it to lose it's strength
EDIT: here a little pic to for the graphical minds.
Me? I find the whole thing just too interesting and confusing to just let it go.. It gets to me from time to time like now. That whole day is filled with like a dozzen 'coincidences', i would buy one... but there's just so many redicolous stuff around it. So someone can spot 15 seconds before that the building is about to colapse?
Well, OK... so the director switched the camera just when the tower started to collapse. What's so weird about that? I remember this kind of controversy raising around Senna's crash where a fraction of a second before he actually hit the wall director switched the camera feed. Live broadcast directors are pretty busy people, they have to think ahead and it's quite impossible for them to instantly respond to some unexpected events. It's not like the less zoomed shot of a tower tumbling down hid something from us, or did it?
Or am I just missing something?
The theory these guys behind "September clues" have, is that all videos we've seen are fabricated, CGI.. Towers did collapse, but were emptied, and probably demolished god knows how. In their videos there are some really good 'proofs' about this, how ABC (of FOX can't remember) released two different videos, one with plane almost invisible, and then later that day the same video (same angle etc) but with the plane CLEARLY visible..
If you're borred like i was the other night, check them out.. "September Clues", there's A to G videos if i recall..
But like Deko said, it's just unimaginable how many people would have to be involved..
Do the guys behind "September Clues" realize that there were like hundreds of people on the streets who actually saw it with their own eyes? Don't you think somebody would've said "Hey, I didn't see no frikkin' plane that day?"
Also the quality of those shots is waaay too good for them to be CGIed, they would've been rendering stuff like that for years. The (in)visible plane is probably just a subsequent retouch, shiny silver plane is not exactly well visible, especially among buildings with lots of windows that cast all sorts of reflections on it. Making the plane black just made that footage a bit more attractive, TVs do things like this all the time.
Like i said, watch the videos.. it's pretty interesting 45min-1 hour viewing.. Many of them saw nor hear any plane.. A lot of them reported the 'missile sound', and many of them reported a 'small comuter plane', small plane can easily be mistaken with winged-Jdam missile..
I'll be honest for a second. I watched the towers being hit live on tv in school. Now back then it all seemed real and everything, but now it seems too farfetched.
Did the terrorists plot this like the Russians in the movie "Salt"? How exactly did all this come about? The Pentagon stuff was said to sound like a missile. The Government grabbed every video of surveillance from it right after the supposed plane hit it. The only piece of video we have from it is a slow, pixelated, unclear pile of trash that shows the nose of what could be a plane, missile, or even a giant cone.
Some of the videos do make sense, and saying "too many people would have to know" doesn't really make me disbelieve this. You don't think all those people hide many things from us now? The top end of the military sure isn't fully communative either. Just look at the Osama situation.
I guess I should watch those videos before going on with this discussion, but... Don't all A2G or G2G missiles travel and very high speeds like supersonic speeds to make them hard to intercept and shoot down? If such a missile hit the WTC, people all over New York would hear a loud bang caused by the shockwave as the missile would fly by them. JDAM "missiles" don't have an engine at all, they just glide on the target. I'm not certain about that, but wouldn't it be a good idea to make these bombs as silent as possible (no whistle sound) to not warn the enemy he's being bombed?
I'm not opposed to the fact that the whole 9/11 if forged and fishy, really. I'm actually quite sure it was an inside job, but these theories have become way too wild. How is anyone supposed to believe any of that when you take a bunch of very good ideas and you completely discredit them by topping them with icing of immense crap?
I don't really think a JDAM or a GTG Missile could have really been the cause, They move too fast, Most missiles have a penetration factor that makes them explode 5 feet after impact or near a object before exploding, It couldn't have been a block of sidewinders or something, Because they are infrared, And those missiles thought the sun was a perfect target too. I'm thinking they just packed a plane with some gasoline and tossed it into a building, Maybe they had auto pilot or something. Whatever it was, It was a bad day none the less.
The whistle sound (I believe) Comes from the bomb shearing air off the top of the fins, If you're going slow enough, no, it doesn't make that sound, A jetliner makes that noise because of the 2 turbine engines. I'm pretty sure the explosion of fuel could have covered up any blast, c4, tank, missle, anything.
[edit to avoid double post]
Yeh, It was really real, I think that's what the US calls Shock And Awe or something, Nobody would question what just happened, It was pretty clear and breath taking, Most were worried about their loved ones that day.. Which sucks. I don't think that the terrorists actually planned much of anything TBH, Sure. It's a revolving group of ****s (Not talking about muslims, Guys with guns and a bad attitude and a religion is 2 different things) But most likely just a guy who said "I did it" To maybe seek attention, Nobody will really know why, I do believe the only reason we attacked him in the first place was because he wanted America out of his country. We didn't want to leave.. So he got the blame tossed on him.. We really don't know who hi-jacked the plane, I wouldn't know how. Everything in that crash was incinerated, what lived, is under steel and carpet and alot of other nasty stuff. So maybe we tossed the blame on him. I believe alot of people would hide stuff. Look at all the people that cheat on their wifes, They made vows to be together till the end, I'm pretty sure if you were paid a huge amount of money, told what was going down, and what to do, The majority of people (Greed) Would have taken over.
It's quite confusing. I just wish we really knew, I'm sure a revolution or two wouldn't hurt, America seemed to loose most the values it fought for in 1700's. Maybe brittish rule was better. (Their flag is spiffy, too.)