Continuing REAL WORLD Physics

Readers may remember the two “truthers” I have dealt with online, “Truther” A, and “ Truther” B, from a previous article.

            Continuing from said article, we will begin with “Truther” B, who as I pointed out in the aforementioned article,  stated, falsely, that you can’t move more with less.

            When I informed him that his statement was false and asked him if he ever heard of levers, his lame response was to accuse me of saying the WTC was brought down with levers.  Anyone with even the most rudimentary of reading comprehension skills  ( which automatically eliminates “truthers”)  knows that I was NOT suggesting the WTC was brought down with levers;  I was merely providing one example of how you CAN move more with less.

            Here’s another example of how it IS possible to move more with less.  I was hanging out with a friend earlier this month, and we noticed the aftermath of an accident involving four vehicles on the opposite side of the road from us.  The vehicles, in order from rear-most to front-most vehicles, were a Chrysler Sebring, one of the F- series Ford trucks-  I believe it was an F-250  and two standard-sized sedans.  The accident occurred near a railroad crossing, so more than likely, it happened just as the gate came down.  From what we could see, the Chrysler Sebring managed to rear end the F-250 hard enough that it was pushed into the sedan in front of it, and that sedan was pushed in to the sedan in the front it, resulting in a 4-car accident.  In short, the Chrysler Sebring managed to hit the Ford F250-  which was at least TWICE the Sebring’s size-  with sufficient force to cause a chain reaction.

            As we see here, the Chrysler Sebring weighs between 2900 – 3400 pounds, making its approximate mass between 1320 – 1550 kilograms.

            The approximate weight of a Ford F-250, found here, is 6976 pounds, for a mass of about 3170 kilograms. In short, the Chrysler Sebring was rear-ended the Ford F-250 with enough force to shove a vehicle that was about 2 to 2 ½ times its size into two other vehicles. After all, mass doesn’t move mass, force does.

            Now, as for “Truther” A, who was mentioned in two of my previous articles, “ More ‘Truther’ Desperation”  and “If Ignorance is Bliss, ‘Truthers’ are in Paradise,” even after having been provided explanations for the behavior of fires, explanations that were given to me by a friend and his father who happen to have been volunteer firefighters  ( reference ), still refuses to believe that, while fire will go in any direction where it has something to burn, it DOES move faster uphill.  Never mind the fact that fire is hot, and anyone who’s passed 3rd grade science knows that HEAT RISES!

            Of course, as we see here, some “truthers” claim that the black smoke is proof of an oxygen fire.  However, that is a lie for one simple reason.  The Twin Towers had big, gaping holes in their sides, which gave the fires plenty of oxygen. Furthermore, fire investigator John Lentini says that black smoke doesn’t prove squat ( source ).

            I’m sure we all remember being taught the 3 main things you need to get for a fire are heat, fuel  ( meaning anything combustible), and oxygen.  This is known as the fire triangle.

Nowadays, we also have the more modern-  and accurate- fire tetrahedron, which consists of oxygen, heat, fuel, and a chemical ( or chain) reaction ( source) . 

            Remove any of those 4  ( or three) things and there’s no fire. I will use the fire tetrahedron. Clearly, there was plenty of combustible material in the WTC- furniture, carpet, etc.  Obviously, there was oxygen in the WTC already as well-  if there wasn’t, the WTC tenants would have had a slight problem, but that oxygen supply was limited.  The fact remains that you already had two of the ingredients for a fire present. When the planes slammed into the Twin Towers, they made large holes in the side of the buildings, which, of course, gave the fires an unlimited oxygen supply.  The jet fuel provided the final two ingredients-  heat, and the chemical reaction, resulting in the WTC fires. 

            There is yet more evidence that the “truther” claim of black smoke being a sign of an oxygen-starved fire, which is found here, being a lie.

            The evidence is in a rare but dangerous effect known as a backdraft. provides this description of a backdraft: “One of the most dangerous situations firefighters can face is a rare but powerful effect called a backdraft. Although definitions of a backdraft vary somewhat, in general it is a sudden explosion of hot gases as fresh oxygen enters a smoldering airtight room.”

            Sometimes, if a fire occurs in a confined area, it runs out of oxygen before it runs out of things to burn ( Obviously, since the WTC had big, gaping holes in their sides, those fires didn’t have that problem). One sign of a possible backdraft is thick smoke that is either yellow or brown ( reference ).  Hint:  This means that YELLOW OR BROWN SMOKE is more likely to signal an oxygen-starved fire. Other signs of a possible backdraft are rattling windows caused by the difference in air pressure, due to the fact that the fire, which needs oxygen, will try to obtain it through any opening, which results in puffs of smoke around windows and doors.

   states, “ If  the door to a burning airtight room is opened suddenly, a fresh supply of oxygen is delivered straight to the smoldering fire. The heat of the room also heats up volatile gases, and the result is often a powerful explosion and instant flames. This is the dreaded backdraft, and it can injure or kill anyone entering the room. Thankfully, backdrafts are rare events, but it only takes one to restart a fire or cause more structural damage.” 

         In short, if you open the door to such a room, you’re screwed.


Posted October 31, 2010 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

Tagged with , , ,

%d bloggers like this: