“Truthers” Still Comparing Apples to Oranges

Once again, “truthers” insist on comparing apples to oranges.

“Truther” B, from a previous article uses this link comparing the Address Hotel Fire in Dubai on December 31, 2015 to the WTC on 9/11/01.  A high school friend of mine who also knows that “truthers” are full of more crap than a toilet at Taco Bell also informed me of this latest bit of “truther” stupidity this past Monday, January 4, 2016, so hat tip to her as she brought it to my attention first.

Anyway, here are some key differences:

First, unlike the WTC, the Address Hotel did NOT have fully fueled airliners deliberately slam into it at full speed or, in the case of WTC 7, as Brent Blanchard of Protec pointed out, had tons of debris,  from the collapsing North Tower carve a hole about halfway up the side.

Second, in the case of the WTC, as we see here, the impact of the planes took out the pipes that supplied the water to the sprinkler system. In addition, as the NIST mentions, the sprinkler sysem in the WTC was designed to handle a fire of up to 1500 square feet on ONE floor, not the 40,000 square feet spread over several floors ( this is for BOTH towers). That is about 27 times MORE than what the sprinkler system was meant to handle, provided it was UNDAMAGED, which it wasn’t. As the aforementioned site  states, even if the sprinkler system had been fully functional, it would NOT have been able to handle the WTC fires.

Third, the Address Hotel fire was fought, the WTC fires were not ( source). In addition, it was the COMBINATION of the impact of the airliners, dislodging of the fireproofing from said impact, and severe unfought fires on SEVERAL floors that brought the WTC down (reference).

Fourth, “Truthers” say jet fuel, which burns at between 800-1500 degrees Fahrenheit ( 427-816 degrees Celsius) is not hot enough to melt steel, which melts at 2750 degrees Fahrenheit (1510 degrees Celsius) . While this is technically true, what “truthers” neglect to mention is that; 1) They’re the ONLY ones who said steel melted, and 2) The steel didn’t need to melt, only weaken.

In point of fact, as we see here, steel loses about half its strength at 1100 degrees Fahrenheit ( 593 degrees Celsius), which is well within the temperature range that jet fuel burns.  This quote from here sums it up nicely: ” However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”

Last but not least when confronted on it by being told 1) the WTC and the Address Hotel were not the same building and 2) how the steel is used makes a difference, his response was, ” It’s the same steel” and “It’s still steel,” respectively. There is just one problem with that. If you put a steel beam in the water, it sinks, however if you have a boat made of steel, it floats and it’s still steel.

Once again, we see that the “truthers” arguments are invalid.




Posted January 10, 2016 by Victor Chabala in Mocking Truthers, Real 9/11 Facts

%d bloggers like this: