Was 9/11 an inside job?

submitted by Blackbrownfreestuff from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]TheJamesRocket 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's possible the official narrative is true

Not really. The narrative told by the 911 Commission Report contains 25 internal contradictions and inconsistencys.

many 9/11 truther myths have been debunked

Like what?

u/Blackbrownfreestuff

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Dumb shit like "muh jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel" and "they found thermite in the dust".

This argument fails for multiple reasons, the biggest one being that heat weakens steel, even without melting it.

[–]TheJamesRocket 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

muh jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel

This is based on the observable evidence of molten steel pouring out of the twin towers prior to the collapse, and the molten steel found in the rubble of ground zero days afterward.

they found thermite in the dust

This is more debatable, since the chain of custody for those thermite samples is disputed.

This argument fails for multiple reasons, the biggest one being that heat weakens steel, even without melting it.

In order to the core columns in the towers to have undergone a creep failure), the fires would have needed to burn for many hours at an intensity well beyond what was present. There wasn't enough combustible materials in the twin towers to generate those kindof temperatures. The jet fuel would have burnt out within minutes.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

When i see this photo i think, could be molten steel or it could be burning stuff. It's pretty weak.

As for heat induced failure, im gonna leave that call to structural engineers.