“Truthers” Still Using Roadrunner Cartoon Physics
It is once again time to demonstrate that “truthers” are made of tungsten, actinium, potassium, oxygen, and sulfur.
Readers will remember “Truther’ B from an earlier article. Like most “truthers,” he still insists on using Roadrunner Cartoon physics instead of real world physics, yet he calls everyone else’s grasp on physical reality into question. Suffice it to say a “truther” questioning someone’s grip on physical reality is like Ted Kennedy questioning someone’s sobriety.
In an exchange between “Truther”B and Fellow Debunker 9 ( also from an earlier article), “Truther” B demonstrates his ignorance.
First, ” Truther” B provides the following picture purporting to be melted rock at Ground Zero:
However, as Fellow Debunker 9 points out, that is merely solidified concrete slurry.
“Truther” B then continues with the “melted steel” lie, but as we see here the molten stuff was SLAG, not steel. Slag is the byproduct, or, in other words, the waste product of steel smelting and slag is a mix of silicates and oxides ( source).
As this site clearly indicates, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER of molten steel. What “truthers” claim is molten steel happens to be red hod SOLID steel. Hint, if it’s solid, it’s NOT molten. The aforementioned link mentions that the molten metal if any, may well have been aluminum from the planes as aluminum melts at 660 degrees Celsius or 933 degrees Fahrenheit, which is well below the temperature jet fuel burns at, between 980 and 2200 degrees Celsius ( 1253 to 2473 degrees Farhenheit).
While “truthers” are technically correct that the melting point of steel, 1425-1540 degrees Celsius ( 1698- 1813 degrees Fahrenheit), they conveniently ignore the FACT that steel loses it’s structural integrity at between 700-820 degrees Celsius ( 973 – 1093 Fahrenheit), which was well within the temperatures recorded in the WTC. Furthermore, red hot steel will burn in air or in the presence of steam ( reference) The source of air wouldbe quite obvious- the big gaping holes in the sides of the building and it’s not unreasonable to assume there was some steam present too as there would be plenty of sources of water to be converted to steam- toilets and other plumbing in the restrooms comes to mind. Logic dictates that the Twin Towers would have had lots of restrooms seeing as how someone who works on, say, the 80th floor, is not going to want to go all the way down to the bottom floors just to use the restroom.
This quote from the previously cited link sums it up perfectly: ” That all being said, a 767 Family plane can carry up to 90,000 liters of fuel in its hull. It is estimated the two planes had about 28,000 Liters left in their tanks which is spread all over the hull from the wings to the fuselage (for ballast and balance control). The crash and shredding of the plane hardware caused the fuel to ignite almost instantly. Since it was not a controlled burn it is likely to hit the highest end of the combustion scale at its core, causing simultaneous ignition of anything around that was combustible and causing severe damage to load bearing pillars.”
Fellow Debunker 9 then correctly stated that when the building came down, all the potential energy (stored energy) was converted to kinetic energy ( energy of motion). He also correctly pointed out that, per the First Law of Thermodynamics, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In simpler terms, the energy required to put the towers up equals the energy required to bring them down.
As an aside, there are other times of energy in addition to kinetic and potential energy. There is also heat energy, and mechanical energy. A common unit for energy is the Joule, and per the First Law of Thermodynamics, regardless of the types of energy you have on each side of the equation, if you have 200 Joules on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 200 Joules on the right side of the equation.
Fellow Debunker 9 also correctly pointed out that the steel was not melted, it was ” chemically eroded by a combination of oxygen and sulfur acting on the steel and accelerated by heat,” or, in layman’s terms, it was rusted. As any chemistry book will tell you, heat is a catalyst in many chemical reactions.
“Truther” B then wanted to know how you can destroy all that matter with minimal force, while conveniently ignoring the FACT that per the Law of Conservation of Matter, Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This is why chemical equations MUST be balanced. For example, if you have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the right side of the equation.
Of course “Truther” B is the same one who insists you can’t move more with less, and when I pointed out that levers and pulleys are one way of doing exactly that, he made the ridiculous assumption that I was saying the WTC was brought down with levers and pulleys when even a 3rd grader could figure out I was simply offering one example. Then again, when it was pointed out that a person, who is less massive than a car, can push the car, his lame response was that ” the car has wheels.” Never mind the fact that, A) The wheels ADD mass to the car, and B) it does NOT change the FACT that a car has more mass than a person.
Once again, we see that any statement made by “truthers” is comosed of arsenic, indium, iodine, and neon.
Readers will remember “Truther’ B from an earlier article. Like most “truthers,” he still insists on using Roadrunner Cartoon physics instead of real world physics, yet he calls everyone else’s grasp on physical reality into question. Suffice it to say a “truther” questioning someone’s grip on physical reality is like Ted Kennedy questioning someone’s sobriety.
In an exchange between “Truther”B and Fellow Debunker 9 ( also from an earlier article), “Truther” B demonstrates his ignorance.
First, ” Truther” B provides the following picture purporting to be melted rock at Ground Zero:
However, as Fellow Debunker 9 points out, that is merely solidified concrete slurry.
“Truther” B then continues with the “melted steel” lie, but as we see here the molten stuff was SLAG, not steel. Slag is the byproduct, or, in other words, the waste product of steel smelting and slag is a mix of silicates and oxides ( source).
As this site clearly indicates, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER of molten steel. What “truthers” claim is molten steel happens to be red hod SOLID steel. Hint, if it’s solid, it’s NOT molten. The aforementioned link mentions that the molten metal if any, may well have been aluminum from the planes as aluminum melts at 660 degrees Celsius or 933 degrees Fahrenheit, which is well below the temperature jet fuel burns at, between 980 and 2200 degrees Celsius ( 1253 to 2473 degrees Farhenheit).
While “truthers” are technically correct that the melting point of steel, 1425-1540 degrees Celsius ( 1698- 1813 degrees Fahrenheit), they conveniently ignore the FACT that steel loses it’s structural integrity at between 700-820 degrees Celsius ( 973 – 1093 Fahrenheit), which was well within the temperatures recorded in the WTC. Furthermore, red hot steel will burn in air or in the presence of steam ( reference) The source of air wouldbe quite obvious- the big gaping holes in the sides of the building and it’s not unreasonable to assume there was some steam present too as there would be plenty of sources of water to be converted to steam- toilets and other plumbing in the restrooms comes to mind. Logic dictates that the Twin Towers would have had lots of restrooms seeing as how someone who works on, say, the 80th floor, is not going to want to go all the way down to the bottom floors just to use the restroom.
This quote from the previously cited link sums it up perfectly: ” That all being said, a 767 Family plane can carry up to 90,000 liters of fuel in its hull. It is estimated the two planes had about 28,000 Liters left in their tanks which is spread all over the hull from the wings to the fuselage (for ballast and balance control). The crash and shredding of the plane hardware caused the fuel to ignite almost instantly. Since it was not a controlled burn it is likely to hit the highest end of the combustion scale at its core, causing simultaneous ignition of anything around that was combustible and causing severe damage to load bearing pillars.”
Fellow Debunker 9 then correctly stated that when the building came down, all the potential energy (stored energy) was converted to kinetic energy ( energy of motion). He also correctly pointed out that, per the First Law of Thermodynamics, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In simpler terms, the energy required to put the towers up equals the energy required to bring them down.
As an aside, there are other times of energy in addition to kinetic and potential energy. There is also heat energy, and mechanical energy. A common unit for energy is the Joule, and per the First Law of Thermodynamics, regardless of the types of energy you have on each side of the equation, if you have 200 Joules on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 200 Joules on the right side of the equation.
Fellow Debunker 9 also correctly pointed out that the steel was not melted, it was ” chemically eroded by a combination of oxygen and sulfur acting on the steel and accelerated by heat,” or, in layman’s terms, it was rusted. As any chemistry book will tell you, heat is a catalyst in many chemical reactions.
“Truther” B then wanted to know how you can destroy all that matter with minimal force, while conveniently ignoring the FACT that per the Law of Conservation of Matter, Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This is why chemical equations MUST be balanced. For example, if you have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the left side of the equation, you MUST have 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 8 oxygens on the right side of the equation.
Of course “Truther” B is the same one who insists you can’t move more with less, and when I pointed out that levers and pulleys are one way of doing exactly that, he made the ridiculous assumption that I was saying the WTC was brought down with levers and pulleys when even a 3rd grader could figure out I was simply offering one example. Then again, when it was pointed out that a person, who is less massive than a car, can push the car, his lame response was that ” the car has wheels.” Never mind the fact that, A) The wheels ADD mass to the car, and B) it does NOT change the FACT that a car has more mass than a person.
Once again, we see that any statement made by “truthers” is comosed of arsenic, indium, iodine, and neon.
Comments
Post a Comment