Re: How fire works for the ignorant

From	jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Newsgroups	alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, sci.physics
Subject	Re: How fire works for the ignorant
Date	2015-09-15 01:20 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<dc8kcc-3s4.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <mt6gul$pm6$1@dont-email.me> <pm7jcc-9f1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <mt6tp8$hed$1@dont-email.me> <3cbjcc-0v1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> <mt7ph1$ac1$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics Bast <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they
>>>>>>>>> stay burning afterwards?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They did, delusional fuckwit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hell, normal office fires keep burning strong even after a
>>>>>>>>> building collapses because of fire but that was not the case
>>>>>>>>> with WTC1, WTC2 or WTC7.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No fire continues to burn "strong" after a building collapse and
>>>>>>>> the flow of air is reduced, delusional fuckwit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <snip remaining delusional raving>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you seen this video ?
>>>>>>> After you watch it, would you care to try again ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And what does this video have to do with the physics of fire?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While a building is standing, the rooms withing contain lots of air
>>>>>> to support a fire and if windows are broken, such as happens when
>>>>>> an airplane goes through them and there is a subsequent explosion,
>>>>>> air is free to enter the fire area.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After a building collapses, most of the air source goes away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Take some firewood and make a jumbled stack and a neat stack by
>>>>>> criss- crossing the wood so there are lots of air passages and
>>>>>> light both.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Response: Top 7 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Debunked
>>>>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os8mXNTTRrA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The video above already deals with your falacies, obfuscation, and
>>>>> misdirection.
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to talk about campfires and how the contents of an office
>>>>> can burn for days when there is a limited amount of fuel.
>>>>
>>>> Limited amount of AIR, fuckwit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Huh?  With a plane sized hole ? and a fire couldn't get air ?????
>>
>> The hole disappears when the building collapses into a pile of
>> rubble, fuckwit.
> 
> 
> But if the fire had already burned itself out,.....how did it get started 
> and then get hot enough to melt steel in the ground  ?? 
 
Who said it had already burned itself out; certainly not me kook.

No melted steel in the ground, kook. 

-- 
Jim Pennino

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 12:16 -0500
  Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 14:09 -0400
    Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 13:38 -0500
    Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:51 -0500
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:31 -0500
        Re: Rocky's legal woes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:57 +0000
          Re: Rocky's legal woes "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:16 -0400
            Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:40 -0500
              Re: Rocky the stalker jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:27 +0000
              Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:24 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:21 -0500
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES + more on his BIG LIES) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 08:09 -0500
            Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES + more on his BIG LIES) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:38 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:34 -0500
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 15:39 -0500
          Re: More Rocky delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 21:17 +0000
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:44 -0500
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid is caught in 4 BIG LIES ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-15 01:27 +0000
            Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 21:05 -0500
              Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-09-16 14:06 +0000
                Re: Broken airplanes jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 18:04 +0000
                Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-18 14:05 -0500
                Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Dealing with Michael's BIG LIES ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-21 10:51 -0500
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:02 -0400
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:05 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:25 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 10:28 -0400
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 11:31 -0400
            Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:14 -0500
              Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 17:47 -0400
                Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 22:04 -0500
                Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 23:46 -0400
                Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? 9/11 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:22 -0700
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 10:19 -0400
    Re: smoke and fire jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:29 +0000
  Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? burfordtjustice <burford@uk.mo> - 2015-09-13 14:27 -0400
  Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-13 11:34 -0700
    Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 13:43 -0500
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:53 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 14:59 -0500
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:24 -0500
    Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 22:43 -0400
  Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 13:50 -0500
    Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 15:21 -0500
      Re: Rocky's delusions jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:29 +0000
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:25 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Kid Wills is FULL OF SHIT ) "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-14 09:35 -0500
          Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Roger "Rocky" Wittekind is caught in ANOTHER lie.) "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 18:43 -0500
            Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? ( Roger "Rocky" Wittekind is caught in ANOTHER lie.) noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 10:48 -0700
  Re: Rocky doesn't understand fire jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 19:26 +0000
    9/11 debunkers, debunked - Re: Rocky doesn't understand fire "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-13 16:35 -0400
      Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-13 16:00 -0500
        Re: If fires really brought down WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 why didn't they stay burning? Tony Dragon <tony.dragon@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-13 23:29 +0100
        Re: Rocky denies reality jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:39 +0000
      Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-13 23:36 +0000
        Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 09:11 -0400
          Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 16:03 +0000
            Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 12:48 -0400
            Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 12:50 -0400
              Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-14 17:05 +0000
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-14 20:43 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-14 21:15 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 09:47 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 13:13 -0500
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 18:24 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-15 15:32 -0700
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 20:42 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 22:36 +0000
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2015-09-15 19:57 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-16 00:13 +0000
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2015-09-15 20:43 -0400
                Re: How fire works for the ignorant jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-15 01:20 +0000

csiph-web