Alright, this is off topic, but I have to ask. If one were to believe Rosie O'Donnell's crazy conspiracy theories about fire being unable to melt steel at the World Trade Center, how does one explain this story from Oakland:
The tanker carrying 8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited after crashing into a pylon on the interchange, which connects westbound lanes of Interstate 80 to southbound I-880, on the edge of downtown Oakland about half a mile from the Bay Bridge's toll plaza.A preliminary investigation indicated the driver may have been speeding on the curving road, Cross said.
Witnesses reported flames rising up to 200 feet into the air. Heat exceeded 2,750 degrees and caused the steel beams holding up the interchange from eastbound I-80 to eastbound Interstate 580 above to buckle and bolts holding the structure together to melt, leading to the collapse, California Department of Transportation director Will Kempton said.
According to the laws of Rosie, fire just can't melt steel, right?
I'm just saying.
Posted by Eric Earling at April 29, 2007 05:53 PM | Email ThisRosie is a know it all! Just like all the deme's here in la la-la la Washington!
Can we not please have at least one Rosie Free Zone?
NO ROSIE NONE OF THE TIME!!!
The Piper
Posted by: Piper Scott on April 29, 2007 06:04 PMThe above does not imply that steel will not soften long before it gets hot enough to become a liquid. Softened steel was the problem at the WTC disaster and also with this freeway collapse. Softened structural steel beams cannot do their job of supporting a great weight of concrete. They fail, leading to a collapse of the structure.
People may advocate any conspiracy theory they wish, but the melting point of structural steel remains the same. So does the softening point of steel. Keep in mind that steel is a good conductor of heat, so that the heat from a fire is quickly spread throughout the steel member when there is no insulating material around the beam to protect it.
Posted by: JulieJulie on April 29, 2007 06:40 PMNext thing, you'll be telling us that water can make things wet!
Posted by: ScottM on April 29, 2007 07:23 PMJust fell down....
And you say Rosie has crazy conspiracy theories, like over 50% of New Yorkers polled, please explain why a steel framed building would just fall down.
Don't even mention the owner of WTC 7 saying they "pulled" it on video.....
While you are at it. Why don't you make a list of all the code red, in your face, we are going to be attacked at any second warnings the White House (who controls the FBI) completely ignored.
Naw, that may hurt someone's ideology.
If it is too hard for someone to believe that our current sleazy leaders were involved in the attacks, think about how it helped their agenda. They could never have had their powergrab without a "Pearl Harbor Like" event.
Face it.
Looks reeeeeeeeel suspicious, especially with all the warnings, and not one single action to protect us, or raise security in any way.
Reeeeeeel suspicious.
Posted by: Facts on April 29, 2007 07:47 PMAs for Rosie..
I love her.
I wish she was on the air 8 hours a day.
Give her the friggin' mike!
No one will turn around this Country faster & more effectively than Rosie ranting.
Most Republicans believe they can somehow talk Moderates into being Conservative.
Au contraire....
The most effective way to convert Moderates & even Liberals is make them listen to Rosie 8 hours per day!
You may be using one of the older models and didn't receive the CSA (consumer safety advisory). I've reached that assumption based on most of your posts. Don't worry, I didn't either and was completly unaware until my neighbor saw me wearing mine improperly while stabbing my lawn with the poker from my fireplace in order to eradicate ground moles, loudly singing the words to the popular Beatles song Helter Skelter.
Since pinning back the flaps, I no longer sing that loud.
Good luck, dude.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on April 29, 2007 09:06 PMNotice how the freeway overpass didn't create a cloud of dust like the WTC collapss did. Notice how the freeway overpass is in large pieces. It wasn't blasted into pulverized concrete. There are alot of significant differences wouldn't you say?
No one wants to believe that government insiders were part of 9/11. But it's clear the FBI, CIA, the Justice Dept have all been compromised severely. You have to admit there is something seriously wrong with the Federal government. Even conservative Republicans like Chuck Hagel are calling for our President's impeachment. There are serious problems with our government today.
Posted by: Ellen on April 29, 2007 09:46 PMScotty's ashes were "beamed up" via a commercial rocket a few days ago...
Have you heard...9/11 was planned on a grassy knoll in Dallas. Lee Harvey Oswald's accomplice was recently identified as the 20th terrorist, and they all did it because Madelyn Murray O'Hair wouldn't go to the mosque sock hope with any of them.
And...Osama bin Laden? Doesn't he bear a striking resemblance to John Wilkes Booth? Think on it...have you ever seen the two of them in a picture??? Go figure...
The Piper (Who will cower under his bed this evening since I know the black helicopters are coming to take me away, ha ha, ho ho, he he)
Posted by: Piper Scott on April 29, 2007 10:20 PM"And you say Rosie has crazy conspiracy theories, like over 50% of New Yorkers polled, please explain why a steel framed building would just fall down."
Once again you use the improper alias "facts" when your posts contains none at all. You should call yourself "No Facts".
Controlled demolition of a building involves removing load bearing trusses and columns. Pleas review the link below to educate yourself:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/building-implosion1.htm
According the the FEMA REPORT
"The performance of WTC 7 is significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers."
The report does go on to say "Prior to September 11,2001, there was little if any record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected buildings." However one shold note that prior to September 11, 2001 there was no record of terrorists crashing planes full of people into buildings either.
So once again, the troll calling himself "Facts" has none at all. Fire can indeed weaken a steel structure to the point it loses it's ability to bear the load.
Expanding gases may have expanded that skin allowing support to pull away from the edge of each floor and allow the whole thing to collapse, further expanding the outer skin so floors underneath them could fall as well.
Posted by: John Bailo on April 30, 2007 12:24 AMPopular Mechanics has done a wonderful job debunking almost all the tin foil hat conspiracy theories. Here's a link:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
Here is an excerpt from the part dealing with Building 7:
Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner...
I highly encourage you to read the report... Naw, that may hurt someone's ideology.
Posted by: Mike H on April 30, 2007 12:26 AMBut that would take all the fun out of wandering around in an ignorant conspriacy daze, hating Bush for everything. Given the number of conspiracy fools out there, that obviously has a lot of appeal.
Posted by: Jeff B. on April 30, 2007 12:32 AM
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/911myths/4213805.html
Perhaps if the freeway overpass had been dropped from a height of 1,355 rather than approximately 30 feet, you'd find it more "blasted into pulverized concrete."
Also, do you know anything about roads? That road deck is surfaced with asphalt, which isn't concrete. Perhaps the flames would transmute one material into another to result in the "pulverized concrete" you so clearly desire.
Ignorance is best not shared.
G'day
Posted by: Beantowner on April 30, 2007 07:34 AMBut again, I always believed the softening of the steel theory. But, I couldn't believe binLaden and company was experienced enough in metallurgy and structural analysis to predict the total failure. It was also conjectured/rumored that binLaden was surprised at how successful the attack was.
Posted by: swatter on April 30, 2007 08:43 AM1) Bridges are made mostly of concrete and oil. (Asphalt is a petroleum product.)
2) Gasoline burns at a MUCH higher temperature than does jet fuel. Gasoline burns at about 2,000 C. Jet fuel burns between 800 and 1500 C.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/autos/gasoline-faq/part4/preamble.html
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4
So we're talking about a much hotter fire burning a much more vunerable structure.
Posted by: Bushdidit on April 30, 2007 09:26 AMExcerpt: (yes, murtz, thEse are DIRECT quoutes, hence the use of QUOTATION marks)
... " In The-Word-According-to-Rosie, England and the U.S. conspired to have Iran seize British sailors to start another Middle East War. The U.S. government attacked itself on 9-11. The Supreme Court voted against partial birth abortion because the Pope told them to do so. Bush ordered the levees in New Orleans to be dynamited, and Dick Cheney deliberately shot his friend to silence him from talking about something or other (insert secondary conspiracy notion here). "
... " The list is endless. Because of this, practicing Christians are thought to be no different than Islamic terrorists in the mind of Rosie, the new spokeswoman for her generation. Present her with a counter argument and she'll simply ignore it, and then promptly start to talk about Enron and Global Warming. Nothing that conflicts with her views can be proven because nothing is provable. "
... " The fact is, if you follow the ebb and flow of American politics, you'll notice an enduring trend. There is a built-in self-correcting mechanism in our political process that compensates for abject stupidity once it has finally reached a breaking point. "
... " Today, the public's patience for lying and manipulation is starting to wear thin. Rosie may have hit a few sympathetic notes at first with a fair portion of the viewing public, but the more she spoke the more insane she became. Her insanity was fine until that Don Imus moment arrived and the blue suits in network programming saw a threat to their bottom line. Rosie had to go, and thus Rosie "decided" to leave. "
... " American public opinion is a lumbering mass. But once it's set in motion, an inertia of its own begins to take hold. As the pendulum reaches its breaking point, we may well see a counter-reaction to the idiocy and insanity of the Left. It's already started with Imus and Rosie, who've lost their jobs for different reasons. One can only hope that Pelosi and Reid will be next. "
" Then Time Magazine should run another cover with Reagan's tears. Only this time they would be tears of joy as the country regains
its soul. "
"Physicists are baffled by the seemingly impossible. Noted structural engineer Rosie O'Donnell could not be reached for comment.
A section of freeway that funnels traffic off the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge collapsed early Sunday after a gasoline tanker truck overturned and caught fire, authorities said.
The heat from the fire was intense enough to melt part of the freeway and cause the collapse, but the truck's driver walked away from the scene with second-degree burns.
Scientists from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and CERNE Laboratories are petitioning the government to cordon off the area to keep the site of this unprecedented event pristine enough for scientific investigation. "It's like witnessing the live birth of a new universe," Normal Druvovitch of JPL said. "
Physicist Kip Thorne believes the area may in fact be a "naked singularity," a region in space in which the normal physical laws that govern the universe simply fail to operate. He suggests that the National Guard be activated to surround the area at a "safe distance," in order to keep the curious well away from the site. "Strange energies may be radiating from the wreckage as we speak," Thorne said. "Bizarre forms of radiation, atoms and quarks previously unseen in our reality. Maybe even wizards riding dinosaurs and crazy shit like that."
Posted by: John425 on April 30, 2007 09:50 AMWhy?
WTC 7 was an unknown building outside of NY, and if you polled people today I imagine that most people don't even know of its existence. I've heard that the destruction of the building was to destroy files, but a simple fire could do that. What was so special about WTC7 that *anyone* would care that it collapsed?
Posted by: eirik on April 30, 2007 09:59 AMBut here's something...If 9/11 was an inside job, where are the insiders? I mean, this couldn't have been a lone black bag operation. Anyone care to estimate how many folks would have to be involved to do what the conspiracy theorists claim?
I mean...wouldn't you think that at least one of them would have sought to sell his story to the Enquirer or something? Go figure!
You can do all the scientific analysis you want, but it still would have taken some effort on the part of a few to schlep those explosives in the Towers and rig them up.
Where are they? Who done it?
The Piper
Posted by: Piper Scott on April 30, 2007 10:07 AMI have two words for you: Occam's Razor. Look it up.
Posted by: John Galt on April 30, 2007 12:32 PMOh, I don't know. Maybe because they were two of the tallest buildings in the world and were directly hit by airplanes? And 110 stories x 2 coming down onto the populace has a tendency to get people's attention?
I swear. People like you are seriously fucked in the head.
Posted by: jimg on April 30, 2007 03:28 PM:)
Posted by: whit on May 1, 2007 03:07 PMDesert Rat: Yes steel melts, but not at the temperature from a kerosene fire. Jet fuel is basically kerosene. It burns at a far lower temperature than does gasoline.
Face it. You dimwits jumped on this story to try to "prove" people like Rosie wrong, but all you've proven is that you don't know the difference between kerosene and gasoline.
Posted by: Bushdidit on May 2, 2007 08:08 AMDesert Rat: Yes steel melts, but not at the temperature from a kerosene fire. Jet fuel is basically kerosene. It burns at a far lower temperature than does gasoline.
Face it. You dimwits jumped on this story to try to "prove" people like Rosie wrong, but all you've proven is that you don't know the difference between kerosene and gasoline.
Posted by: Bushdidit on May 2, 2007 08:09 AMDesert Rat: Yes steel melts, but not at the temperature from a kerosene fire. Jet fuel is basically kerosene. It burns at a far lower temperature than does gasoline.
Face it. You dimwits jumped on this story to try to "prove" people like Rosie wrong, but all you've proven is that you don't know the difference between kerosene and gasoline.
Posted by: Bushdidit on May 2, 2007 08:14 AM