DANK MEMES

doublename · January 13, 2016

Jesus, look at those things.

**dr lopez** · January 13, 2016

On 1/13/2016 at 7:54 AM, xxx said:
Her body and face pull millions of Instagram followers but those hands are rebuilding transmissions on 12 hour shifts.

lol

olo · January 13, 2016

On 1/13/2016 at 1:47 AM, usagi said:

On 1/13/2016 at 1:02 AM, prdctvsm said:

"jet fuel can't melt steel beams"

olo · January 13, 2016

in response to jet fuel conspirators though:

Quote

Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). 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."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

**YEK** · January 14, 2016

On 1/13/2016 at 7:54 AM, xxx said:
Her body and face pull millions of Instagram followers but those hands are rebuilding transmissions on 12 hour shifts.

lolz! i saw that too...

vertsk8er419 · January 14, 2016

Edited January 14, 2016 by impotentwhitecapitalist

usagi · January 14, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO696B03l48

roasty · January 14, 2016

On 1/13/2016 at 7:53 PM, olo said:

in response to jet fuel conspirators though:

Quote

Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). 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."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

Tell me more about the jet fuel on Building 7

January 14, 2016

very nice posting streak, iwc

olo · January 14, 2016

On 1/14/2016 at 1:14 PM, roasty said:

On 1/13/2016 at 7:53 PM, olo said:

in response to jet fuel conspirators though:

Quote

Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). 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."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

Tell me more about the jet fuel on Building 7

just caught on fire. It was burning throughout the day & became structurally compromised. I get it's more fun to believe in conspiracies. But, I just don't think our government would be smart enough to carry this out. I really don't. I mean did you see Bush's face when he was told about what just happened? Complete tumbleweeds in those eyes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056088/Footage-kills-conspiracy-theories-Rare-footage-shows-WTC-7-consumed-fire.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/

**azatoth** · January 14, 2016

On 1/14/2016 at 1:45 PM, olo said:
But, I just don't think our government would be smart enough to carry this out. I really don't. I mean did you see Bush's face when he was told about what just happened? Complete tumbleweeds in those eyes.

Wasn't that just his default setting?

olo · January 14, 2016

On 1/14/2016 at 2:57 PM, azatoth said:

On 1/14/2016 at 1:45 PM, olo said:
But, I just don't think our government would be smart enough to carry this out. I really don't. I mean did you see Bush's face when he was told about what just happened? Complete tumbleweeds in those eyes.

Wasn't that just his default setting?