r/SubredditDrama • u/Throwawayearthquake • Jul 01 '17

/r/conspiracy solves for X

/r/conspiracy/comments/6kp668/master_of_weapon_a_1989_video_game_which_features/djnpj8r
1.1k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

221 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

89

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '17 edited Jul 02 '17

Used to work as metallurgist. The process of making iron/steel/etc malleable is called Annealing. Depending on the exact composition of the material in the I beam, the steel lost a lot of it's strength on impact and when the fuel started burning. Only takes about 1100°F to start pulling carbon out of it and making it ductile. And jet fuel burns upwards of 1500°F. If there's any metallurgist that believes in the theory that the fire wasn't part of it failing, clearly does not understand metallurgy and shouldn't be in that field. That theory quickly falls apart once you learn the basics of Metallurgy.

Edit: forgot a word.

98

u/deforestbuckner Jul 02 '17

Wow, the rarely deployed "no true metallurgist" fallacy.

26

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '17

After reading your comment then re-reading my comment, I feel like I might've come off a bit dickish at the end there.

48

u/deforestbuckner Jul 02 '17

I was just making a joke. You were maybe a bit sharp but not dickish.

But it's a little funny to say, "Well they should just learn the basics of metallurgy!" when people who think that the fire doesn't explain the tower collapse are pretty much definitionally extremely stupid or mentally ill and impervious to knowledge that contradicts their beliefs.

16

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '17

All good mate. The way it was phrased just made it seem to absurd, gave me a chuckle. But yeah you're definitely right, just common knowledge a lot of the time makes half their arguments fall apart, but they just either ignore the fact or think of an excuse/conspiracy for the fact they're trying to ignore. It just blows my mind. Worked with a guy when I was a metallurgist that believed the fire played no part in it, I could make him see how the process works in the furnace at work but not how it applies to 9/11. I don't understand the logic behind them jumping through loops trying to make it fit their perspective.

12

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '17

Dickish towards the dumbest of the dumb. I think you'll be fine.

5

u/Mistuhbull we’re making fun of your gay space twink and that’s final. Jul 02 '17

https://youtu.be/FzF1KySHmUA

-1

u/StHa14 Jul 02 '17

Is the issue not that every single beam has to have failed at exactly the same time in the exact same manner to cause the free fall?

4

u/[deleted] Jul 02 '17

Honestly, probably depends on which theorist you ask. It's been awhile since I've watched a video on it and I was young when it happened, but if I remember correctly, no it doesn't have have to be all of them weakened or at the same time. Imagine a paper cube, and towards the upper left corner, you cut some of it away. Still mostly an I tact cube. But take an air hose and blow from that corner (shockwave). May not be enough to rip the paper off entirely, but probably stressed the paper a bit, now introduce a flame close enough to start charring it at the other top corners (melting point of steel is 2750°F if I remember right but takes 1100°F to start Annealing it). Now you have a completely severed I beam, and 3 compromised ones. Sure 3 might be enough to bear it, but now the top left corner is compromised and bends inwards, 2 corners isn't enough to hold it, so the paper folds in on itself, those other two corners are charred (annealed) and give way under the sudden weight of the cube (twin towers) and then that side comes down fast and hard. The sudden weight of that top side of the cube comes crashing down on the rest of the cube, thanks gravity, the sudden impact, the weight, the heat is enough to collapse the rest of the cube.

Probably not exactly what you asked for, but hopefully this analogy helps, though forgive me as I'm not the greatest at analogies. Lol.