• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

New 9/11 Photos Of The WTC

hokum6 said:
...

Also:

The apparent pools of molten metal were actually caused by spontaneous combustion.

I can't say that I find those totally convincing counter arguments.

Okay, well suggest another argument then. Perhaps their reasoning for the pools of metal is wrong, but it wasn't bombs for the many reasons already discussed. Once again we're back to conspiracy theories that rely on imaginary technology and completely unrealistic plots.
Oh no. I don't have to put forward another argument. I simply need to point out that the spontaneous combustion argument seems simply preposterous.

;)
 
Yeah, maybe it is, but there were no bombs or thermite so unless you'd like to suggest an alternative that's about the best explanation there is right now. I'm open to anything that doesn't involve fantasy technology.
 
If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion.
 
tonyblair11 said:
If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion.

?

Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied?
 
Cavynaut said:
tonyblair11 said:
If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion.

?

Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied?


Building heat will ignite without an eternal flame. That's pretty much how spontaneous combustion works. You might be thinking of spontaneous human combustion where there is usually no sign of an eternal heat source. :D
 
Cavynaut said:
tonyblair11 said:
Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied?

Although I'd agree that the explanation originally being referred to by PM doesn't seem very satisfactory I think the phrase 'spontaneous combustion' might have confused the issue. 'Spontaneous' fires occur all the time, only they are never really spontaneous in the true sense of that word. So-called spontaneous fires are usually the result of a combination of slow oxidation and trapped heat and I think this is the process the article is referring to, although the author does seem to do so rather clumsily.

At this point haystacks are often mentioned but 'spontaneous' fires are fairly common in buildings too (although the original heat sources involved may be different).
 
Back
Top