Go to Unsolved Mystery Publications Main Index Go to Free account page
Go to frequently asked mystery questions Go to Unsolved Mystery Publications Main Index
Welcome: to Unsolved Mysteries 1 2 3
 
 New Mystery StoryNew Unsolved Mystery UserLogon to Unsolved MysteriesRead Random Mystery StoryChat on Unsolved MysteriesMystery Coffee houseGeneral Mysterious AdviceSerious Mysterious AdviceReplies Wanted on these mystery stories
 




Show Stories by
Newest
Recently Updated
Wanting Replies
Recently Replied to
Discussions&Questions
Site Suggestions
Highest Rated
Most Rated
General Advice
Ancient Beliefs
Angels, God, Spiritual
Conspiracy Theories
Debates
Dreams
Dream Interpretation
Embarrassing Moments
ESP
General Interest
Ghosts/Apparitions
Hauntings
History
Horror
Household tips
Human Interest
Humor / Jokes
In Recognition of
Lost Friends/Family
Missing Persons
Mysterious Happenings
Mysterious Sounds
Near Death Experience
Ouija Mysteries
Out of Body Experience
Party Line
Philosophy
Prayers
Predictions
Psychic Advice
Quotes
Religious / Religions
Reviews
Riddles
Sci-fi
Serious Advice
Strictly Fiction
Unsolved Crimes
UFOs
Urban Legends
USM Events and People
USM Games
In Memory of
Search Stories:


Stories By AuthorId:


Google
Web Site   

Jet Fuel.

  Author:  4309  Category:(Conspiracy) Created:(7/30/2004 3:43:00 AM)
This post has been Viewed (6999 times)

THE JET FUEL; HOW HOT DID IT HEAT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) report into collapse of the WTC towers, estimates that about 3,500 gallons of jet fuel burnt within each of the towers. Imagine that this entire quantity of jet fuel was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat. With these ideal assumptions we calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached.

"The Boeing 767 is capable of carrying up to 23,980 gallons of fuel and it is estimated that, at the time of impact, each aircraft had approximately 10,000 gallons of unused fuel on board (compiled from Government sources)."

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

Since the aircraft were only flying from Boston to Los Angeles, they would have been nowhere near fully fueled on takeoff (the aircraft have a maximum range of 7,600 miles). They would have carried just enough fuel for the trip together with some safety factor. Remember, that carrying excess fuel means higher fuel bills and less paying passengers. The aircraft would have also burnt some fuel between Boston and New York.

"If one assumes that approximately 3,000 gallons of fuel were consumed in the initial fireballs, then the remainder either escaped the impact floors in the manners described above or was consumed by the fire on the impact floors. If half flowed away, then 3,500 gallons remained on the impact floors to be consumed in the fires that followed."

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

What we propose to do, is pretend that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect quantity of oxygen, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction. With these ideal assumptions (none of which were meet in reality) we will calculate the maximum temperature that this one floor could have reached. Of course, on that day, the real temperature rise of any floor due to the burning jet fuel, would have been considerably lower than the rise that we calculate, but this estimate will enable us to demonstrate that the "official" explanation is a lie.

Note that a gallon of jet fuel weighs about 3.1 kilograms, hence 3,500 gallons weighs 3,500 x 3.1 = 10,850 kgs.

Jet fuel is a colorless, combustible, straight run petroleum distillate liquid. Its principal uses are as an ingredient in lamp oils, charcoal starter fluids, jet engine fuels and insecticides.

It is also know as, fuel oil #1, kerosene, range oil, coal oil and aviation fuel.

It is comprised of hydrocarbons with a carbon range of C9 - C17. The hydrocarbons are mainly alkanes CnH2n+2, with n ranging from 9 to 17.

It has a flash point within the range 42° C - 72° C (110° F - 162° F).

And an ignition temperature of 210° C (410° F).

Depending on the supply of oxygen, jet fuel burns by one of three chemical reactions:

(1) CnH2n+2 + (3n+1)/2 O2 => n CO2 + (n + 1) H2O

(2) CnH2n+2 + (2n+1)/2 O2 => n CO + (n + 1) H2O

(3) CnH2n+2 + (n+1)/2 O2 => n C + (n + 1) H2O

Reaction (1) occurs when jet fuel is well mixed with air before being burnt, as for example, in jet engines.

Reactions (2) and (3) occur when a pool of jet fuel burns. When reaction (3) occurs the carbon formed shows up as soot in the flame. This makes the smoke very dark.

In the aircraft crashes at the World Trade Center, the impact (with the aircraft going from 500 or 600 mph to zero) would have throughly mixed the fuel that entered the building with the limited amount of air available within. In fact, it is likely that all the fuel was turned into a flammable mist. However, for sake of argument we will assume that 3,500 gallons of the jet fuel did in fact form a pool fire. This means that it burnt according to reactions (2) and (3). Also note that the flammable mist would have burnt according to reactions (2) and (3), as the quantity of oxygen within the building was quite limited.

Since we do not know the exact quantities of oxygen available to the fire, we will assume that the combustion was perfectly efficient, that is, that the entire quantity of jet fuel burnt via reaction (1), even though we know that this was not so. This generous assumption will give a temperature that we know will be higher than the actual temperature of the fire attributable to the jet fuel.

We need to know that the (net) calorific value of jet fuel when burnt via reaction (1) is 42-44 MJ/kg. The calorific value of a fuel is the amount of energy released when the fuel is burnt. We will use the higher value of 44 MJ/kg as this will lead to a higher maximum temperature than the lower value of 42 (and we wish to continue being outrageously generous in our assumptions).

For a cleaner presentation and simpler calculations we will also assume that our hydrocarbons are of the form CnH2n. The dropping of the 2 hydrogen atoms does not make much difference to the final result and the interested reader can easily recalculate the figures for a slightly more accurate result. So we are now assuming the equation:

(4) CnH2n + 3n/2 O2 => n CO2 + n H2O

However, this model, does not take into account that the reaction is proceeding in air, which is only partly oxygen.

Dry air is 79% nitrogen and 21% oxygen (by volume). Normal air has a moisture content from 0 to 4%. We will include the water vapor and the other minor atmospheric gases with the nitrogen.

So the ratio of the main atmospheric gases, oxygen and nitrogen, is 1 : 3.76. In molar terms:

Air = O2 + 3.76 N2.

Because oxygen comes mixed with nitrogen, we have to include it in the equations. Even though it does not react, it is "along for the ride" and will absorb heat, affecting the overall heat balance. Thus we need to use the equation:

(5) CnH2n + 3n/2(O2 + 3.76 N2) => n CO2 + n H2O + 5.64n N2

From this equation we see that the molar ratio of CnH2n to that of the products is:

CnH2n : CO2 : H2O : N2 = 1 : n : n : 5.64n moles = 14n : 44n : 18n : 28 x 5.64n kgs = 1 : 3.14286 : 1.28571 : 11.28 kgs = 31,000 : 97,429 : 39,857 : 349,680 kgs

In the conversion of moles to kilograms we have assumed the atomic weights of hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen are 1, 12, 14 and 16 respectively.

Now each of the towers contained 96,000 (short) tons of steel. That is an average of 96,000/117 = 820 tons per floor. Lets suppose that the bottom floors contained roughly twice the amount of steel of the upper floors (since the lower floors had to carry more weight). So we estimate that the lower floors contained about 1,100 tons of steel and the upper floors about 550 tons = 550 x 907.2 ≈ 500,000 kgs. We will assume that the floors hit by the aircraft contained the lower estimate of 500,000 kgs of steel. This generously underestimates the quantity of steel in these floors, and once again leads to a higher estimate of the maximum temperature.

Each story had a floor slab and a ceiling slab. These slabs were 207 feet wide, 207 feet deep and 4 (in parts 5) inches thick and were constructed from lightweight concrete. So each slab contained 207 x 207 x 1/3 = 14,283 cubic feet of concrete. Now a cubic foot of lightweight concrete weighs about 50kg, hence each slab weighed 714,150 ≈ 700,000 kgs. Together, the floor and ceiling slabs weighed some 1,400,000 kgs.

So, now we take all the ingredients and estimate a maximum temperature to which they could have been heated by 3,500 gallons of jet fuel. We will call this maximum temperature T. Since the calorific value of jet fuel is 44 MJ/kg. We know that 3,500 gallons = 31,000 kgs of jet fuel

will release 10,850 x 44,000,000 = 477,400,000,000 Joules of energy.

This is the total quantity of energy available to heat the ingredients to the temperature T. But what is the temperature T? To find out, we first have to calculate the amount of energy absorbed by each of the ingredients.

That is, we need to calculate the energy needed to raise:

39,857 kilograms of water vapor to the temperature T° C, 97,429 kilograms of carbon dioxide to the temperature T° C, 349,680 kilograms of nitrogen to the temperature T° C, 500,000 kilograms of steel to the temperature T° C, 1,400,000 kilograms of concrete to the temperature T° C.

To calculate the energy needed to heat the above quantities, we need their specific heats. The specific heat of a substance is the amount of energy needed to raise one kilogram of the substance by one degree centigrade.

Substance Specific Heat [J/kg*C] Nitrogen 1,038 Water Vapor 1,690 Carbon Dioxide 845 Lightweight Concrete 800 Steel 450

Substituting these values into the above, we obtain:

39,857 x 1,690 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the water vapor from 25° to T° C, 97,429 x 845 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the carbon dioxide from 25° to T° C, 349,680 x 1,038 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the nitrogen from 25° to T° C, 500,000 x 450 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the steel from 25° to T° C, 1,400,000 x 800 x (T - 25) Joules are needed to heat the concrete from 25° to T° C.

The assumption that the specific heats are constant over the temperature range 25° - T° C, is a good approximation if T turns out to be relatively small (as it does). For larger values of T this assumption once again leads to a higher maximum temperature (as the specific heat for these substances increases with temperature). We have assumed the initial temperature of the surroundings to be 25° C. The quantity, (T - 25)° C, is the temperature rise.

So the amount of energy needed to raise one floor to the temperature T° C is

= (39,857 x 1,690 + 97,429 x 845 + 349,680 x 1,038 + 500,000 x 450 + 1,400,000 x 800) x (T - 25) = (67,358,330 + 82,327,505 + 362,967,840 + 225,000,000 + 1,120,000,000) x (T - 25) Joules = 1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) Joules.

Since the amount of energy available to heat this floor is 477,400,000,000 Joules, we have that

1,857,653,675 x (T - 25) = 477,400,000,000 1,857,653,675 x T - 46,441,341,875 = 477,400,000,000

Therefore T = (477,400,000,000 + 46,441,341,875)/1,857,653,675 = 282° C (540° F).

So, the jet fuel could (at the very most) have only added T - 25 = 282 - 25 = 257° C (495° F) to the temperature of the typical office fire that developed.

Remember, this figure is a huge over-estimate, as (among other things) it assumes that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb the heat, whereas in reality, the jet fuel fire was all over in one or two minutes, and the energy not absorbed by the concrete and steel within this brief period (that is, almost all of it) would have been vented to the outside world.

"The time to consume the jet fuel can be reasonably computed. At the upper bound, if one assumes that all 10,000 gallons of fuel were evenly spread across a single building floor, it would form a pool that would be consumed by fire in less than 5 minutes"

Quote from the FEMA report into the collapse of WTC's One and Two (Chapter Two).

Here are statements from three eye-witnesses that provide evidence that the heating due to the jet fuel was indeed minimal.

Donovan Cowan was in an open elevator at the 78th floor sky-lobby (one of the impact floors of the South Tower) when the aircraft hit. He has been quoted as saying: "We went into the elevator. As soon as I hit the button, that's when there was a big boom. We both got knocked down. I remember feeling this intense heat. The doors were still open. The heat lasted for maybe 15 to 20 seconds I guess. Then it stopped."

Stanley Praimnath was on the 81st floor of the South Tower: "The plane impacts. I try to get up and then I realize that I'm covered up to my shoulder in debris. And when I'm digging through under all this rubble, I can see the bottom wing starting to burn, and that wing is wedged 20 feet in my office doorway."

Ling Young was in her 78th floor office: "Only in my area were people alive, and the people alive were from my office. I figured that out later because I sat around in there for 10 or 15 minutes. That's how I got so burned."

Neither Stanley Praimnath nor Donovan Cowan nor Ling Young were cooked by the jet fuel fire. All three survived.

Summarizing:

We have assumed that the entire 3,500 gallons of jet fuel was confined to just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor, that no heat escaped this floor by conduction and that the steel and concrete had an unlimited amount of time to absorb all the heat.

Then it is impossible that the jet fuel, by itself, raised the temperature of this floor more than 257° C (495° F).

Now this temperature is nowhere near high enough to even begin explaining the World Trade Center Tower collapse.

It is not even close to the first critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F) where steel loses about half its strength and it is nowhere near the quotes of 1500° C that we constantly read about in our lying media.

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."

Quote from the FEMA report (Appendix A).

Recalling that the North Tower suffered no major structural damage from the intense office fire of February 23, 1975, we can conclude that the ensuing office fires of September 11, 2001, also did little extra damage to the towers.

Conclusion:

The jet fuel fires played almost no role in the collapse of the World Trade Center.

So, once again, you have been lied to by the media, are you surprised?

You can join Unsolved Mysteries and post your own mysteries or
interesting stories for the world to read and respond to Click here

Scroll all the way down to read replies.

Show all stories by   Author:  4309 ( Click here )

Spring is coming

Replies:      
Date: 7/30/2004 7:29:00 AM  From Authorid: 2030    Dispite an amazing amount of calculation, you're not (or did I miss it) taking into account other combustable items burning in the building or the structural damage to the building caused by the jets themselves or the other combustables on the jets. Fires were obviously still burning in both buildings up to and in fact for days after the collapse. No one is assuming that was still jet fuel.  
Date: 7/30/2004 7:34:00 AM  From Authorid: 41708    I allready figured that. All it would have done is mabe make the structure a bit more felxable. The weight on teh destroyed internal structure is what took them down, in my opinion.  
Date: 7/30/2004 5:39:00 PM  From Authorid: 47296    Being familiar with steel construction (I still do it for a living), I will tell you that the WTC towers were not your typical steel frame building. They were built with a steel exoskeleton and used heavy barjoists to support the concrete floors. The towers were built this way to make the maximum use of floor space, without the normal reenforcing inner steel found on most buildings, especially around elevator shafts. Walk into a large gymnasium or Walmart Super Center and look at the roof supporting system found there. This is the same type supporting structure that was used in the WTC. Normally, steel buildings are designed to withstand a 2 hour burn through time before the structure begins to weaken. The WTC towers did stand for almost two hours after initial impact. Add the fact that the supporting clips which hold the bar joists in place were designed to hold the weight of the bar joists, as well as the concrete flooring and anything palced in the building. After impact, you have the additonal weight of the aircraft remains, as well as any water from the sprinkler system. This will change the load bearing hold time for the heavy clips holding the bar joists. When we have to bend steel on a job site, we use heat and pressure. On that day, you had heat present from anything on those floors which were burning, and from the smoke plume, there was a lot of stuff burning. You also have additional weight (pressure) placed on the joists and clips. Eventually, once the clips on a floor can no longer take the heat and pressure, teh will bend causing the bar joists and concrete floor they support to fall to the next floor. From that added weight, with heat still present, you soon have a chain reaction. With a steel exoskeleton, you end up with a implosion effect, which is why the towers crumbled down the way they did.  
Date: 7/30/2004 7:54:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    LoL the plume of smoke only supports a missile theory not burning debris (Cannot exactly combust all those items at once right otherwise they where not existent in the theory those too helped). The plume was not kerosene and thats positive proof to you for sure right? The towers where built to withstand an attack of multiple planes carrying 23,000 gallons. Wal-Mart lol. It would not even come close to withstanding hurricane force winds let alone an impact. The fires raged on for over 100 days UNDERNEATH by the way. (Demolitions). The top events where explosives yes but they would not bring a building down and only demolitions can cause a building to fall down in that manner. (If you work on buildings at all you should know that). Also they cause small seismic activity that will register as a small Earthquake just like the one recorded just before the Towers fell. Go to http://www.911uncovered.com/ just for the tower exploding in a fashion that would sujest bombs set to go off and Fire Fighters saying exactly that ;) Peace2Ü eh.  
Date: 7/30/2004 7:57:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    You want to see somethin funny that I cannot reprint. Check out http://www.nydailynews.com/front/breaking_news/story/128839p-115239c.html Thats how safe your skies still are eh =P  
Date: 7/31/2004 9:09:00 AM  From Authorid: 47296    WIley, it is obvious you know nothing of steel construction, and will believe anything you read. I do this for a living, and have in fact worked on buildings where construction was done similiar to the contruction of the WTC, although not on as vast a scale as the WTC. When I mentioned Wal-Mart, it was to give you an idea of the type of floor support system that used. I have set quite a bit of bar joists, and although it is quite flimsy laterally by itself, once set in place and welded or bolted to the supporting clips in the exterior columns, it becomes extremely strong. I have seen bar joists that were only a foot tall, and spaced a foot apart, support 4" of concrete flooring above it. The bar joists used in the WTC were quite a bit larger. The key is not the bar joists though, but the clips on the exterior columns that support them. Some of those clips would have been damaged on impact, and in fact, although the impact was stated to be on only one floor, anyone with knowledge of the size of commercial aircraft would know that the impact area actually covered at least three floors, with impact centered on one floor. Had the WTC been built in a more conventional manner, then it is possible it would have withstood the impact. The Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber years ago, and although there was considerable damage to the building, there was never a fear of it's collapsing. There was a documentary done on the construction of the WTC, and it also explained how the towers could have failed in the way they did. The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they are use to seeing CONVENTIONAL BUILDINGS collapsed using demolitions. In conventional construction, it does in fact take explosives to the interior columns timed precisely to make a building collapse upon itself. Construction such as the WTC though depends on exterior columns to support the weight. The steel that was removed from ground zero has been extensively examined, and almost every exterior supporting column has shown where the supporting clips were bent to the point where they exceeded the holding capabilities of the connectors used to hold the joists in place. A lot of us in the steel industry could not understand at first how the towers could have failed. Once we realized how they were contructed though, it all came to light. Those towers were built using one of the cheapest means possible at the time, and using a means that had never been used for a building of it's size. They were built to maximize space, with little or no internal supporting steel. The reason they did not topple sideways is because the aircraft impacted near the center of the walls, and not on the corners, which are the strongest parts of the support system. Some will ask why the explosion in the basement did not topple the buildings. The answer is simple. The sub floors were built using conventional construction, not like the above ground floors. You are right about one thing. The plumes of smoke were not kerosene. You are wrong about missile plumes. The plumes of smoke that we saw on that day were caused by a combination of burning material inside the buildings, both natural and manmade materials. Much of the fuel was consumed in the initial impact, which is why we saw the fireball we saw on impact. That fireball was enough though to ignite much of the burnable material exposed to it, including carpet, furniture, ceiling tiles, and even some metals. The smoke was consistant with burning material from a Class Alpha fire. (I am also very familiar with firefighting and damage control from my Navy days as a firefighting and damage control investigator). There would have also been some metals burning, including metal from the aircraft. When metal burns, it burns at temperatures much greater than that of fuel, and you cannot put it out using water. In fact, if water were put on any burning metals, especially from sprinkler systems, then it would raise the air temperature in the area since the water would begin to flash into steam. This increase in air temperature would increase the possibility of spontaneous combustion of other materials, thus adding to the smoke plume. The fact that there were still fires smoldering weeks after the collapse is not surprising. There were tons of combustible material buried in the debris, as well as dust, some of which is ignitable. There was also a constant supply of air to the combustible material, from above ground and also from underground. Three things are needed to maintain a fire, fuel (combustible material), oxygen (air), and heat (provided by the initial impact). Those who are looking for a conspiracy of why the towers fell have little if any knowledge of construction, or fire and how it acts or reacts. They should leave such thoughts to the professionals with the knowledge.  
Date: 7/31/2004 9:25:00 AM  From Authorid: 47296    By the way, look up the temperature of burning metals, especially those used in aircraft. I think you will find there was well in excess of the temperatures needed to make steel fail. Here is the link to a primer put out by DOE that shows some of the temperatures of burning metals and some of the effects when such metals burn. http://tis.eh.doe.gov/techstds/standard/hdbk1081/hbk1081.html#ZZ0  
Date: 7/31/2004 6:14:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Alright lets get something straight, I know more about Jet Fuel. I know it couldn't reach the maximum temperature that is needed to make steel even lose half of its strength. Its low flash point would indeed make it disapear in a poof. I also know there where no reports of it being confined to one floor, this experiment was to show what could happen if it had that chance to increase the number of maximum temperature. Now, even if I could not go to LA (and verious other places like Seatle)and point out buildings that I or my stepfather eighther helped to build or did build wouldn't change the fact I am one mean welder and yes sadly I do know the table of steel vs heat. I know for sure that the steel was also not a cheap steel so it would not even come close to getting that brownish yellow color that would be typical at about 495° of your average everyday beam. Funny enough if you asked for the blue prints of the WTC back around before the first bombing (Which didn't topple the building because it wasn't enough in the right CORE which still needed to be tooken out or even if you smashed the building all the way to the 50th floor above ground level magically with a giant hammer it still would be standing. I could show you that one =P. If you asked you would get them. It was not built like a shak for gods sake =P. Read this its a start. http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm379677.html  
Date: 7/31/2004 6:18:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    You cannot exactly come into my posts halfway and claim im an idiot. I do not believe everything I read lol. I believe all the information I have. Only reason I find the information online is because I already know what it is. Take a miracle if you did not know what information you where looking for and even bigger one to find the credible information. Not written by some boyscout. To find that information takes knowing that information.  
Date: 7/31/2004 6:24:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Now perhaps like most of the WORLD not just America, you believe everything you see on T.V. and care more about putting Martha Stewart in Jail for some reason then no WMD's in Iraq. Cognitive Dissonance. The illness of the world.  
Date: 7/31/2004 9:17:00 PM  From Authorid: 47296    Wiley, understand something, I was doing engineering work before you were born. My whole adult life has revolved around engineering. I also had gone through my first firefighting school before you were born, and that school included instruction on both liquid and solid fuels, as well as exotic metals, because of the work I was doing. Jet fuel does not burn off as fast as you think. In fact, there are few fuels that do. I have helped fight a tank fire where a tank held over 3 million gallons of fuel. We fought the fire for two days before the proper equipment could be flown in to extinguish it. When the fire was out, there was still over a million gallons of fuel left in the tank. That was after 48 hours. The heat put off by that fire was tremendous, and it blistered the paint off the side of our tug, which was almost 200 yards from the fire, and also shattered several windows. As for where the heat came from that is capable of breaking down the steel, titanium, which is found in most aircraft, as well as manganese and magnesium, burn at over 4000 degrees. Buildings constructed of steel are designed to withstand a two hour burn through time under normal direct exposure to fire. The fact that the towers stayed up as long as they did, especially given the presence of burning metal from the aircraftm is in itself a miracle. If there was indeed a conspiracy, then why were the towers not toppled when the aircraft? As for knowledge, I have forgotten more about engineering and construction in my time than you will probably ever know. That is why I am as well respected in the field as I am, and have left my mark for people to see.  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:28:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Lier  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:30:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Now how does it feel to be called one?  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:38:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Blah blah blah before you where born well then baby you learned wrong and I highly doubt the respect of building a wal-mart is the same as building a skyscraper nor do I doubt one second that you do not have any knowledge whatsoever of the WTC buildings (BTW name the one that fell without a plane hitting it) Name the fire fighters that where there (Like I haven't done my fair share of fire fighting god some people). Know what they describe. They put the fire out and that the original explosions where just that explosions that one would see in a demolition floor by floor. Obviously you have more fire fighting experience then them as well right? Please on the fuels crack ok I have worked with all kinds of fuels (Including ones used to throw people into space. You know that big empty black above you. Heck I even worked on a little thing that was meant to do that operation without fuel and your big wig government thought it was better to waste the fuel. So our joint venture with Warner Brothers went to make a ride called Superman) Never ever again assume just by typing what you feel is something superior to me that you are for one and never ever think that that changes anything that is Posted. Stop "Rationalizing" by trying to supposedly proove that you are an intelligent being by saying im not. Proove you are one by actually reading the post. (Which im sure you have no idea how to calculate anything and of course I know you have no knowledge already of anything because sprinklers never went off. It was never reported the crash kept to one floor and there is no possible way you can burn that place down with an office fire because not just the way its built but because they have had them before =P)  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:39:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    In fact they mysteriously removed all fire retardants and sprinkler systems. Hmmmm..  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:40:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Place should of been condemned building code wise just on that.  
Date: 7/31/2004 11:42:00 PM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Wal-Mart does not Equal World Trade Center.  
Date: 8/1/2004 12:17:00 PM  From Authorid: 47296    Wiley grow up. You are a lost cause, and I will not waste anymore time on kids who think they know it all.  
Date: 8/6/2004 4:51:00 PM  From Authorid: 56971    10.000 gallons of gas would go up so fast. plus gas vapors will cause it to blow up. or a spark.
Date: 9/26/2004 12:16:00 AM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    Sorry if its true but it is. Sorry if Wal-Mart did not equal Trade Center (That if anything shows you for you ;)) Sorry if Fuel would not burn that tower down and puuuuhleeease with office supplys Thats in the math anyway. "Kids who think they know it all" is the only reason you kept coming back to my posts. To feel superior to someone who can do the parabolic functions to make that satalites that Boeing uses (yet they sold the information to the chinese without being charged. OUTRIGHT BLATANT TREASON) When I post about it I expect respect to get respect back and you have done nothing but show me contempt in a condescending swash buckling hero attitude. (AKA acting like knowing what you are talking about opposed to actually knowing what you are talking about) I do not care. Your actual intelligence is on the line and you already prooved otherwise. You might be bothered by it but all I can do is type to it. Afterwords I forget it but that does not mean I typed it to be wrong. Anyway, keep going on in life vindicating all the supposed wrong doing by kids who supposedly know it all (Actually I come pretty darn close to that heh) You will find that some of them might not just be blowing air like you did and they actually know what they are talking about. You will find that makes you wrong. You just might not like it but thats what it is. You cannot define wisdom with your words. Only show arrogance. Peace2U  
Date: 12/20/2006 10:27:00 AM  From Authorid: 44960    You know, TwoSpirit tried her best to enlighten people with truth and experience. She was well ahead of her time and she posessed a vast knowledge subject matter that was willingly shared to those that would listen. Those few who dared question that knowledge, soon revealed thier own ignorance. Jean I will always Love you and your presence is greatly missed here at USM. One day we shall be reunited, this I know. Love always, Donna *Spirit*  
Date: 6/23/2007 9:49:00 AM  ( From Author ) From Authorid: 4309    She was wrong.  

Find great Easter stories on Angels Feather
Information Privacy policy and Copyrights

Renasoft is the proud sponsor of the Unsolved Mystery Publications website.
See: www.rensoft.com Personal Site server, Power to build Personal Web Sites and Personal Web Pages
All stories are copyright protected and may not be reproduced in any form, except by specific written authorization
Other Cool Sites:
demo.thefireman.biz 
demo.angelsfeather.com 
demo.myblogsite.us 
demo.laughsandjokes.com 
demo.robertson-connection.com 
demo.comecrywithme.com 
demo.draganddropwebpages.com 
demo.allgamesports.com 
demo.business-finance-money.com 
demo.ilovemysteries.com 
Awesome Free Web Graphics 
Favorite Grapic Quotes 
Greetings in Glittery Text 
Your name in Glittery Text 
www.thehomebusinessindex.com 
www.diet-food-weightloss-health.com 
www.investingandinvestments.com 
www.cancerinformationworld.com 
www.datinglovematchmaking.com 
www.creditinformationworld.com 
www.insurancelinksdirect.com 
www.ilovemysteries.com 
www.casinopokergambleing.com 
www.make-money-while-sleeping.com 
www.vacation-travel-cruse-deals-information.com 


.

Pages:754 598 843 670 1407 847 274 653 636 1224 550 805 841 630 1069 233 1598 36 1418 678 984 110 498 1139 505 838 847 897 816 1551 569 1341 1049 1353 57 193 139 1541 1119 534 146 434 98 1025 383 1393 606 937 1538 455 1042 773 602 1546 118 94 592 117 1186 545 1475 763 963 1276 1098 47 1053 1172 1306 131 676 1476 73 395 991 813 23 665 219 215 1358 37 372 548 1580 903 1576 336 420 574