Originally Posted by
Carlos
1 - Steel does lose strength at high temperatures.
Where was it ever claimed otherwise? You need to prove those temperatures though.
Originally Posted by
Carlos
2 - The fire protection were removed from the truss on the floors where the impact occurred.
This is speculation that's never proven. Exactly how much was removed and exactly how? Exactly how much was needed to remain to keep the building up longer than an hour or until it was completely evacuated?
Originally Posted by
Carlos
3 - It is not necessary to remove all fire protection to make the structure susceptible to fire.
See number 2
Originally Posted by
Carlos
4 - The failure of a structural element can cause the failure of others.
Sure, but will it bring on sudden rapid global collapse of the entire structure?
Originally Posted by
Carlos
5 - Progressive collapse does exist.
Sure. But not sudden rapid global collapse complete in a matter of seconds like what was witnessed three times on 9/11.
Originally Posted by
Carlos
This thread is not about evidence of controlled demolition nor NIST findings. It's about arguments that support the claim the towers (WTC 1 and 2) couldn't have collapsed due to fire.
It's still unprecedented and unproven. This is the problem.