And i find it hard to believe that fire initiated the collapse.
There was also the little matter of all the other structural damage. Like the big hole in the building. Strawman much?
Buildings have been on fire for over 24 hours, and when it does go out, the steel frame is still standing.
Except in cases where this is not true, e.g. the Madrid skyscraper fire, where the steel frame collapsed and only the concrete core remained standing.
Our friend here seems to believe that all forms of combustion are exactly the same, that fire = fire, and that a housefire or even a fire in a skyscraper under other circumstances will reach the exact same temperatures and have the same characteristics as a fire fed by
jet fuel.
Here's a hint, lost: some fires get hotter than your stove or your campfire. And there's a reason blacksmiths heat metal (including steel) before they go pounding at it - it's more pliable when hot. And guess what they use to heat it up?
Pretty sure it's fire. And they don't even use jet fuel.
Your entire set of posts in this thread has been a massive argument from incredulity. You never post evidence, you simply say "that's bullshit!"
So how's this: you haven't the faintest idea of what your talking about. If you're trying to convince anyone, you might want to start posting some actual facts and numbers instead of "that doesn't look right to me" and "this one guy said that can't happen" when it quite plainly
did.
Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.