While doing a bit of research on the burning temperatures of jet fuel, I ran across a pretty interesting site and wanted to make sure you knew about it:
http://www.debunking911.com/index.html
I find it immensely frustrating, as I know you do, to put across any intelligent point in 500 words or less, and as the debate gets more technical -- as the jet fuel temperatures can be -- it could turn into a full-time job.
One thing I have not yet seen worked into the equation is the blowtorch effect that I know has to exist from two sources -- the high prevailing winds blowing high up on a skyscraper, and the blast from the huge air-handling system that was probably still moving air through the ductwork, or at least through the plenums (in the central utility column, I assume) as long as the emergency power to the air system was still operating. How much this would raise the temp above the "open-air burn temperature" of 600F, I can't guess. I know it doesn't take a lot of air to raise a hand-forge temperature to a point where steel is red-hot, and maybe white-hot. You may recall also the "Sherman Neckties" -- rails that the @$#%* Union troops heated over wood fires until they were red-hot in the middle, and then twisted around a tree (one man at each end). This was a period where steel was replacing rolled wrought iron rails, so what type predominated in the South in 1864, and how much difference it would make .... I just don't know.
Another factor that complicates this all to pieces is the tons of wood, fabric and plastic that also fed the fire in the WTC, from the furnishings in both the buildings AND the planes, not to mention any natural gas lines that may have existed there.
As I diddle around with these conspiracy weenies and their various web "sources," I'm amazed at the bizarre blend of extreme left and extreme right of the political spectrum. As a peculiar blend of social liberal-atheist-libertarian, I still wind up with extreme ultra-rightwing views on many international issues, so I kind of recognize most of these clowns and have sometimes been in bed with most of them on at least one issue at some point. My gut feeling is that the overwhelming percentage of the more active ones is made up of disenchanted liberal Democrats who are using this issue to hang their maniacal "I Hate Bush" agenda on, and they'd believe absolutely anything (or pretend to) as long as it could be blamed on GWB. He's far from my favorite President, and not nearly conservative enough on many things, but I don't think the guy has a crooked bone in his body, and pretty much genuinely believes he's doing the best he can. And in most cases, he probably is. Personally, I despised Clinton & Co., but my level of dislike and disrespect never reached the point that we see against GWB today. All logic & fairness -- even basic decency -- seems to have disappeared from the leftish side.
I'm glad you're involved in the anti-PETA type legislative fights. Two of the rescue groups we work with keep us up to speed on which legislators to bang on at appropriate times, usually, but the whole idea of legislating dogs offends me anyhow. While I understand the reasoning behind the animal-cruelty laws, originally, they have (as the government always does) expanded animal legislation until the owner is becoming just a caretaker for the government and has little say in the dog's life or its use. With all its warts, I sometimes wonder if, all in all, the dogs weren't better off when they were strictly personal property, period. A few hundred years ago you could do pretty much what you wanted to a dog, but if any well-bred gentleman saw someone mistreating an animal -- dog, horse, cow, whatever --- the offender stood a good chance of getting horse-whipped in public.
I will keep you in mind for any "good news" coming out of Iraq. All the people I served with are even older retired farts. Most of the Colonels I served with in the Pentagon are long retired and making money on the History Channel or Fox News, or in politics. They all made three or four stars after I retired, and most of them served another ten years or so. I was so far removed from the muddy-boots soldiers my last ten years that I don't really even know any soldiers anymore except the ones I see in the VA hospital, where I spend far too much time. My gut feeling from talking to the young guys returning from Iraq is that they believe they should be there, want to win, but are getting really suspicious that they're going to be double-crossed, just like in Vietnam, and the politicians and the media will destroy any hope of victory, or of any hope for the Iraqis that would like to see a secular democracy in place. I hope I'm wrong, but I suspect they're right.
Unfortunately, I lived in the Middle East for years, among the people and not in some American barracks, and I know how dangerous and how crazy Islam really is. Like the Japanese imperialism and the Nazis, in retrospect it was abundantly clear how dangerous they were, but everyone ignored them until it was too late. And now we're doing it again. Very depressing.
G.L.W.
U.S. Army (Retired)
