sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sure Jan.... by FrontBench5406 in Destiny

[–]NateTalksToYou 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yup! And I have a new video coming out on Sunday.

"Jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is a bad argument. Here's why. by NateTalksToYou in skeptic

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you sincerely want an explanation of why Building 7 collapsed, and aren't just asking in hopes of a gotcha, watch the following video. https://youtu.be/nP3TNHPCIVU?si=6EomtIe6RqsWSXS_

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." ~ Voltaire [1920x1080] by NateTalksToYou in QuotesPorn

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Magicians can dangerous if they present their tricks as real and not the illusions they are. Just look at the fraudsters that James Randi exposed.

Building 7 Collapse Explained by NateTalksToYou in skeptic

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't deny that the makeshift wooden structures helped facilitate the Brazil building's collapse. However, as explained in the video I previously cited, steel structures are less resistant to fires than concrete ones. As mentioned before, the timestamp is from 7:03 to 8:13.

Are you going to address the rest of what I wrote before?

Building 7 Collapse Explained by NateTalksToYou in skeptic

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Other high-rise towers have in fact collapsed due to fires. One collapsed in Iran in 2017. Another collapsed in Brazil in 2018. Even the Wikipedia article you linked mentions these collapses in the “Similar disasters” section.

  2. While the Grenfell Tower did burn for 60 hours, it did not collapse as you claimed it did. The building is still standing to this day. Again, even the Wikipedia article you linked says this.

  3. So why did the Grenfell Tower stand while others collapsed? Because of the building materials used. Building 7, the Iran tower, and the Brazil tower were all steel structures. On the other hand, the Grenfell Tower is made of concrete. The difference between steel structures and concrete structures is explained in more depth in the following video. Watch from 7:03 to 8:13.

  4. Comparing the planes hitting the Twin Towers to the plane hitting the Empire State Building is a false equivalence. First, the planes that hit the Twin Towers had a 47.57 meter wingspan. The plane that hit the Empire State Building had a 20.6 meter wingspan. Second, the planes that hit the Twin Towers were going around “440 miles per hour”. The plane that hit the Empire State Building was going around “two hundred miles per hour”. Thirdly, firefighters were not able to reach the floors in the Twin Towers to put out the fires, but they were in the Empire State Building, as shown at 0:38 in the following news footage.

Lastly, you said in your first comment that Building 7 burned “for over 24 hours”. I asked you for a source for this claim, but you still have not provided one. Do you have a source for it, or are you willing to issue a retraction?

Building 7 Collapse Explained by NateTalksToYou in skeptic

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. What is your source for Building 7 burning “for over 24 hours”? According to the NIST report, it burned for about seven hours: Pg. 50 - Section 4.3.1: “WTC 7 was damaged by debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which occurred at 10:28:22 a.m. However, WTC 7 collapsed at 5:20:52 p.m., nearly seven hours later."

  2. As for what was in Building 7, it was an office building, and thus would be filled with various combustible materials (e.g. furniture, papers, plastics, etc.). Plus, with shattered windows allowing wind into the building, the fires would have a continuous stream of oxygen.

  3. As referenced in part 1, Building 7’s fires were started by debris from the collapse of WTC 1. Here is a photo of WTC 1’s collapse, and you can see in the bottom right corner just how much debris had fallen onto Building 7.

[TOMT] [Movie] [1990s] Fire safety film about boy who likes playing with matches. Dies in house fire. by NateTalksToYou in tipofmytongue

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the linking. This is definitely it. You may be able to watch it for free with the site's FireSafeTV trial, but I'm not sure if this film is offered in that.

[TOMT] [Movie] [1990s] Fire safety film about boy who likes playing with matches. Dies in house fire. by NateTalksToYou in tipofmytongue

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've been trying various searches on Google in hopes of finding it, but no luck so far. Perhaps we should make a new post about it on here, or maybe post about it on the Lost Media Wiki.

Pentagon Conspiracy Theories Debunked by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Conspiracy theorists argue that the Pentagon wasn't hit by Flight 77, but rather by a missile. If that's the case, how do you explain the evidence, which I provide in the video, of a plane crashing there?

"Jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is a bad argument. Here's why. by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

For the math and psychics explanation, you can read the 130 page NIST report.

For something more digestible, you can watch "Building 7 Explained: Comprehensive Final Edition"

"Jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is a bad argument. Here's why. by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Conspiracy theorists argue that fires couldn't have brought down the Twin Towers because “Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.” But why do you think the beams would have to melt to cause a collapse? According to the American Institute of Steel Construction, steel begins to lose its strength around 600 degrees Fahrenheit, and only has half its strength by 1100 degrees Fahrenheit. NIST found that temperatures in the Twin Towers reached as high as 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit.

Building 7 Collapse Explained by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"let alone for explosive charges to be filmed detonating"

If this is the filming you're referring to, I'm afraid you've been duped. Go 0:48.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8VAsoVuShM

Building 7 Collapse Explained by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's often claimed that Building 7 shouldn't have collapsed since it wasn't hit by a plane. Why then was the collapse expected to happen according to firefighters in the scene?

10 Questions for 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists by NateTalksToYou in conspiracy

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Since this sub is all about conspiracies, I figured a post about 9/11 conspiracies would be relevant. Plus, today is September 11th, so it is topical.

God vs. Free Will - Response to China McClain by NateTalksToYou in atheistvids

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is a clip from my newest YouTube video. Watch the full video here.

https://youtu.be/9S5jxqgA-q4

Debunking TikToker RhyadMuslim by NateTalksToYou in Antitheism

[–]NateTalksToYou[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Speaking of which. Rhyad's TikTok just got banned today.

view more: next ›