<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who are you going to trust?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/</link>
	<description>The unbearable lightness of Lex. Enjoy!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:48:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: lex</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-240316</link>
		<dc:creator>lex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:16:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-240316</guid>
		<description>Golly, Casey. At the risk of encamping myself within the wingnutosphere, the point of the whole exercise is that Rosie - and other troofers - triumphantly saying that &quot;fire doesn&#039;t melt steel&quot; is a false syllogism. Dudn&#039;t have to melt steel, it only has to (as you point out) sufficiently alter the building&#039;s structural integrity in order to create the conditions for a collapse. 

You&#039;ve got to follow the rest of us on the deductive jump to the finish, pard:  There was no conspiracy, 9/11 was caused by a bunch of pissed off Muslims. Just like the South Park kids said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Golly, Casey. At the risk of encamping myself within the wingnutosphere, the point of the whole exercise is that Rosie &#8211; and other troofers &#8211; triumphantly saying that &#8220;fire doesn&#8217;t melt steel&#8221; is a false syllogism. Dudn&#8217;t have to melt steel, it only has to (as you point out) sufficiently alter the building&#8217;s structural integrity in order to create the conditions for a collapse. </p>
<p>You&#8217;ve got to follow the rest of us on the deductive jump to the finish, pard:  There was no conspiracy, 9/11 was caused by a bunch of pissed off Muslims. Just like the South Park kids said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Casey</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-240197</link>
		<dc:creator>Casey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-240197</guid>
		<description>Oh, Lordy, I see that I must be the contrarian here. 

First let me point out that Rosie O&#039;Donnell is an idiot. No argument there. 

But... The whole &quot;fire doesn&#039;t melt steel.&quot; argument drowns in the sloppy imprecision of the participants. The wingnuts are just so hard-nippled excited to beat down the moonbats that they can&#039;t restrain their own ignorance.

First, did the NIST report actually state that any structural steel members &lt;i&gt;&lt;b&gt;melted&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt;? 

Second, we need to consider context. Define steel. Then define fire. For example, during the discussions of the Twin Towers destruction some people pointed out that steel melts at c. 2750 F, while jet fuel burns between 800-1500 F. Do the math, guys. Given a jet-fuel-only fire, the conflagration won&#039;t melt steel. That&#039;s simple physics.

The sad truth is that steel facing thermal expansion was the culprit, not steel melting. 

BTW, Byron: how hot was your torch burning? Was it run off of kerosene and/or burning office furniture?

Yes, Rosie is an idiot. But let&#039;s keep the real world in mind while we&#039;re beating up on her advocates.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, Lordy, I see that I must be the contrarian here. </p>
<p>First let me point out that Rosie O&#8217;Donnell is an idiot. No argument there. </p>
<p>But&#8230; The whole &#8220;fire doesn&#8217;t melt steel.&#8221; argument drowns in the sloppy imprecision of the participants. The wingnuts are just so hard-nippled excited to beat down the moonbats that they can&#8217;t restrain their own ignorance.</p>
<p>First, did the NIST report actually state that any structural steel members <i><b>melted</b></i>? </p>
<p>Second, we need to consider context. Define steel. Then define fire. For example, during the discussions of the Twin Towers destruction some people pointed out that steel melts at c. 2750 F, while jet fuel burns between 800-1500 F. Do the math, guys. Given a jet-fuel-only fire, the conflagration won&#8217;t melt steel. That&#8217;s simple physics.</p>
<p>The sad truth is that steel facing thermal expansion was the culprit, not steel melting. </p>
<p>BTW, Byron: how hot was your torch burning? Was it run off of kerosene and/or burning office furniture?</p>
<p>Yes, Rosie is an idiot. But let&#8217;s keep the real world in mind while we&#8217;re beating up on her advocates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-239844</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:46:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-239844</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s a technical link on the effects of fire on wood versus structural steel.  Pretty telling stuff.

http://www.softwood.org/AITC_eVersion/EN/p3.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a technical link on the effects of fire on wood versus structural steel.  Pretty telling stuff.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.softwood.org/AITC_eVersion/EN/p3.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.softwood.org/AITC_eVersion/EN/p3.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: craig mclaughlin</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-239143</link>
		<dc:creator>craig mclaughlin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-239143</guid>
		<description>AFSister,

Glad you enjoyed it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AFSister,</p>
<p>Glad you enjoyed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lex</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-239140</link>
		<dc:creator>lex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:25:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-239140</guid>
		<description>You can download that episode from iTunes, if you&#039;re equipped.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can download that episode from iTunes, if you&#8217;re equipped.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AFSister</title>
		<link>http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/08/22/who-are-you-going-to-trust/comment-page-1/#comment-239137</link>
		<dc:creator>AFSister</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 22:18:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=4902#comment-239137</guid>
		<description>Craig,
That&#039;s the best literary reference I&#039;ve seen in a VERY long time.
A most excellent analogy!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig,<br />
That&#8217;s the best literary reference I&#8217;ve seen in a VERY long time.<br />
A most excellent analogy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

