Image 01 Image 03

Metalworker to 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists: “Your argument is invalid.”

Metalworker to 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists: “Your argument is invalid.”

“If you hold this up as a reason for conspiracy, you are an idiot.”

For all the good the joy, one-click shopping, and cat videos the Internet provides, its underbelly is racked with loons of all shapes and sizes. Among them are the 9/11 truthers.

Fed up by the “jet fuel can’t melt steel” mantra, metalworker Trenton Tye of Purgatory Ironworks finally had enough. So he took to YouTube.

For the undying 9/11 MORONIC JET FUEL ARGUMENT” is a beautiful thing to behold.

“Jet fuel only burns at 1500 degrees and since steel melts at 2700 degrees, 9/11 was a conspiracy. I am so sick and tired of this argument.” Now, I am not going to make any claims as to what did or did not happen. If it was a conspiracy, I do not care. What I am upset about is the retarded metallurgical things that you guys are saying… if you hold this up as a reason for conspiracy, you are an idiot,” said Tye.

Tye then proceeded to demonstrate his point.

“Your argument is invalid. Get over it. Find a job,” said Tye in conclusion.

And there you have it.

[h/t Logan Dobson]

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I want this man in congress, lmao.

Now we get to see how many of the embedded trump supporters here go full tin foil hat.

    ConradCA in reply to cepenta. | December 17, 2015 at 12:02 am

    It’s not Trump supporters who think 9/11 is an inside jobs. Mainly it’s leftists like Michael Moore and Muslims who blame Jews.

      Milhouse in reply to ConradCA. | December 17, 2015 at 11:01 pm

      There are plenty of right-wingers in that camp too. They were visible among the Ronulans, and of course the whole viper-pit that is Infowars/Alex Jones is very into this ridiculous theory.

nice … the conspiracy nuts also say they found pieces of molten steel at the base, fully melted. They show pics … but I doubt it was analyzed for what metal it was before it melted. There are obviously other lighter metals in the building.

I haven’t seen anything yet that experts can’t clearly refute.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Midwest Rhino. | December 16, 2015 at 6:47 pm

    Well speaking from my time as an Army Engineer part of the problem with the melted steel argument is that when the buildings fell that doesn’t mean the fire went out and once the building collapsed you would have gotten an “oven” effect which could have significantly increased the temperature. No one knows how hot it got at the center of that rubble pile.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Gremlin1974. | December 16, 2015 at 7:02 pm

      and there was probably some oven effect, I guess, in the many minutes before the buildings collapsed. Everything was baking up.

      I’d read asbestos was used on lower floors beams, but then PC came along and they went with another product. But much of that was stripped anyway, and it only delays the heat effect, it can’t stop it, as I understand it.

      I think it was Popular Mechanics that did a pretty good analysis, for one.

        I also seem to recall having an airliner come crashing through removed most of the fire protection. It wasn’t really a design case they were using at the time the building was built.

        Better fire protection material wouldn’t really have helped anyways; the building was designed to implode after a fire had gone on long enough, to prevent it spreading to neighboring structures. The combination of a far hotter fire than it was design for, and the impact effect set it off much sooner than was the design.

      IrateNate in reply to Gremlin1974. | December 17, 2015 at 11:13 pm

      what – you would let rational thought spoil a perfectly good conspiracy theory?

    Ragspierre in reply to Midwest Rhino. | December 16, 2015 at 7:24 pm

    IIRC, powered aluminum is THE major component of Thermite, which is used to cut steel rails in some applications.

    If you had temperatures high enough to kindle aluminum, you had the aluminum contributing one heck of a lot of heat.

    When we built “pipe racks” in refineries, they were covered with a concrete slurry to RETARD their failing structurally in a fire. Which is all you could hope for.

    If you ever see a metal hay barn that’s burned (a rather common occurrence), you’ll note that there’s very little of anything left standing.

A Rosie O’Donnell smack down by the village blacksmith! Oh, yeah!

Rosie will melt when you through a bucket of water on her.

    Heck yeah! But that’s the Wicked Witch of the West syndrome, which, unfortunately proves nothing in relation to steel, only her mortal being, such as it is!

    Still, the Iron Workers point is solid. so to speak!

DouglasJBender | December 16, 2015 at 6:49 pm

So is he saying that there were terrorists stationed at various places in the buildings to strategically bend the supporting beams? Or is he saying that the buildings had forges located at their four corners near where the planes hit?

Perhaps I just don’t understand science. Or YouTube. 🙂

THAT was a thing of beauty….

But it won’t convince the conspiracy theorists. Nothing will convince them so it’s best to just pat them on the head and move along.

    malclave in reply to Sanddog. | December 16, 2015 at 7:16 pm

    Sometimes I like to tell them that the cities attacked were where Bill and Hillary Clinton worked, so while there was indeed a conspiracy, it wasn’t Bush… it was the Clintons getting revenge for Gore’s defeat.


weight isn’t the only reason titanium/etc used in turbines. exhaust heat alone would bend steel if it was part of the tower turbine module.
800-900 deg c (fairly common range) would bend the hell out of thin steel to point of slagging
add in blast furnace effect and crap gets hot when a plane hits

LOL get over it find a job.
awesome end

Humphrey's Executor | December 16, 2015 at 8:29 pm

I forget where I read it recently: “One experiment is worth 1,000 calculations.”

VetHusbandFather | December 16, 2015 at 8:52 pm

My favorite posts are when someone defends the melting point farce with the added annectdote that they are an architect or civil engineer. I always hope they are lying…

    Just assume they’re lying. Just as whenever someone says they’re a vet and were harmed by Agent Orange, or have the strange symptoms of “Gulf War Syndrome” (remember that?), the odds are very good that they were never in the service at all. Ditto for those who claim to have seen atrocities (“Winter Soldier”, or Beacham Whatsisname); most of them were never in the countries where they claim to have seen these things.

This is mostly a straw-man argument. Several hundred high rise fires have never brought a building down. The idea that cold fires (black smoke) would bring 3 buildings down in one day is silly. If the buildings came down, they would not fall into their footprint. All three buildings fell into their footprint. I know; it is crazy talk. Besides those issues, I can find another 20 facts that don’t support the plane theory. I wonder if people are this dense, or if they just want to have their heads in the sand to feel safer.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to InEssence. | December 16, 2015 at 10:48 pm

    When making your tinfoil hat do you go with the turban style or the sea captain style?

      Multiple layers of tinfoil wouldn’t help idiots like these. The only way tinfoil would help these morons would be if they were force fed about 10 pounds of it. At least death would remove them from the gene pool.

      malclave in reply to Gremlin1974. | December 17, 2015 at 3:50 pm

      I got a book on Kindle a few years ago that details proper construction.

      One detail it points out that many people miss is that you actually need to wear TWO hats… shiny side out deflects the mind control rays from getting in, and shiny side in prevents them from reading your mind.

      They might just be wearing their hat the wrong way.

    ConradCA in reply to InEssence. | December 17, 2015 at 12:09 am

    The steel beams were under stress, supporting hundreds of tons. The fire weakened them and made them unable to withstand the stress they were under.

    Another way to look at is to imagine all the energy required to move 500 tons at 500+ mph for thousands of miles. That energy hit the towers at hundreds of mph and it’s no wonder the buildings collapsed.

    The building collapsed straight down for the most part because the weight of the building as the lower floors was driven by gravity straight down to the ground. The fire effectively removed a number of floors 1/3 of the way down from the top and the floors above dropped straight down overwhelming the structures below.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to ConradCA. | December 17, 2015 at 12:32 am

      Yea, there is also the inconvenient little fact that the buildings were designed to collapse in just that way because they were built during a time when people wanted “earthquake” proof buildings.

        Spiny Norman in reply to Gremlin1974. | December 17, 2015 at 12:45 am

        Besides, they were designed with their vertical supporting columns on the outside of the buildings (lots more interior space that way), so of course they would collapse straight down.

      Char Char Binks in reply to ConradCA. | December 17, 2015 at 10:23 am

      Let’s not forget the impact of those several-hundred-ton airplanes. But try telling Rosie O’Essence that.

    Hi-rises, and the WTC buildings, are designed to withstand the high-end of sustained winds in the area. Think about the force of winds against the side of a building: the wind force is multiple orders of magnitude higher than anything a jet crash could produce. (You’re not a structural engineer, are you?)

    For a building to NOT fall into its footprint, you would have to move the center of gravity of the building to outside of its footprint. Think about the force necessary to essentially move the WTC buildings at least a half a block off of their foundations. (You’re not real well versed in physics, are you?)

    Hi-rise fires aren’t generally accomplished with jet fuel. They’re done with more conventional fuel sources such as wood and plastics. (You’re not much of a materials specialist, are you?)

      Spiny Norman in reply to ss396. | December 17, 2015 at 12:42 am

      Now you’re being cruel.

      (Please, keep going.)

      CalFed in reply to ss396. | December 17, 2015 at 11:17 am

      They also rarely involve having the fireproofing material blown off the structural members by the force of a speeding jetliner.

      NC Mountain Girl in reply to ss396. | December 17, 2015 at 2:42 pm

      Your point about the force of wind seems flawed. Consider the difference between being hit by the flat side of a large knife and the point. The same amount of force may have been used by the assailant, but the first blow may only badly bruise the larger area of impact while the second blow could easily kill.

        Midwest Rhino in reply to NC Mountain Girl. | December 17, 2015 at 7:28 pm

        The force at the point of collision was greater, which is why it penetrated the building of course. The energy was then absorbed as the plane came to a stop, but that obviously didn’t knock the building over.

        The force of a high wind over the whole building, with more leverage at top, I’ll leave for those structural engineers, along with the calculation of the plane impact spread across width of the building in less than a second, some out the other side. But the only force acting when it fell was gravity, and there was no “reason” or ability for any beams to transfer that force laterally.

    “I can find another 20 facts that don’t support the plane theory.”

    No you can’t you fucking moron. You cannot even find one. It must hurt to be that stupid.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to Barry. | December 17, 2015 at 7:36 pm

      That’s a little harsh. Putin states he respects Trump. That’s a fact that doesn’t support the plane theory. 😉

    turfmann in reply to InEssence. | December 17, 2015 at 5:04 am

    Yeah, except for the fact that half the Western world saw the second plane hit the South tower on live television.

    And that ample videos exist of the first jet hitting the North tower.

    Other than that, can you recommend to me a good tin foil habadasher?

    Milhouse in reply to InEssence. | December 17, 2015 at 10:18 am

    I assume there was an editing error in that comment. I assume that all but the final sentence (“I wonder…”) was intended to be in quotes, and the final sentence was intended to be a separate paragraph, commenting on the “quote”.

    BrokeGopher in reply to InEssence. | December 17, 2015 at 1:45 pm

    And I can shoot holes in all 20 of your non-plane theories.

But … but … Rosie O’Donnell and Jessie Ventura said it so it must be true. This video is obviously a fake. I wonder who funded this video? Hmmm …

This guy obviously works for GWBush. Or the Illuminati. Rothschilds! Oh, that last part…….. “Get a job.” It was a signal that he was lying about the steel. It’s only a job to him. He’s a paid disinformation agent. Cheney!

I have yet to hear anyone that I ask give me a solid answer to, “if the buildings were brought down intentionally, where did they hide all the explosives and det cord that would be needed to do it?”

You know, the miles and miles of bright orange or yellow plastic tubing that would have to be wrapped all over the outside of the buildings…


we at AMR airlines know we lost two airframes that day.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to dmacleo. | December 18, 2015 at 11:18 am

    I am reminded of this:


    A person is holding up a pointer to a screen with an image of the World Trade Center towers mid-disaster.

    Person: Based on my analysis, I believe the government faked the plane crash and demolished the WTC north tower with explosives.

    Person saying further: The south tower, in a simultaneous but unrelated plot, was brought down by actual terrorists.

    Caption: The 9/11 truthers responded poorly to my compromise theory.

    General (unseen) title: I believe the truth always lies halfway between the most extreme claims.

I think that most of these people are delusional. I think that the building method to make it Earthquake proof. There was all of the different metals involved, any reaction could happen. Building codes are so strict in this country, the theories are a joke.

perhaps a spirited game of Jenga with a can of Ronsonol would help recreate the conditions on that fateful day…

Sammy Finkelman | December 18, 2015 at 11:12 am

Steel may melt only at 2700 degrees Fahrenheit (which someone would know only because they looked it up or someone else looked it up in a table) but it weakens at a far lower temperature, and there wasn’t all that much steel holding up the building. So floors collapsed without melting.

This point, and a possible fire, had been overlooked when someone, before the Twin Towers were built made a back-of-the-envelope-type calculation that a Boeing 707 could crash into the World Trade Center without bringing down the building.