HackerTube.dev

For the undying 9/11 MORONIC JET FUEL ARGUMENT

purgatoryironworks · 14.5M views · 2015-12-15 · 2:08

Open on YouTube ↗

If playback is restricted in your region, try opening the original video. Use Mark watched to add it to your marked videos.

Overview

A short video from a blacksmith, who heats and bends steel to rebut the claim that jet fuel could not weaken the steel in the World Trade Center. It is delivered with a lot of attitude.

On Hacker News

HN commenters use it as a quick, hands-on demonstration that steel loses strength well below its melting point.

Recommended by 2 HN people across 2 months · HN mentions 2017–2023

Topics

Search by tags

What people said

khazhoux · 2023-12 · Recommendation

This video disproves that conspiracy theory, and with just the right amount of "WTF-you-truthers-are-idiots" attitude: [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
ceejayoz · 2022-02 · Recommendation

Been in a coma for two decades? [LINK] > The four sides of each building formed a tube with window slots This tube was designed to carry the weight of the building and its contents directly downward to the foundations. The walls acted as vertical beams, wide and tall as the buildings, that bent to the side to absorb wind loads. [LINK] > Prior to the construction of the Twin Towers, skyscrapers were designed to support themselves through large internal columns spaced about 30 feet (9 meters) apart, which interrupted the flow of interior space. For this project however, the engineers came up with a different solution -- the exterior walls themselves would support the bulk of the structure, and they would get a boost from one single column of beams in the center. Make a big hole in the primary support structure and things go badly. (And before parroting the "jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams" thing as a follow-up, watch this excellent and short video from a blacksmith: [VIDEO] )

Read the original HN comment ↗
SideburnsOfDoom · 2020-09 · Reference

> Wood will not self-combust until reaching around 300°c Staying below the "fail fast" temperature does not make it safe: [VIDEO] The question is, how will it handle years of the daily heating and cooling cycles that the cooling system will undergo? I don't know and likely no-one does ... because it hasn't been rated or approved for that task. it isn't even a standardised part, how can it be?

Read the original HN comment ↗

Sources

Video by purgatoryironworks, played through YouTube.

Data and selection notes

HN summaries and labels may contain AI errors. HN dates refer to discussions, not video publication.

HN Library: HackerTube export (2026-10-31) and open-index/hacker-news. Upstream summaries and classifications may contain AI errors.

Views, duration and playback status refresh separately from the published catalog. When an update fails, existing data remains visible.

Selection checks
  • SaaS & AI candidates: Topic keywords do not match
  • Editor-approved picks: Editorial review is required

Rule matches identify candidates. They do not guarantee video quality or financial results.

About the library and its sources