| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
 Posted: 13-02-2010 16:26 Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| hokum6 wrote: | ...
| Quote: |
Also:
The apparent pools of molten metal were actually caused by spontaneous combustion.
I can't say that I find those totally convincing counter arguments. |
Okay, well suggest another argument then. Perhaps their reasoning for the pools of metal is wrong, but it wasn't bombs for the many reasons already discussed. Once again we're back to conspiracy theories that rely on imaginary technology and completely unrealistic plots. |
Oh no. I don't have to put forward another argument. I simply need to point out that the spontaneous combustion argument seems simply preposterous.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hokum6 I am one can short of a six-pack!
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 Total posts: 842 Location: Location Location Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 13-02-2010 20:17 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Yeah, maybe it is, but there were no bombs or thermite so unless you'd like to suggest an alternative that's about the best explanation there is right now. I'm open to anything that doesn't involve fantasy technology. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| tonyblair11 Joined: 28 Jan 2002 Total posts: 2080 |
| Posted: 13-02-2010 22:24 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cavynaut Skoumed!
Usually tired. Joined: 10 Apr 2003 Total posts: 1976 Location: Crouch Wailing. UK. Age: 56 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 14-02-2010 02:06 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| tonyblair11 wrote: | | If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion. |
?
Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| tonyblair11 Joined: 28 Jan 2002 Total posts: 2080 |
| Posted: 14-02-2010 04:56 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Cavynaut wrote: | | tonyblair11 wrote: | | If you get enough heat near combustibles it will catch fire through spontaneous combustion. |
?
Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied? |
Building heat will ignite without an eternal flame. That's pretty much how spontaneous combustion works. You might be thinking of spontaneous human combustion where there is usually no sign of an eternal heat source.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Spookdaddy Cuckoo Joined: 24 May 2006 Total posts: 3924 Location: Midwich Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 14-02-2010 10:55 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Cavynaut wrote: | | tonyblair11 wrote: | | Surely it wouldn't be spontaneous if heat was applied? |
|
Although I'd agree that the explanation originally being referred to by PM doesn't seem very satisfactory I think the phrase 'spontaneous combustion' might have confused the issue. 'Spontaneous' fires occur all the time, only they are never really spontaneous in the true sense of that word. So-called spontaneous fires are usually the result of a combination of slow oxidation and trapped heat and I think this is the process the article is referring to, although the author does seem to do so rather clumsily.
At this point haystacks are often mentioned but 'spontaneous' fires are fairly common in buildings too (although the original heat sources involved may be different). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| colinbaker32 Great Old One Joined: 19 Mar 2009 Total posts: 223 Gender: Unknown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
