"Environmentalism" And WTC

[Berzerker]

Ted -

Pretty good try berzerker, but you've just demonstrated nothing more than your own lack of depth.

I can't wait to see you prove this one. Oh yeah, the only thing you prove is what a moron you are.

What YOU didn't realize was that there are MORE THAN TWO TYPES of marital status.

And this means out-of-wedlock births can increase for married people?

You are thinking married and unmarried.

I was? Okay.

There are:

married
divorced
widowed
separated
single

4 out of 5 of those types can have a child out of wedlock.

And all 5 are either married or unmarried, DOH!

Any questions?

Yes, when will you learn to cut your losses and slink away with your tail between your legs?

[Ted Striker]

You should have more confidence in your theories berzerker, maybe then you wouldn't have to resort to trying to prove to yourself how great you are.

[Berzerker]

Ted -

You should have more confidence in your theories berzerker, maybe then you wouldn't have to resort to trying to prove to yourself how great you are.

What worries me is you apparently have confidence in yours.

[Ted Striker]

Hey Chief,

Can we get that one more time? Little excited there?

But I can understand now that you feel like that's the only thing left you have to stand on.

At least you got it in the right thread this time.

Though it took you 3 tries.

[Berzerker]

Ted -

Hey Chief,

Can we get that one more time? Little excited there?

But this is too much fun.

But I can understand now that you feel like that's the only thing left you have to stand on.

Actually I'm rolling on the floor laughing my a$$ off at your posts.

At least you got it in the right thread this time.

That was quite an achievement with all the threads to make fun of you.

[Ted Striker]

Maybe you've spent too much time in the aesbestos.

After spending entirely too much time reading your line by line psychotic replies, and aside from the obvious health risks, I think you make a good case for outlawing aesbestos, due to its advese effects on mental capacity and well being.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Berzerker
That doesn't prove the article fallacious. The asbestos coating was invented to prevent the steel from weakening from fire. The buildings did not collapse from the impacts and the fireballs, but after long exposure to fire. Levine predicted they would collapse if a fire broke out and they did collapse. Had a fire broke out at the 65th floor, there was PLENTY of material to fuel a fire big enough to weaken the steel above if not properly insulated.

There are different kinds of fires, Berz. Clearly Mr Levine invented the procedure to protect against fires normally found in building fires, not jet fuel fire. Jet fuel burns at a much higher temperature than normal building fires and there's no evidence that the aformentioned procedure can protect against a sustained jet fuel fire.

IIRC, the steel structures were protected by some kind of coating, but the crash and the explosion blasted that off. Would the abestos coating be able to withstand that?

His prediction was right, but the reasons were wrong.

Originally posted by Berzerker
And you know the towers would have collapsed even if the steel superstructure was properly insulated? Given the fact they left the asbestos coating the first 64 floors, don't you think it wise to finish the job with an insulator known to work instead of finishing the job haphazardly or re-doing the whole thing? "Clumsy sophistry"? I"ll bet the correct insulation would have allowed those firefighters to get up there in enough time to combat the fire...

See above. Is the any evidence that they didn't coat the steel supprt frames?

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


I wasn't commenting on Berz's article, Case. So, you can spare me the histrionics. I was commenting on this, The stuff is POISON.

It is poison, DinoDoc. If you'd like, I can try to dig through my respiratory course notes to find the statistics for you. Suffice it to say, if you ever put down asbestos, you are at a hugely increased risk for multiple types of lung cancer. And being around any exposed asbestos (which happens quite often, as it was often used near air ducts) also increases your risk.

[chequita guevara]

dinodoc, Asbesto is poison, if you get it in your system. If it's lying around doing nothing, like most other poisons, it won't bve very dangerous. However, when it is being applied or removed, it becomes airborne, breathable, and deadly. The WTC wasn't meant to last forever.

Berserker the reason they didn't go back and fix the previous 64 floors is because that asbestos had already been laid. It was up to code. They couldn't put any more asbestos in. And taking it out is more dangerous than leaving it in place.

Furthermore, the architetects of the buildings had survied the towers a few weeks before the crashes and said the towers could withstand a fire. As noted by Urban Ranger, this does not mean a fire fueled by several thousnad gallons of jet fuel. The temperature caused by such a flame (around 4,000° F IIRC) was enough to melt the steel, even had there been asbestos.

Anyways, it wasn't about environmentalism but safe workplaces and neighborhoods.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Obviously the builders/owners should have found an alternative method of heat insulation the structural steel in the upper floors, shorthening the tower if necessary to compensate for weight of material or paying for the whatever more expensive insulation was available. Even in the 60s there were light weight insulating materials more effective than asbestos, but very expensive, were available, but perhaps not in the volume requred, they were all being used in the space program IIRC.

And yes it is most often best to leave undeteriorated ACBM in place, often applying extra coatings of sealer until the building is demolished, than to remove it. The Feds, through the EPA & health agencies admitted as long as 17 years ago the asbestos removal programs, primarily in public schools up to that point, created MANY times the exposure, as much as a few orders of magnitude, than doing nothing, much less using abatement in place procedures, which are now the most common. Most asbestos removal now comes only during the pre demolition process. The haste and go ahead with removal before adequate study in the 70s and early 80s, and before adequate devolopment and refinement of techniques may well have created MORE exposure to friable asbestos, than any other cause.

[chequita guevara]

There was a factory in my old neighborhood back in Chicago. The developers wanted to renovate it and convert it into yuppie housing. However, they decided it would cost too much to take the asbestos out safely. So they demolished the building and let the stuff float free in the air.

The clouds went for miles and lasted for days cuz they didn't tear it all down in one day.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Must have been a while ago, during the stupid days of early ACBM removal. Now a days it is encapsulated and removed before structural demolition. I do not have much experience with the srapyed on or smilar applied ACBM. Only two buildings that I have had taken down conatained even a small amount of that stuff. By far the most common ACBM I deal with, either pre demolition removal or between tenants, are floor tiles and mastic. Lead paint actually gives me much more problems and expense than asbestos.

[chequita guevara]

1994-95.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
1994-95.

Tahts G-damn ridiculous if they did what you said they did, what kind of crooked permitting authority did you have where you lived?

[chequita guevara]

Mayor Daley