The University of Wisconsin, Madison, has completed it's review of the , er, unusual theories of Kevin Barrett, an instructor who teaches that the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11 was done by controlled demolition. Because, you see, no jet fuel fire could melt steel. Mr. Barrett will be allowed to teach his courses.
"There is no question that Mr. Barrett holds personal opinions that many people find unconventional," Farrell says. "These views are expected to take a small, but significant, role in the class. To the extent that his views are discussed, Mr. Barrett has assured me that students will be free – and encouraged – to challenge his viewpoint."…
"I am satisfied that Mr. Barrett appreciates his responsibility as an instructor. I also believe that he will attempt to provide students with a classroom experience that respects and welcomes open dialogue on all topics," Farrell says. "And I fully expect that the vast majority of his teaching will involve aspects of Islamic culture and religion wholly unrelated to his controversial views of the events of 9/11, which we know had a profound impact on the world and many members of our campus community."
Now, all these years that the NFPA has required the fireproofing of structural steel can be seen to be a long-simmering Bushitlerian plot. Going back almost to the dawn of the NFPA, in fact! All the fines the government collected from various power plants for having insufficient fireproofing on their structural steel can now be refunded!
I, of course, will immediately apply to the UW-M to teach a course about the flat earth, since this spherical nonsense has gone on much to long.
(Please, do not try to tell an engineer jet fuel fires cannot "melt" steel. It is not, and never has been necessary to melt steel to cause a structural failure. One only needs to soften it and remove it's ability to bear load.)
Pingback: chez Diva » Blog Archive » Moonbat U
Love the site. You do a great job!
Buuuut, you sure missed this one. Having been in the metal industry for years, we all not that heat treating makes metal stronger, so we know this was a controled demolition becuase the jet fuel fire would only have tempered the steel and kept the Towers from falling.
I really hate to bring that up because some cheese head professor will pick it up an run with it. Or as my brother and I used to say before trying something very stupid – Damn the physics, full speed ahead. Boy, I sure do miss him.
And you obviously know nothing about how tempering works. The heat would not temper the steel, it would cause it to lose it’s temper – that is it would soften.
“Having been in the metal industry for years”
Making tin foil hats doesn’t count. When I take my acetylene torch to a piece of metal (get it red hot) it is very easy to bend. That’s what heat does to metal.
Pingback: Don Singleton
The steely resolve to alter/ignore facts to fit positions does indeed ‘lose its temper’ rather than be strengthened.
I have no dog in any fight over the fall of the towers, but I can see the dynamics of steel-trap closed minds as they deal with various issues meriting discussion because folks hold differing viewpoints. Steel-trap minds are very quick to attack and denigrate whatever doesn’t fit preconception, because they tempermentally believe that only they have the ‘truth’. There is no space left in which to communicate.
Guys,
My bad, I thought the sarcasm was obvious. That is why I made the comment about a cheese head professor picking it up and running with it. I work with smelters everyday. Believe me, I know what heat does to metal. My comments were meant to point out how you can take a partial fact (heat treating does strengthen steel) and misapply it.
My original thought was to take an old Junker out into the desert with a half filled gas tank and a 100 lb weight on the hood and then set it on fireto disprove Barret’s theory. Reasons for not doing, 1) fire restrictions; 2) too hot; 3) my son still need the car; 4) gas is just to expense; and finally, throwing logic at certain people will never work.
Take care and have a great day.
Sorry, Lens, I missed the tag!
Donna, I’m kind of unsure how you meant your comment.
Me too. Sorry, Lens.
No problem, I should check my writting to make sure it is more clear. My wife says that about a lot of my communication. So I just stopped talking to her but that did not seem to help either.
Gaius and AlenS, you are very gracious. Most people would have just moved on. Hope things go well for you today. Now, let me see what other Carrer Limiting Moves I can make today.
Cheers
NP, Lens. I’ve had many, many things I wish I had written more clearly. Happens all the time.
Oh, Gaius, sorry for the comment. I just lament the name-calling that takes place instead of discussion of issues. I see that so much nowadays wherever my surfing takes me.
< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> < !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Kevin Barrett is only scratching half of the truth. The rest is here: DELETED
Editor:
Nonsense. This is much better: http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/. Plant links to your revisionist lunacy elsewhere.