My editorials on the World Trade Towers and 9/11 over the past couple of editions of Fort Fairfield Journal (see links, below) have generated a quite a bit of conversation—certainly a lot more than when I wrote on those subjects in the past. I never intended to spend this much space on the subject; I thought since I was stating facts, there should be no discussion, but there were a few points in last edition that weren’t quite clear that I now have clarification on, so I’ll share with you what I’ve learned.

Larry works on aircraft engines for a living and knows much more about them than I do. In my last editorial I wasn’t sure what the temperature of kerosene burning in a jet engine combustion chamber was and suggested it might get hot enough to melt steel. Larry informed me that it gets very close. He said the temperature of jet grade kerosene inside the jet engine combustion chambers he works on burns at 2,057° F. Since (carbon) steel begins to melt at 2,066° F and is completely molten at 2,400, it is plausible that the structural integrity of carbon steel (that is steel with 2.1% carbon by weight) is compromised when inside a jet engine combustion chamber and is perilously close to melting.

Third, the pressure inside the combustion chamber of the jet engine needs to be 150 psi (pounds per square inch). This pressure causes the fuel to burn more efficiently and through things called venturies and nozzles, thrust is produced.

I asked Larry if a jet engine burning under those conditions—full throttle, optimally atomized fuel, 150 psi—produces any smoke. He said if the engine is working correctly, under those conditions there will be no smoke at all.

That was when we discussed the World Trade Towers. I asked him if the conditions inside the Trade Towers on 9/11 could have produced properly atomized fuel. He said, no, the fuel would have simply been dumped all over the floors and walls (what fuel was left, most exploded in a fireball outside the buildings when the respective planes impacted.)

Since the buildings were not built to be airtight and the gaping airplane holes in the sides of them were just created, it was merely rhetorical to ask if the pressure inside those buildings, where the fires were burning, was able to approach 150 psi. Obviously, that was impossible.

I don’t know what I can do to convince people that from the human perspective, water is wet, the sun is hot, ice is cold and the World Trade Tower fires did not burn hot enough to melt steel—or even structurally weaken it. The North tower already withstood a much hotter and longer burning fire in 1976 and it did not collapse.

Another friend of mine, Richard, said he enjoys reading the Fort Fairfield Journal even if he doesn’t agree with everything I write. He said it’s good that I am able to express my opinions and more people should do the same.

None of the above is my opinion, but the government and mainstream media has taught you all that anybody who questions their “official” story is somehow a conspiracy theorist and is merely giving opinions. Facts are not opinions; facts are facts.

Without getting into the symmetrical nature of the fall of both of those buildings, or Galileo’s Law of Falling objects (yet), and simply looking at the temperature of the burning fires to determine if the buildings could have fallen as the government and its mainstream media mouthpieces have successfully sold to the vast majority of Americans, one who has an open mind will surely conclude that the government and its associates in the mainstream media are absolutely lying to us.

The government lying? The mainstream media lying? Wow, what a bold concept. But, I guess it’s easier to attack someone like me who is simply asking you to look at all the facts, shut that stupid television off and do a little thinking for yourself.