Plasticizing Metals

I began reading "The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right" by Atul Gawande and early on the book he meets with an engineer who is overseeing the construction of a multi-storied building. At one point in their meeting, the author describes the following exchange:

“... he showed me the bare metal trusses that had been put into the ceiling to support the floor being built above. Next, he said, will come the fireproofers. "You have to fireproof metal?" I asked. Oh yes, he said. In a fire, the metal can plasticize--lose its stiffness and bend like spaghetti. This was why the World Trade Center buildings collapsed, he said. He walked me down a stairway to the floor below us. Here, I could see, the fireproofing material had been sprayed on, a gypsum-based substance that made the ceiling trusses look gray and woolly.”

There's not a hint of skepticism on the part of the author, who published the book in 2009, as to whether or not metal "can plasticize - lose its stiffness and bend like spaghetti". The engineer clearly believed it was possible. This is what Google's Gemini had to say on the matter:

Is it possible for metals used as strusses in multistory buildings to plasticize under extreme heat, lose their stiffness and bend like spaghetti?

Metal Behavior Under Extreme Heat in Building Structures

Yes, it is possible for metals used in building structures to plasticize under extreme heat.

This phenomenon is a critical concern in fire engineering and structural design. When metals are subjected to temperatures exceeding their yield point, they undergo a process known as plastic deformation. This means they permanently deform without returning to their original shape once the load is removed.

Factors affecting metal behavior under fire:

• Type of metal: Different metals have varying melting and yield points. For example, steel, commonly used in construction, begins to lose strength significantly above 500°C.
• Cross-sectional area: Larger cross-sections generally provide better fire resistance.
• Protective coatings: Fire-resistant coatings can delay the onset of structural failure.
• Fire duration and intensity: The longer and more intense the fire, the greater the risk of structural failure.

To mitigate these risks, engineers incorporate various measures:

• Fireproofing: Applying fire-resistant coatings to structural members.
• Redundancy: Designing structures with multiple load paths to distribute forces.
• Early warning systems: Implementing systems to detect fires early and initiate evacuation.
• Emergency response plans: Having procedures in place to address fire emergencies.

When asked where this information came from, Gemini couldn't identify anything specific but instead responded:

Much of the information I shared is considered general knowledge within the field of engineering and construction. This means it's widely accepted information that can be found in numerous textbooks, academic papers, and industry standards.

So there you go. For all those who believed the twin towers were taken down in a controlled demolition, the facts are that the towers were "plasticized" or maybe "spaghetticized". The fact that an engineer used such terminology reminded me of Richard Gage, a San Francisco-based architect, and the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth who sought to establish some sanity regarding what happened regarding 9/11.

The vitriol directed against Gage is extreme. Here is an example from an article in KQED in September of 2021:

Last month, Spike Lee came under fire for including the voices of 9/11 conspiracy theorists in his four-part HBO series, NYC Epicenters 9/11-2021½. Lee hastily edited his documentary after objections poured in from journalists who had seen previews, and who had expressed dismay at the inclusion of interviewees expressing the view that the official narrative of Sept. 11, 2001 was false. Chief among these interview subjects was Richard Gage, a San Francisco-based architect, and the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Slate‘s Jeremy Stahl called Gage’s segment, “surreal and demoralizing.” Stahl noted that “Gage is responsible for peddling some of the most pernicious and long-running lies about the 9/11 attacks, which is why I was surprised that Lee, HBO, and WarnerMedia might be lending his group any amount of time.” Stahl continued, “In terms of conveying facts, this is a bit like presenting COVID-19 vaccine skeptics in a debate alongside Anthony Fauci.”

These comments are all the more hilarious given that time has proved that Anthony Fauci was a lying little rat. Gage is demonised for simply "expressing the view that the official narrative of Sept. 11, 2001 is false". The fact that he has compelling evidence to support his view is never mentioned. A Google search for "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth" brings up a Wikipedia (the source of all "truth") article and any link to the site itself does not appear until page 5. All very sad but at least I've been reminded of this website and can draw some satisfaction from its continued existence and, from time to time, recommend others to visit it.

That Aint' Workin'

THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS

Fauci Awarded $1 Million Israeli Prize For 'Speaking Truth To Power' Amid Pandemic

February 15, 202111:05 AM ET

That ain't workin', that's the way you do it

Money for nothin' and your chicks for free

Now that ain't workin', that's the way you do it

Lemme tell ya, them guys ain't dumb

That little Fauci got his own jet airplane

That little Fauci, he's a millionaire

Actually, this news is a little stale being dated February 15th 2021 but I just came across it today. The slightly adapted lyrics from Dire Straits 1985 song "Money for Nothing" seem peculiarly appropriate. The article whose headline appears above goes on to say:

America's top infectious disease official Dr. Anthony Fauci received a prestigious $1 million Israeli prize Monday, along with six other researchers who shared two additional $1 million prizes for their contributions to health and medicine.

The Dan David Prize, affiliated with Tel Aviv University, said it honoured Fauci for his career in public health and "speaking truth to power" during the politicised COVID-19 crisis.

Fauci "is the consummate model of leadership and impact in public health," the awards committee said in a statement.

The award sets aside 10% of the prize money for academic scholarships in each winner's field. Fauci gets to determine the nature of the scholarships.

Fauci has been director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the U.S. National Institutes of Health since 1984, advising seven presidents on domestic and global health issues.

His research into HIV helped develop treatments to enable carriers of the virus to live long lives. In 2003, he helped launch the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief under the George W. Bush administration, which the NIH credits with saving millions of lives in the developing world.

Fauci became a household name in the U.S. after appearing in televised presidential briefings on the coronavirus. He was a trusted authority for the public on preventive measures against COVID-19, even as former President Donald Trump downplayed the virus and blocked Fauci from appearing on several television programs. Trump called Fauci part of a group of "idiots" and suggested he might fire him after the presidential election, which Trump lost.

"As the COVID-19 pandemic unraveled, (Fauci) leveraged his considerable communication skills to address people gripped by fear and anxiety and worked relentlessly to inform individuals in the United States and elsewhere about the public health measures essential for containing the pandemic's spread," the awards committee said. "In addition, he has been widely praised for his courage in speaking truth to power in a highly charged political environment."

The Dan David Prize, established by the late Italian Israeli philanthropist Dan David, annually awards three prizes of $1 million honouring contributions to knowledge of the past, contributions to society in the present and advances for the future.

This year the three awards focused on health and medicine.

Fauci is to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases as J. Edgar Hoover was to the FBI. Hoover was the director of the FBI for 37 years until his death aged 77. As of 2021, Fauci has been director of his Institute for 37 years. Fauci was born on December 24th 1940 and is now 80 years old. The little creep began his tenure overseeing the fake HIV crisis in the 80s and 90s and he is currently overseeing the fake Covid crisis. 

Clearly, it's suited the powers that be to keep him in his sinecure so that he can be seen to radiate an image of grandfatherly concern for the muzzled masses as they wait in line for their "Fauci Ouchie".

It's certainly fitting that the award for the world's greatest fraud should be associated with the world's most dangerous country. In their different ways, they have done a great deal to make the world a more miserable place. "Speaking Truth to Power" is better phrased as "Spreading Lies to Disempower" as what little "power" the citizens of the world once had has now been taken away. 

Perhaps when an octogenarian scumbag like Fauci becomes a global icon, we should just admit there is no hope for humanity. The few who do persist in really "Speaking Truth to Power" are demonised, deplatformed, denigrated, denounced, detained, demoted, disregarded, dismissed, deprecated, devalued, despised, disbelieved, disbarred, disdained, disgraced, disowned, disqualified, disrespected, decried, defiled, demeaned, derided and detested. They do not receive one million dollars prizes.

Despicable though Fauci might be, I think those celebrities who endorse the mainstream narrative sink even lower. Read the story here in which a protester supposedly "punching" a police horse provoked howls of outrage.

Sydney anti-lockdown protesters 

slammed by Aussie celebrities

An Embarrassing Untruth

I was talking with an old friend the other night and we got to talking about how we were both completely taken in by Al Gore's 2006 "An Inconvenient Truth". Here is a little background about this film from a source that is very supportive of the film's premise:

Decade ago, climate change was a huge problem with a small audience. Unless you were among a handful of brave policymakers, concerned scientists, or loyal Grist readers, it’s fair to say the threat of a rapidly warming world took a back seat to High School Musical, MySpace, and whether or not Pluto was a planet (yes, those were all a thing in 2006).

Then, An Inconvenient Truth happened.

Somehow, a film starring a failed presidential candidate and his traveling slideshow triggered a seismic shift in public understanding of climate change. It won Oscars and helped earn Al Gore a share of the Nobel Peace Prize. It injected the issue into policy debates and dinner-table conversations alike.

Did any of this actually “save the world?” OK, you got us. Ten years after the movie’s release, climate change is still a growing threat and a polarizing issue, with record-breaking heat unable to stop skeptics from tossing snowballs on the Senate floor. But we’re also seeing corporate, political, and societal mobilization against the crisis on a scale that would have been hard to imagine 10 years ago, and there’s no question the film played a big part in getting us there.

So how did the movie-makers turn a science-heavy slideshow and unlikely leading man (sorry, Al) into a global force for change? What follows is a behind-the-scenes look at An Inconvenient Truth. As for whether there’s a happy ending, we’re afraid that’s still a bit TBD.

Knowing what we now know, it was a little embarrassing to reminisce about our naiveté. We forgot to ask question like who is Al Gore and what are his connections and affiliations? YouTube started up in early 2005 but it may have only been in 2007 that I first became aware of videos that were challenged the global warming narrative. Around this same time also, many videos appeared that challenged the official 9/11 story. Prior to this, I remember reading a Time Magazine article, in the library of the school where I worked, that explained the alleged structural failures that lead the collapse of the twin towers. I soaked it up and sadly enough accepted the official story. Nowadays of course, I wouldn't waste my time reading any article from Time Magazine but back then I still read the occasional article. 

It's easy to be scornful of people who believe what mainstream media tell them but it wasn't all that long ago that I was not very different. It's sad to reflect that it was not really until my early sixties that I began to wake up to what was really going on. Like many others, I can thank YouTube for my awakening. Now YouTube is actively censoring the sort of content that woke me up but other alternative platforms are emerging to take its place. My key point is that I reached a tipping point after which I viewed everything in the world differently. Once that point is reached, then trust in politicians, the political system, the health "profession", mainstream media, religious leaders, international organisations like the United Nations and so on evaporates. Trust resides only in your immediate circle of close friends and family. Anyone or anything outside that circle is made to earn your trust. It is not automatically granted.