Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Farangrakthai
though also agree with Larkinny that the NIST report has some true statements in it along with false ones, IMO.
|
And we are qualified to tell the difference?
My point is that one of the areas Larkinny disagrees with is the temperature of the fire.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Larkinny
“None of the recovered steel samples showed evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600ºC for as long as 15 min.” (NCSTAR 1, 180)
|
And he's said that this forensic evidence is what he is basing the temperature of the fire on.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Larkinny
when the forensic evidence shows the temperatures weren't high enough to provide molten metal samples, yet that's what we have, then you would conclude that there must have been another source of energy
|
The problem with that premise is that the "molten metal samples" are part of forensic evidence and if you include them into the pool of evidence, then you are also saying that the fire could (or even should) have been higher than 600 degrees. It's not a separate issue until you find evidence of the fuel that caused that temperature or you conclude that it was an anomaly in temperature, friction, wind velocity or a combination of unknown factors that caused it.