Creative Speculation

.....to remedy the disparity noted recently in a study between the hostility of conventionalists vs. non-conventionalists, let me begin by saying, "Sophistry, thy name is William Seger."

Without any further ado, let's proceed to the woodshed.

You photo of dangling steel beams shows not the results of fire insomuch as it shows the results of heat. But maybe you haven't learned the difference. Fire would have consumed the wooden beam. What you show is a piece of charcoal which is a result of anaerobic heat. Which is the same result in the second photo. You're not looking at burnt paper but carbon ash. Everything we know as paper (cellulose) is gone. Again, the result of heat and not fire. And, if you think you can sinter silica (the main constituent of sand) the main constituent of concrete or if you can think that one can sinter calcium (the main constituent in gypsum board) at low temperatures then you're missing out on the big money. A half dozen patents of the last 10 years have been filed that outline new, controlled processes that allow the sintering of the materials at only 700 celsius! Guess all those people were wasting their time. They should have just given you a call.

And, if you think that 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit is to be expected from the smoldering rubble of an office fire, well this is the beginning temperature of a blast furnace - a controlled process. That's simply a laughable notion.