It’s pretty hard to make a tower fall to one side. Likely it would snap before it got 10 degrees out of plumb.
As a point of reference, the famous Leaning Tower of Pisa had a maximum tilt of 5.5 deg. It’s more upright now after recent renovations.
Good point, a much shorter tower had achieved a nearly intolerable level of tilt at 5 degrees. If the WTC had achieve that tilt, it would have been evacuated along with the surrounding blocks.
There was a really cool YouTube video that was used in one of these discussions to demonstrate the physics. Unfortunately I can’t seem to find it now.
To be fair, the is the “Principle of Least Action”, although that is generally not taught except in advanced physics classes. That poster’s error was not so much the “path of least resistance” but in determining which path that was.
This is the key point. A government so inept it was led by a man who took aim at a crippled quail … and shot his friend in the face! No way it could plan something like this and keep it secret.
I think the chance such a secret would come out would be nearly 99%. But even if it were as low as 15% would Cheney (or Karl Rove, or whoever you think planned it) take the risk of discovery?
This poster’s join date is Sep 2013. All the other threads they’ve started are equally odd.
Since when is there a “The” Antichrist, anyway? I thought it was a franchise deal, one antichrist per territory.
You mean, like, when a dog bites its master?
That was my biggest laugh too. The US and Western Europe are getting… paid to do this?
Actually I think the main difference is that relative to their mass, trees have a lot more resistance to shear forces than do sky scrapers. So as it falls the lower portions of the tree can forces that maintains the trees shape changes the downward force into angular momentum. So that the top of the tree gets pushed sideways. With a sky scraper the downward force and inertia is so great that the structure can’t withstand the forces necessary to maintain its shape as it falls. There is simply no where to get the sideways force necessary to get the top floors falling at an angle. So it just collapses straight down.
The falling of the world trade center is more similar to the falling of a house of cards than a falling tree
Physicists please correct me if I’m wrong.
I thought the idea was the other way around, that the US is paying pseudo-terrorists to act, in order to rap the benefits of war and seizing oil and so on. Sounds like the plot of a Tom Clancy novel.
Nope. The only places it is mentioned in Scripture, (in the first and second letters of John and never in Revelation), it is a generic term for anyone who opposed Christian belief and is explicitly identified as “many.” (OTOH, there is clearly not one “The” antichrist.)
Except in the novel it was a false flag run by the KGB. 
So the U.S. and/or other countries pay off a group of Muslims to do bad things, including hijacking a bunch of planes and crash them. Okay.
Are you saying that instead of just horrifying the world by crashing jets into buildings, the evil-doers also packed the buildings with explosives?
I agree. In fact I think a knowledge of science probably is a hindrance in being convinced of the theory.
Here’s my first question. Do you believe the masterminds had enough foresight to tell the operatives to be sure and fly the planes into right where the explosives were planted? They must have, right? After all, it wouldn’t look good to have the planes fly into the 85th floor and then have a controlled demolition on the 50th floor. Do you agree?
Then please tell me why, in terms that a non-scientist would understand, why the overlords would position the explosives in the proper position for the buildings to come down in a controlled footpatch, rather than just blowing the hell out of one side of the buildings and having them topple over?
I personally think that “the image of the crumbling towers” being seared into our minds was EXACTLY the idea. And that’s regardless of who was behind it.
Let’s put it this way. These events happened in September 2001 and it’s now June 2014. There are literally thousands of books, papers, YouTube videos, monographs and miscellaneous ramblings claiming to “prove” what happened, and no clear evidence of the conspiracy in which you believe.
Dragutin Dimitrijević, the mastermind behind the 1914 assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, was unmasked by one of his trusted assistants. The conspirators in the Lincoln assasination were caught, tried and convicted in about six weeks. But somehow, even after almost 13 years has gone by, this vast international conspiracy has gotten away with, not just 9/11, but repeated incidents throughout Asia, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.
Why don’t they just eliminate people who know the TRUTH? Seriously. They’re powerful enough, aren’t they?
Steve Jones’ paper was laughable and based on some very gross misunderstandings. He embarrassed Physics professors everywhere when he tried to play structural engineer.
Operation Northwoods? Really? Something that never went beyond the ‘put a plan on paper’ stage?
Why is Betty Ong’s last call convincing you of anything?
AE911Truth…the best money-making scheme for 911 truthers.
It has no merit. I didn’t watch this particular video but if he is pulling out his ‘10 points showing explosive used’ it is the same nonsense as always. Nothing he shows indicates explosive and many of his points are outright lies. More often they are internally inconsistent.
In General Questions you guys seem to have a pretty good idea of the objective application of science, but this thread seems to be another story entirely. Like I said, the debunkings don’t really convince me. For instance the page linked to in a couple of posts regarding the fall rate of the towers. Going down to the calculations from the “physics blogger”, the first one calculates the free-fall time of the top floors of the towers, ignoring air resistance, to show that “the collapse was at much less than free-fall rates”. I would say “less than” or “not far from”, but otherwise it’s not too bad. But then in the second calculation we seem to be calculating the total kinetic energy of every part of the tower falling to the ground, which is not relevant to the earlier stages of collapse. Furthermore, the person seems to have gotten confused and used his free-fall velocity figure from the earlier calculation in calculating this kinetic energy. Well, ultimately a different free-fall velocity, but the error remained.
The Greening paper linked to from that page isn’t great either. In section 3.0 we get this:
Strangely, he appears to be positing not that every steel column on the impact floors has weakened and buckled, but that every steel column on the impact floors has completely disappeared! The video evidence doesn’t seem to corroborate. The silliness continues. It’s pretentious science, intended to impress people who don’t have a very good grasp of the concepts, while actually making many errors.
What both these people are doing by their mistakes is essentially giving the system more energy than it actually has, over 2.6 x 10^9 joules more energy in fact.
To answer the “why haven’t people come forward yet” questions:
-most of those involved probably experience little to no guilt over what they’ve done.
-if the CIA or whoever is corrupt enough to do this, then they are certainly corrupt enough to make the life of any whistleblower very difficult.
-the media may not necessarily want to break this story, and many sections of government would try to keep it under wraps too, so there may not be many ways for those involved to get their story out. They might also be accused of being or presumed to be an enemy agent, or to have a mental illness.
Now that was silly, you even acknowledge that that they are not too far from what they should be, and then the most important bit is not explained by you: what explosives were used and why the video evidence does not show them in audible form too.
This is like what I learned from the moon hoax debates, if you want to replace what is more plausible with the most implausible (that there were explosives) your theory has to explain more than just a few “errors” it has to match all what we see and to begin with the debris field of the towers was not what one could get from a controlled demolition.
They are not like Batman, the materials for that quantity of explosives was not easy to hide and more that one not directly involved in the manufacturing of the devices and material would report that something was amiss.
They could escape to Russia and make the life of the perpetrators very difficult with their information.
Same thing too, there is a lot of pain just a single guy can make by telling.
The problems with these explanations are many:
First, you would have to realize that such a plan would require the concentrated efforts of many, many people. In addition to those who did the planning, there would have to be countless technicians and engineers producing and planting the explosives, lawyers and accountants creating paperwork trails, investigators, medical professionals, etc. Are you saying that THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE PEOPLE are utterly ruthless sociopaths?
As to the role of the CIA in tormenting whistleblowers, how are you doing right now? How are the people who made “Loose Change” doing right now? All the other bloggers and YouTube commentators and authors who have tried to propose conspiracy theories…how are they doing right now? Have any of them been killed in the night by covert agents or arrested on false charges? If the CIA didn’t want the truth out there, they would be doing something about it. The fact that you can, freely, on a public message board, discuss this conspiracy indicates that it doesn’t exist.
As for the media, first remember that “the media” is not monolithic. Secondly, remember that most elements of the media want money. That’s effectively it. There are some media organizations that have political agendas, but in the main they are profit-generating enterprises. If a news outlet (say, CNN) actually was able to present the story that the government had conspired in the 9/11 attacks, and could prove the theory with well-documented evidence, that would be a massive coup and would generate tremendous positive publicity for that group. Surely a Peabody or Pulitzer would be in the offing. What media organization wouldn’t want that kind of audience?
The assertion of a massive conspiracy ignores basic human behavior.
For someone who is “not usually interested in conspiracy theories”, you do seem to have embraced a lot of them in order to believe this “one” is true.
And these aren’t just “little” conspiracies leading up to the Big Day. Muslim terrorism has been a factor in global politics for longer than I’ve been alive. For it to be a hoax, you’d need a multi-national, multi-generational conspiracy, involving several groups who, on the face of it, would have no reason to cooperate on anything at all, let alone cooperate in such a massive criminal endeavor.