# Skyscrapers on fire, not collapsing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2010, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541 "2010-09-12T22:53:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Ibanez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a4c791/32.png) [@Ibanez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibanez)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/81 "2010-09-14T21:46:44Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > After seeing these buildiings fall STRAIGHT DOWN into their own footprint exactly like controlled demolitions. > > It doesn’t take an expert to see that the odds of that happening once with buildings of this size are astronomical. Three times suspends belief. Actually it does take an expert to analyze what happened. ASCE agreed that planes damaging the structure and fire burning out of control is what brought down the buildings. Carefull because your implying the American Society Civil Engineers are now part of the conspiracy 1000’s of proffesionals. What a feat to keep that secret huh ? But how was it suppose to fall ? Like a tree ? It’s not a tree its a 110 story building made out of concrete and steel with alot of air. I’ll let you in on a little secret buildings are really heavy. I’m mean really heavy. When it started collapsing you see that the top of the towers leaned over quite a bit on an angle. Then gravity kicks in, yeah gravity it applies to man made structures as well. When 10, 15 , 20 stories of building starts comming down it would take alot to stop it much less slow it down. Which it did neither. But then you probably think there should a bugs bunny outline of an airplane in the pentagon as well huh ? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/82 "2010-09-15T15:22:03Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > Jesus merciful fuck, when did every uneducated guy on the street become an expert in skyscraper demolitions. :rolleyes: > > After seeing these buildiings fall STRAIGHT DOWN into their own footprint exactly like controlled demolitions. > > It doesn’t take an expert to see that the odds of that happening once with buildings of this size are astronomical. Three times suspends belief. > > And building 7 was never hit by a plane, and was not effected by jet fuel. Or the more likely explanation that tall buildings typically collapse more or less straight down ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/83 "2010-09-16T12:46:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > [@Czarcasm](#): > > > > Has it actually been long enough to pretend that we haven’t done this many times before? > > Well, it looks like Mozart is starting from scratch, as it were, parroting ideas that were tossed around and debunked years ago, and I know it must be tempting to try to put him through the kindergarten of 9/11 reality checks in the hope that he may one day graduate, but I understand and share your weariness. > > I’m just curious when and if Mozart will address the “pull it” issue. That’s always good for a few laughs. To be fair, he’s got a lot of catching up to do. He’s been dead for quite awhile, you see, and only recently was he resurrected. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/84 "2010-09-16T14:10:29Z")
[QUOTE=davidm] They were going on about how the cellphone calls made from the hijacked planes were impossible. One of them gave as a cite a series of experiments that supposedly proved that cellphone calls are impossible above 7,000 feet. I countered with a cite of a paper describing high altitude balloon experiments where they maintained a cellular connection up to 20,000 feet. The response was that their paper was written by a Professor Emeritus in Computer Science “so you know he’s not talking through his hat!” [/QUOTE] They are full of shit, and their ‘Professor Emeritus’ IS talking out his hat. Even the Loose Change idiots have backed off of this one, since in fact only 2 of the calls came from cell phones (the rest were from in flight air phones), and cell phoned DO work at those altitudes. The FAA doesn’t want you to use your phones on a plane, not because they won’t work but because there is a small chance it will interfere with the planes instrumentation. I used to have a good cite for this, but the web site doesn’t seem to be working anymore. [Here](http://www.ehow.com/about_5065930_cell-phones-work-airplanes.html) is a more generic explanation. If you watch 9/11 Science and Conspiracy they also touch on this subject…that and the Discovery Channel’s similar 2 hour special really has a lot of good information in it and were done well, giving the CTers a chance to make their case then debunking each claim. From the linked article above: > [@](#): > > The simple answer > > # Following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, news reports carried stories of passengers phoning loved ones in the minutes before the planes crashed. Also, the Federal Aviation Administration has conducted studies indicating that despite the warnings from flight attendants, an average of one to four cell phone calls are made from commercial flights in the United States. Obviously, then, cell phones can operate in flight, at least under certain conditions. ETA: This is one of the wackier CTer ideas…surly a government that was ruthless enough and had the assets to pull something like this off (including magic explosive and unrealistically tight security) would have checked to see if cell phones worked at those altitudes before incorporating it into their massive plot, no? I mean, the planes had regular air phones, so why wouldn’t they have just made all the calls from those, if indeed cell phones don’t work from air planes?? Were they brilliant, evil but stupid?? And how could someone making this fundamental of a mistake have pulled off such a crime and STILL not been conclusively outed?? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/85 "2010-09-16T15:48:42Z")
Of course they were genius fools. The Ed Woods of conspiracy. “Nobody’s gonna notice!” And the fact that it doesn’t make sense proves that it’s true, because here you are saying it doesn’t make sense so that proves it’s false. That’s just what they want you to think. If it made sense, it would look too perfect, and therefore be suspicious. So the Illuminati put in deliberately impossible parts, just to prove it was impossible if it were faked, which therefore throws off suspicion. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/86 "2010-09-16T16:42:20Z")
They add more smoke and mirrors to hide the smoke and mirrors. It is a recursive truth cycle. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/87 "2010-09-16T17:37:43Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > From the linked article above: > > > [@](#): > > > > The simple answer > > > > # Following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, news reports carried stories of passengers phoning loved ones in the minutes before the planes crashed. Also, the Federal Aviation Administration has conducted studies indicating that despite the warnings from flight attendants, an average of one to four cell phone calls are made from commercial flights in the United States. Obviously, then, cell phones can operate in flight, at least under certain conditions. > > ETA: This is one of the wackier CTer ideas…surly a government that was ruthless enough and had the assets to pull something like this off (including magic explosive and unrealistically tight security) would have checked to see if cell phones worked at those altitudes before incorporating it into their massive plot, no? I mean, the planes had regular air phones, so why wouldn’t they have just made all the calls from those, if indeed cell phones don’t work from air planes?? Were they brilliant, evil but stupid?? And how could someone making this fundamental of a mistake have pulled off such a crime and STILL not been conclusively outed?? They also gloss over the fact that the “planted” evidence overwhelmingly pointed at Saudis as opposed to, say, Iraqis. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/88 "2010-09-16T19:55:42Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > The buildings were designed to withstand airpcraft impacts, and 90% of the jet fuel burned in the initial explaosions. > > > > Even NY firefighters can be heard saying “It was like one of those controlled explosions, you heard pop, pop, pop, as the buildings came down”. > > > > If you watched ANY of the several docs shown yesterday you had to have seen that clip. > > Jesus merciful fuck, when did every uneducated guy on the street become an expert in skyscraper demolitions. :rolleyes: When they were there in the middle of the thing, instead of home reading Popular Mechanics and thinking up excuses for the most cirrupt and inept administration in American history. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/89 "2010-09-16T19:58:50Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > After seeing these buildiings fall STRAIGHT DOWN into their own footprint exactly like controlled demolitions. > > > > It doesn’t take an expert to see that the odds of that happening once with buildings of this size are astronomical. Three times suspends belief. > > > > And building 7 was never hit by a plane, and was not effected by jet fuel. > > Or the more likely explanation that tall buildings typically collapse more or less straight down Not THAT straight down, and one of the towers can plainly bessen to tilt, and then straighten it’s self out as it collapses. Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/90 "2010-09-16T20:01:56Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. Controlled demolitions also obey the laws of physics, you know. And no you would not expect a piece of the building to just slide off. And I think you’re now suggesting that someone (WHO?) blew up only part of the tower so it fell evenly. Why would that happen? > [@Mozart1220](#): > > When they were there in the middle of the thing, instead of home reading Popular Mechanics and thinking up excuses for the most cirrupt and inept administration in American history. You’ve alread said you don’t think they were responsible for the attack. So what does their corruption have to do with this? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/91 "2010-09-16T20:19:00Z")
[QUOTE=Mozart1220] Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. [/QUOTE] Um…no. I wouldn’t think that. The puzzlement is why YOU think that this would be a reasonable thing to have happen. Well, and what definition of ‘physics’ you are applying to all this. In your obviously vast understanding of physics and of static and dynamic loading, what leads you to believe that your assertion here is reality based? What, again in your vast experience, SHOULD have happened had the building simply collapsed due to a catastrophic failure resulting from the fire and damage due to a plane slamming into it at high speed? Feel free to be as detailed as you like…if you have any reputable computer models of what SHOULD have happened (as opposed to what did actually happen), again feel free to provide those as well. I await in hopeful anticipation for the coming of wisdom… -XT ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/92 "2010-09-16T20:22:01Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@msmith537](#): > > > > Or the more likely explanation that tall buildings typically collapse more or less straight down > > Not THAT straight down, and one of the towers can plainly bessen to tilt, and then straighten it’s self out as it collapses. > > Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. That is not surprising when a lever crushes its fulcrum. Physics were just fine here. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/93 "2010-09-16T20:25:37Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > Jesus merciful fuck, when did every uneducated guy on the street become an expert in skyscraper demolitions. :rolleyes: > > When they were there in the middle of the thing, 😕 Are you saying you were at Ground Zero? > [@](#): > > instead of home reading Popular Mechanics You’ve been given hordes of sources, and I don’t think a single one was PM. > [@](#): > > and thinking up excuses for the most cirrupt and inept administration in American history. We get it. You hate Bush. So do a lot of people here. That said those folks are not about to start making up wacky bullshit to hate the previous administration for when there was plenty of crap based in reality to work with. In other words, thanks for justifying the use of the term ‘Bush derangement syndrome’ . ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/94 "2010-09-16T21:59:32Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > Jesus merciful fuck, when did every uneducated guy on the street become an expert in skyscraper demolitions. :rolleyes: > > When they were there in the middle of the thing, instead of home reading Popular Mechanics and thinking up excuses for the most cirrupt and inept administration in American history. The french filmmaker of the “9/11” documentary was inside the tower, the recording showed that the sounds that appear to be most like explosions happen **at the very end of the collapse** , most likely the sound of the bottom floors collapsing. So yes, anyone that still claims explosives took down the towers is willfully ignoring the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/95 "2010-09-16T22:17:46Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@msmith537](#): > > > > Or the more likely explanation that tall buildings typically collapse more or less straight down > > Not THAT straight down, and one of the towers can plainly bessen to tilt, and then straighten it’s self out as it collapses. > > Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. And where does the lateral energy come from to push millions of tons of debris sideways? Gravity pullls it down; what pulls it sideways? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/96 "2010-09-16T22:19:14Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] And where does the lateral energy come from to push millions of tons of debris sideways? Gravity pullls it down; what pulls it sideways? [/QUOTE] Based on a similar thread I’d go with: Cables. And Wombats… -XT ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2010, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/97 "2010-09-16T22:42:16Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > When they were there in the middle of the thing, instead of home reading Popular Mechanics and thinking up excuses for the most cirrupt and inept administration in American history. > > The french filmmaker of the “9/11” documentary was inside the tower, the recording showed that the sounds that appear to be most like explosions happen **at the very end of the collapse** , most likely the sound of the bottom floors collapsing. > > So yes, anyone that still claims explosives took down the towers is willfully ignoring the evidence. Well, you see, they were ABOUT to detonate the explosives when the planes hit. So you see… -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Ibanez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a4c791/32.png) [@Ibanez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibanez)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2010, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/98 "2010-09-18T21:07:55Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > Not THAT straight down, and one of the towers can plainly bessen to tilt, and then straighten it’s self out as it collapses. > > Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. You’re really stuck on this building should of fell like a tree theory huh ? Whenever your realize the buildings weren’t trees let me know. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2010, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/99 "2010-09-18T21:55:10Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > Not THAT straight down, and one of the towers can plainly bessen to tilt, and then straighten it’s self out as it collapses. > > Hmm..you’d think just that bit would have slid off, leaving the rest of the building. I guess physics don’t apply here. How is a building structure that is based on steel posts supposed to slide? Slide on what? Once the posts snapped all the massive weight above them moved according to the laws of physics. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/100 "2010-09-19T00:40:53Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > They also gloss over the fact that the “planted” evidence overwhelmingly pointed at Saudis as opposed to, say, Iraqis. Exactly. If it was a false flag operation to justify the invasion of Iraq, they framed the wrong damned people! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=6)