# Who cares to debate the events of 9/11/2001 based upon the laws of physics? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2017, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861 "2017-10-14T21:40:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 29
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/561 "2017-10-16T16:02:10Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “lying eye witnesses” ONLY the ones who state that they saw the airliner ( or rather the alleged airliner ) penetrate the skyscraper wall, all of the others may be mistaken or whatever, but the individual witnesses are the least of our problem here… This is sickening. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/562 "2017-10-16T16:03:15Z")
Were Trump and Obama in on this before they ever considered running for office and, if so, why? If they became part of this conspiracy after they came into office why would they agree to do so? Why don’t the networks tell Trump “Back the fuck off or we reveal everything!”? If he didn’t become part of this conspiracy until later, why didn’t Trump bury Obama with it? _If this conspiracy is so fucking vast and powerful, why aren’t you and all the other Truthers afraid for your lives?_ ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/563 "2017-10-16T16:03:41Z")
All this math and physics is simply noise to distract from the real issue. Please allow Jay\_Jay to expound on the reasons why this entire illusion was orchestrated and covered up by the last three administrations. ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/564 "2017-10-16T16:03:45Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It went into the building that it hit, knocking a hole in the side. Some was distributed as heat, although that was minor compared to the heat of the jet fuel, the rest as kinetic energy.It wasn’t - it also damaged the floors, support structures, and so on. > Yes. The building hit the plane as hard as the plane hit the building, depending on your frame of reference. The plane was destroyed, and the building had a hole blown in it, and then the floors collapsed down onto each other and then the whole building collapsed. > > Regards, > Shodan indeed in the act of the building hitting the airliner WHY was all the energy focused on the bit where the aircraft met the wall, why no other effects seen? why didn’t the airliner bust up in to a mass of wreckage outside of the building? ---
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/565 "2017-10-16T16:03:50Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Surely all the furniture and cubicle walls had some part? We know from Charleston on 18 June 2007 that ordinary furniture can reach in excess of 1300°F and bring down a steel frame the size of the average Tower floor in less than an hour. the Av-gas started the fire but was burned off fairly quickly. However it had ignited pretty much everything flammable near the impact region and more. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/566 "2017-10-16T16:05:25Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Surely all the furniture and cubicle walls had some part? We know from Charleston on 18 June 2007 that ordinary furniture can reach in excess of 1300°F and bring down a steel frame the size of the average Tower floor in less than an hour. Exactly … the fluid continued to flow through the building setting _everything_ on fire … and any swabbie will tell you that steel burns … ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/567 "2017-10-16T16:05:31Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > I actually think Bugs Bunny might do a better job than what his ideas are. Yeah - but he didn’t study law. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/568 "2017-10-16T16:05:50Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “lying eye witnesses” ONLY the ones who state that they saw the airliner ( or rather the alleged airliner ) penetrate the skyscraper wall, all of the others may be mistaken or whatever, but the individual witnesses are the least of our problem here. Earlier you said that the video is lying, so we should rely on the witnesses. Now the witnesses who said what they say are lying or mistaken. What else is there? The physics? We have already seen that the physics say the same thing as the video and the witnesses. Regards, Shodan ---
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/569 "2017-10-16T16:06:10Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > indeed in the act of the building hitting the airliner WHY was all the energy focused on the bit where the aircraft met the wall, why no other effects seen? The imapct hole is actually a bit larger than the silhouette of the plane due to the various structural elements being connected. But what are you expecting? You think a hole should have happened on the observation deck? > [@](#): > > why didn’t the airliner bust up in to a mass of wreckage outside of the building? Why would it? It was going very very fast and the sides of the tower were just not strong enough to stop such an object. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/570 "2017-10-16T16:06:20Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > from the very moment that the nose encountered the tower wall, there would have to be slowing down caused but the resistance from having to displace mass, bend/break structural members ( etc… ) and this slowing down would be significant in that it would cause g force stress to the aircraft, and such g force stress to the aircraft would cause breaking up such that the contents of the plane, that is luggage, passengers ( whatever ) would spill out and be deposited in the street below. You seem to have this idea that the WTC towers were these impenetrable objects. They weren’t. As others have repeatedly indicated to you, the planes were moving at more than 500 mph. Objects at this speed do not behave like you expect them to do. It is literally outside of your experience. For that matter, large objects themselves (like airliners or buildings) are outside of people’s experience. A large plane or a building when scaled up from toy-sized to actual real-world sized behaves entirely differently. You can pick up a toy building or a toy plane in your hands, for example. If you were magically made into a giant and tried to pick up a building, it would fall apart in your hands. Large macroscopic objects are laughably fragile when compared to toy-sized objects. Compared to your toy building, the real-world building may well be made of paper. **Jay\_Jay** , all of your arguments seem to boil down to an [argument from personal incredulity](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity#Personal_incredulity). Just because something is outside of your experience does not mean that it cannot be so. ---
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/571 "2017-10-16T16:07:12Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Yeah - but he didn’t study law. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/572 "2017-10-16T16:07:53Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Were Trump and Obama in on this before they ever considered running for office and, if so, why? > If they became part of this conspiracy after they came into office why would they agree to do so? > Why don’t the networks tell Trump “Back the fuck off or we reveal everything!”? > If he didn’t become part of this conspiracy until later, why didn’t Trump bury Obama with it? > > _If this conspiracy is so fucking vast and powerful, why aren’t you and all the other Truthers afraid for your lives?_ you don’t know what is really going on here, and really because the conspiracy at least believes that the psychological warfare is so effective as to preclude the need for any action at this level, however, there is an effort to prove them wrong. and as for most of what you wrote, it constitutes a call for speculation and I refuse to speculate on this matter. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/573 "2017-10-16T16:08:04Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane” > > instantly, no, however given aprox 50 milliseconds to accomplish the task, > the airliner would be so seriously damaged as to deposit most of its mass down the side of the building falling to street level. Well, if we assume that the building was from Krypton, and acquired invulnerability under earths yellow sun, so that it could resist the impact. And also that the laws of physics dealing with inertia was on holiday that day. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/574 "2017-10-16T16:09:55Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you don’t know what is really going on here, and really because the conspiracy at least believes that the psychological warfare is so effective as to preclude the need for any action at this level, however, there is an effort to prove them wrong. > and as for most of what you wrote, it constitutes a call for speculation and I refuse to speculate on this matter. Is there a limit to the number of :rolleyes: allowed per post? ---
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/575 "2017-10-16T16:10:15Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you don’t know what is really going on here, and really because the conspiracy at least believes that the psychological warfare is so effective as to preclude the need for any action at this level, however, there is an effort to prove them wrong. > and as for most of what you wrote, it constitutes a call for speculation and I refuse to speculate on this matter. You mispelled ‘sheeple’. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/576 "2017-10-16T16:10:51Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > indeed in the act of the building hitting the airliner WHY was all the energy focused on the bit where the aircraft met the wall, why no other effects seen? There were other effects seen - it blasted a hole into the building and caused the whole structure to collapse. > [@](#): > > why didn’t the airliner bust up in to a mass of wreckage outside of the building? Because it was massive enough, and moving fast enough, to blast a hole in the side of the building. So most of the wreckage ended up inside the building. When someone is in a head-on car crash, and isn’t wearing a seat belt, where do they hit first - the floor of the car, or the dashboard? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/577 "2017-10-16T16:11:10Z")
> [@robby](#): > > You seem to have this idea that the WTC towers were these impenetrable objects. They weren’t. As others have repeatedly indicated to you, the planes were moving at more than 500 mph. Objects at this speed do not behave like you expect them to do. It is literally outside of your experience. > > For that matter, large objects themselves (like airliners or buildings) are outside of people’s experience. A large plane or a building when scaled up from toy-sized to actual real-world sized behaves entirely differently. You can pick up a toy building or a toy plane in your hands, for example. If you were magically made into a giant and tried to pick up a building, it would fall apart in your hands. Large macroscopic objects are laughably fragile when compared to toy-sized objects. Compared to your toy building, the real-world building may well be made of paper. > > **Jay\_Jay** , all of your arguments seem to boil down to an [argument from personal incredulity](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity#Personal_incredulity). Just because something is outside of your experience does not mean that it cannot be so. there is a LOT more to this than personal incredulity have you ever been in an automobile having to stop very quickly from highway speed? note that anything loose in the vehicle will move, and this is under \<3 g deceleration force … now consider this, the airliner striking a wall, would have to encounter \>45 g deceleration force and at that, the 4 ton jet engines would stress their mounts by \>180 tons … can you get your head around that? ---
**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:** [October 16, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/578 "2017-10-16T16:12:03Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > and as for most of what you wrote, it constitutes a call for speculation and I refuse to speculate on this matter. Yet this thread is full of you speculating on what happened to the planes. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/579 "2017-10-16T16:12:23Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > There is a fallacy being presented here, and it is pretty much the same fallacy that drives Kennedy conspirators: Because something spectacularly horrendous happened, only something equally spectacular could possibly have caused it. Is there a name for this fallacy? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/580 "2017-10-16T16:13:44Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > indeed in the act of the building hitting the airliner WHY was all the energy focused on the bit where the aircraft met the wall, why no other effects seen? why didn’t the airliner bust up in to a mass of wreckage outside of the building? It takes time to break up. Metal is elastic under those forces, it’s not going to shatter like glass. And there were effects at the impact, [a flash of light.](http://911review.com/errors/phantom/flash.html) [Just like this.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWXyr4Y0aP0) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861.md?page=28) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861.md?page=30)