# 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:** 50
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/981 "2017-10-17T13:22:27Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > note that photos and video are all too easy to fake, and in the face of the overwhelming evidence in the form of how the alleged airliner behaved in the alleged crash into the south wall of the south tower, its obvious that there is a LOT more going on here… We’ve already been over the physics of the airliner crashing into the wall of the South Tower. I explained, with math and physics, why you shouldn’t expect to be able to see the rear of the plane slow down as the front hits the building. You have not addressed this at all, you just keep saying that it’s overwhelming that you’re right. Can you address these points? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/982 "2017-10-17T13:30:45Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > note that photos and video are all too easy to fake… No, they aren’t easy to fake, because [ul] [li]there are hundreds of them from many different observers[/li][li]they would have to be faked very nearly in real time - I saw the second airliner crash on TV[/li][li]there is no motive for the media to fake this - they would make enormously more money with the revelation of a government conspiracy[/li][li]a conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of people is impossible to keep quiet[/li][/ul] > [@](#): > > and in the face of the overwhelming evidence in the form of > how the alleged airliner behaved in the alleged crash into the > south wall of the south tower… I have not seen any such evidence. An “alleged” airliner? If you are claiming there wasn’t really an airliner, where did all the parts come from? Nor have you shown that the airliner’s behavior was anomalous - it crashed into the tower, there was a massive fire, the tower collapsed. The anomaly would be if it behaved as you seem to expect - bouncing off. A plane weighing a quarter million pounds going at 500mph isn’t going to bounce off the side of a building. And again - if the buildings were really brought down by demolition charges, how did the conspirators know the floors the planes would hit, and the times? And how did they convince Osama bin Laden to [confess](http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html) to doing it? > [@](#): > > , its obvious that there is a LOT > more going on here, that is psychological warfare to keep the > masses in line so as to not rock the boat for the people who > at least think they own this planet. So the idea is that somebody staged the greatest terrorist incident in US history, killing thousands of people, creating a recession, so as “not to rock the boat”. That is difficult to understand - perhaps you could explain how it would have rocked the boat not to stage 911 in the first place. 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 17, 2017, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/983 "2017-10-17T13:33:30Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Still no answer about the missing person, huh? Guess you can’t answer that one. > > From [here](http://www.history.com/topics/flight-93) > > How much debris do you expect to be intact? Yeah you can reconstruct a plane which crashes on takeoff, from cruising altitude, not so much. Note they did identify remains from this non-existent airliner. > > And you also haven’t explained the cellphone calls. Can’t admit you are wrong, can you? The cell phone calls were ALL bogus, you don’t make cell phone calls from an airliner (that is with state of the art 2001 phones, etc … ). ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/984 "2017-10-17T13:38:42Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, they aren’t easy to fake, because [ul] > [li]there are hundreds of them from many different observers[/li][li]they would have to be faked very nearly in real time - I saw the second airliner crash on TV[/li][li]there is no motive for the media to fake this - they would make enormously more money with the revelation of a government conspiracy[/li][li]a conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of people is impossible to keep quiet[/li][/ul]I have not seen any such evidence. An “alleged” airliner? If you are claiming there wasn’t really an airliner, where did all the parts come from? Nor have you shown that the airliner’s behavior was anomalous - it crashed into the tower, there was a massive fire, the tower collapsed. The anomaly would be if it behaved as you seem to expect - bouncing off. A plane weighing a quarter million pounds going at 500mph isn’t going to bounce off the side of a building. > > And again - if the buildings were really brought down by demolition charges, how did the conspirators know the floors the planes would hit, and the times? And how did they convince Osama bin Laden to [confess](http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html) to doing it? > So the idea is that somebody staged the greatest terrorist incident in US history, killing thousands of people, creating a recession, so as “not to rock the boat”. That is difficult to understand - perhaps you could explain how it would have rocked the boat not to stage 911 in the first place. > > Regards, > Shodan what you have written constitutes speculation about what may have been the motivation for the attack, and about the destruction of the towers, if the whole airliners story is fake, it makes a non-issue out of where the explosives have to be placed. " A plane weighing a quarter million pounds going at 500mph isn’t going to bounce off the side of a building." Nor should it be expected to simply glide right in totally disappearing inside the building, the alleged crash as shown in the video is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/985 "2017-10-17T13:40:49Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > what you have written constitutes speculation about what may have been the motivation for the attack, and about the destruction of the towers, if the whole airliners story is fake, it makes a non-issue out of where the explosives have to be placed. > > " A plane weighing a quarter million pounds going at 500mph isn’t going to bounce off the side of a building." Nor should it be expected to simply glide right in totally disappearing inside the building, the alleged crash as shown in the video is wrong. How many times have you seen a plane hit a building? ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/986 "2017-10-17T13:41:14Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > The cell phone calls were ALL bogus, you don’t make cell phone calls from an airliner (that is with state of the art 2001 phones, etc … ). [Airfone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfone) > [@](#): > > Airfone was an air-ground radiotelephone service developed by MCI founder John D. Goeken, and operated under the names Airfone, GTE Airfone and Verizon. Airfone allowed passengers to make telephone calls (later including data modem service) in-flight. Airfone handsets were often located in the middle airliner seatbacks, with two handsets per row for 6-wide coach seating configurations, and more or less depending on the aircraft layout and fare class. First class cabins typically had one handset per seat. Some planes had one or more bulkhead mounted phone stations with cordless handsets that the passengers could use, instead of the multiple wired handsets. [Cellphones 2001 at altitude](http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/us/after-attacks-communications-new-perspective-issue-cell-phone-use-planes.html) > [@](#): > > According to industry experts, it is possible to use cell phones with varying success during the ascent and descent of commercial airline flights, although the difficulty of maintaining a signal appears to increase as planes gain altitude. Some older phones, which have stronger transmitters and operate on analog networks, can be used at a maximum altitude of 10 miles, while phones on newer digital systems can work at altitudes of 5 to 6 miles. A typical airline cruising altitude would be 35,000 feet, or about 6.6 miles. > > ‘‘The fact of the matter is that cell phones can work in almost all phases of a commercial flight,’’ said Marvin Sirbu, professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University. ‘‘An excess of caution prevents us from doing so, of course, because we are so worried about the safety of air travel.’’ We’re right, you’re wrong. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/987 "2017-10-17T13:46:30Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > You have yet to prove beyond any doubt that “the media” lied. > > You have yet to respond to most of the demands for cites. > > You have yet to use legitimate physics to support each of your claims. > > Madness, indeed. Just ONE POINT here totally straight up legit physics, WTC7 spent 2.25 sec falling at the acceleration of gravity and kept its shape while falling straight down during that time. how was that done without controlled demolition? ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/988 "2017-10-17T13:48:24Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > How many times have you seen a plane hit a building? you don’t actually have to see an airliner collide with a building in order to have a concept of what should be seen if such an event should happen. ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/989 "2017-10-17T13:48:57Z")
loop\_counter = loop\_counter + 1; Console::Writeline("loop\_counter = " + loop\_counter); Let’s run this and … loop\_counter = 249 Cool. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/990 "2017-10-17T13:50:12Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you don’t actually have to see an airliner collide with a building in order to have a concept of what should be seen if such an event should happen. Bugs Bunny cartoons are not real life. You’ve seen a video of a plane NOT bouncing off a solid wall. _That_ is what real life looks like. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/991 "2017-10-17T13:50:40Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, they aren’t easy to fake, because [ul] > [li]there are hundreds of them from many different observers[/li][li]they would have to be faked very nearly in real time - I saw the second airliner crash on TV[/li]\ > [/ul] > Regards, > Shodan I came in post the same question. Just how where all of these photos and videos supposedly faked? And as Shodan said, it would have to happened in real time. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/992 "2017-10-17T13:51:01Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > The cell phone calls were ALL bogus, you don’t make cell phone calls from an airliner (that is with state of the art 2001 phones, etc … ). Who told you this? Where do you get your (dis)information? ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/993 "2017-10-17T13:51:48Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > [Airfone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfone) > > [Cellphones 2001 at altitude](http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/us/after-attacks-communications-new-perspective-issue-cell-phone-use-planes.html) > We’re right, you’re wrong. " possible to use cell phones with varying success" so cell phone use is not a guaranteed success, and its a chance that it may work and also a chance that it may not work. there are enough anomalies with the reporting of said phone calls to convince me that these calls are totally bogus, and in addition, the mountain of evidence showing that the whole hijacked airliners fiasco is fake. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/994 "2017-10-17T13:52:18Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > Just ONE POINT here > totally straight up legit physics, WTC7 spent 2.25 sec falling at the acceleration of gravity and kept its shape while falling straight down during that time. > how was that done without controlled demolition? You keep insisting that it can’t happen without controlled demolition, but you have no basis for that assertion. All it takes is gravity. And saying “It didn’t happen the way I imagine it should have happened” is indicative of a failure of your imagination, not a vast international conspiracy. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/995 "2017-10-17T13:53:51Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > Just ONE POINT here > totally straight up legit physics, WTC7 spent 2.25 sec falling at the acceleration of gravity and kept its shape while falling straight down during that time. > how was that done without controlled demolition? Gravity. If something is in freefall, it will keep it’s shape regardless of why it’s in freefall. If someone jumps off a bridge, is that caused by controlled demolition? Controlled demolition starts from the bottom, the Towers collapsed from the top. Controlled demolition involves explosives. No explosions of that type were heard. Controlled demolition involves weeks of building prep that would be impossible to hide. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/996 "2017-10-17T13:54:16Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > Just ONE POINT here > totally straight up legit physics, WTC7 spent 2.25 sec falling at the acceleration of gravity and kept its shape while falling straight down during that time. > how was that done without controlled demolition? Asked and answered. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/997 "2017-10-17T13:55:46Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > " possible to use cell phones with varying success" > so cell phone use is not a guaranteed success, and its a chance that it may work and also a chance that it may not work. there are enough anomalies with the reporting of said phone calls to convince me that these calls are totally bogus, and in addition, the mountain of evidence showing that the whole hijacked airliners fiasco is fake. So you discount the “chance it might work”. That says there is a chance it DID work. The only anomalies are in your imagination. What about the Airfones? ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2017, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/998 "2017-10-17T13:56:04Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you don’t actually have to see an airliner collide with a building in order to have a concept of what should be seen if such an event should happen. Then do your homework and actually create the physical model that shows it. FWIW, what happened on 9/11 fits my concept of what should be seen if such an event should happen. Just a few quick yes-or-no questions. Do you understand that, for most of us, what we see in those videos fits our concepts of what should be seen if such an event should happen? Do you understand that you have been utterly unconvincing to anyone here throughout this thread? Do you understand that “the media faked it” is a premise that requires its own independent evidence, and actually makes your claims _less_ realistic to everyone here? Do you understand why I keep asking you to do your homework? ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/999 "2017-10-17T13:56:20Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > " possible to use cell phones with varying success" > so cell phone use is not a guaranteed success, and its a chance that it may work and also a chance that it may not work. there are enough anomalies with the reporting of said phone calls to convince me that these calls are totally bogus, and in addition, the mountain of evidence showing that the whole hijacked airliners fiasco is fake. Faked by whom and for what purpose? Exercise the courage of your own convictions, FFS. ---
**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 17, 2017, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/1000 "2017-10-17T13:57:05Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > I came in post the same question. Just how where all of these photos and videos supposedly faked? And as Shodan said, it would have to happened in real time. The ONLY videos that are critical to the case are the ones that actually show the south wall of the south tower, there are only 3 or maybe 4 of these, all of the rest of the video alleging to show the crash of “FLT175” were faked real-time because they didn’t have to show the alleged penetration event they just showed an image of an airliner and then the explosion from the alleged crash, all the time the south wall was obscured by anothe skyscraper or was shot from the north side of the south tower. incredulity over how these things may have been accomplished does nothing to negate the obvious fake images that were promoted as the alleged crash of “FLT175” [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=49) [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=51)