Who cares to debate the events of 9/11/2001 based upon the laws of physics?

[Saint_Cad]

@Jay_Jay

in addition to the fact that you can not guarantee total destruction of any given stack by messing with the top 15%

Please explain the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse in Kansas City. I’d love to hear that CT.

[Shodan]

I’m not even sure this makes enough sense to be wrong.

@Jay_Jay

how convenient that all of the structural failures of the airliner waited until said airliner was inside the building…

No, they didn’t wait. The airliner broke up as it smashed into the building, and then the wreckage continued forward into the building.

and for that matter, in 3 out of 3 airliner crashes that were into buildings, the plane totally entered the building and THEN after the plane was fully inside, the fire-ball of jet fuel ignited …

How would the jet fuel get inside the building and ignite before the plane got there? For that matter, how would the jet fuel get inside the building if the plane bounced off the outside?

I asked this a while back, but don’t recall an answer - do you believe the demolition charges were set off at the exact moment the plane bounced off the WTC tower? And on exactly the same floors? How did the people who set the demolition charges know the exact time and location of the plane arriving? Or did they just get really lucky?

Regards,
Shodan

[simster]

@Jay_Jay

This is the difficult part of the whole effort,
you see its possible to KNOW what didn’t happen
that is alleged airliner crash into the South wall of the south tower.
however people seem to get all hung-up on needing an explanation
of what did happen and to that all I can say is insufficient data.
however there is sufficient data to KNOW that the official story is a CROCK!

Sorry - complete and total bullshit.

[Jay_Jay]

@Novelty_Bobble

Of all the things that could be a sticking point, a plane-shaped hole as a result of a decelerating, disintegrating plane should not be high on the list.

Even if we imagined that the plane started to decelerate and disintegrate at the point the nose and leading edges hit the (relatively flimsy) skin of the building…then what?
You still have 100+ tons of plane-shaped debris travelling at 400+ miles an hour with the majority of the fuselage and trailing wing edges intact. What shape is it going to make other than that of a plane?

I think the problem you may be having is comprehending the energy and momentum present in any object going at that speed, let alone something the size of a jet aircraft. Heck, a fairly flimsy plank of wood weighing a few kg can punch clean through a brick wall when propelled by hurricane or tornado force winds, i.e. less than 300mph. Mythbusters had a few grams of piano wire going at only 300mph and it went straight through a palm trunk, plywood and embedded in a brick wall. A few grams remember.

If I had to fake the damage done to the twin towers do you know how I’d do it? I’d fly two fully-loaded airliners into them at full speed.

“(relatively flimsy) skin of the building.”

Steel box columns …

[scr4]

@Jay_Jay

you are asking for speculation and I’m not about to go there.

See, this is the problem with so many conspiracy theories and denialism. It’s not even a theory, it’s just a bunch of nitpicks that don’t add up to anything. You can’t disprove their claim because they aren’t even making any claim, it’s just a whole lot of innuendo.

Global warming denial is another example - they poke holes at mistakes made by scientists, but they don’t present any alternative hypothesis that can explain the observations.

[Jay_Jay]

@Mr.Miskatonic

I’m going to go thank some random diety that you have not and will not ever have anything to do with load bearing systems that might involve human life.

You have no idea what I do for a living
…
thank U very much

[Czarcasm]

@Jay_Jay

so rather than calling it a global failure,
how about picking out a detail that you would like clarified(?)

Give us a more probable alternate explanation as to what happened.

[Skywatcher]

At least this one’s better than claiming the planes crashed into Lake Erie.

[Jay_Jay]

@simster

Sorry - complete and total bullshit.

so … do you support the idea that 19 radical Arabs
hijacked airliners and managed to fly 3 out of 4 to their targets,
and that two 110 story skyscrapers “collapsed” because of the airplane crashes

• a third building fell because of “office fires”

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@Jay_Jay

“(relatively flimsy) skin of the building.”

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/docs/spandrel.jpg

Steel box columns …

vs. a plane moving at 500mph, hence the terminology ‘relatively flimsy’. Note the use of the word ‘relatively’.

Even without the airplane impacting one can compare the skin of the tower as ‘relatively flimsy’ compared to other structures such as the Empire State Building, the Pentagon, and other, mostly older building designs.

[Saint_Cad]

@Shodan

Skyscrapers are held together by their support columns. They aren’t strong enough to hold up against lateral impact, like a fully loaded airliner smashing into them at 500 mph.

Wait! You mean that material may behave differently under tension, compression and shear?!

But … but … but … that’s like science and shit. :eek:

[Shodan]

@Jay_Jay

“(relatively flimsy) skin of the building.”

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/docs/spandrel.jpg

Steel box columns …

Which were hit by planes weighing 180,000 lbs. plus 50,000+ lbs. of jet fuel (cite).

There is little that isn’t flimsy under that kind of impact.

Regards,
Shodan

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@Jay_Jay

You have no idea what I do for a living
…
thank U very much

OK, Ace. Give me your engineering or science credentials then.

[scr4]

If you want to prove it’s not a duck, you really need to suggest another animal that looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck.

[DrFidelius]

Arabs are able to learn to fly planes almost as well as regular people. It’s not like anyone is claiming that trained squirrels carried out the attack.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@Jay_Jay

so … do you support the idea that 19 radical Arabs
hijacked airliners and managed to fly 3 out of 4 to their targets,
and that two 110 story skyscrapers “collapsed” because of the airplane crashes

• a third building fell because of “office fires”

Watch out guys, he’s using scare quotes!

[Saint_Cad]

@scr4

If you want to prove it’s not a duck, you really need to suggest another animal that looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck.

So your theory is that the WTCs were hit by platypodes?
Actually makes more sense than JayJay

[Jay_Jay]

@Czarcasm

Give us a more probable alternate explanation as to what happened.

so it is not sufficient to understand what didn’t happen
now you want speculation about what did happen even
if that ventures out into an area of insufficient data(?)

Please enlighten me as to WHY it is necessary to speculate about what did happen?

[CurtC]

@Jay_Jay

so your idea is that the destruction was confined to the area where the airliner met the building and the entire rest of the airliner would be subjected to a most 10 g deceleration force? is that it? … note that even under 10 g any given bit of luggage or for that matter equipment in the airliner would be exerting 10X its weight against whatever was supposed to be holding it.

The 10 g was a guess - it could be as low as 5 g or as much as 20 g, but something in that ballpark. But basically, yes.

In addition, I submit to this forum that the idea of limiting the g force in the aircraft to an arbitrary 10 g is not realistic, the whole event was said to have taken between 190 & 250 milliseconds and in that time the airliner ONLY experienced total catastrophic failure in the bit that was nearest the wall?

Yes, that’s pretty much it.

[running_coach]

@Jay_Jay

“(relatively flimsy) skin of the building.”

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/docs/spandrel.jpg

Steel box columns …

Again, you’re not comprehending the magnitude of the forces involved. Flimsy relative to a fast moving mass of metal.