Active Users:462 Time:03/05/2025 06:54:56 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Contemplate this.... Jeordam Send a noteboard - 20/09/2011 04:27:52 PM
The way the buildings fell, for instance. Or the fact that jet fuel isn't capable of burning hot enough to have caused the collapse. Stuff like that. Was 9/11 orchestrated? I really don't know. But it's at least worth discussing.


How much does a plane that big weigh? We're talking with all the people on board, luggage/freight, and fuel. I'm guessing quite a bit. Now slam that weight going, what 100mpg or so (I'm honestly not sure), into the side of a building. All of a sudden, the support structure of the building has to account for the massive amount of extra weight that it wasn't designed to support.

And then on top of that, all of the momentum of the plane that had to be absorbed by the building itself was a further compication. Remember when the Federal Building in OK was attacked. Remember how there was a huge hole in the entire side of the building and one could see into the halls/rooms through the wreckage. That was a conventionally built buidling, with support beams throughout the outer walls and within the structure itself. The WTC Towers were not built like that. Instead the lattice work outer shell of the building was the main support structure. If that was damaged.....

So you have a huge mass with some significant momentum slamming into the side of a lattice supported building. At the point of impact, that side's latticework is...well...gone. Meaning the weight of the floors above is now unevenly distributed. Now incorporate the inertia that was absorbed by the lattice. If memory serves me correctly, both planes hit a side directly (right?)...not a corner head on? That means that the lattice on the opposite side of impact took the brunt of the force. Somewhere along the opposite side outer latice, stress caused a break. Add in the extra weight of the planes, and it was just a matter of time.

You will note that I'm not addressing if anyone worked for anyone, or it was an inside job...or anything along those lines. That is not my point. My point is that with science, physics, and, well...logic....one can avoid any issues such as you mentioned. To Star Trek this up, there's an episode of Voyager (called Conspiracy if I remember correctly) where 7 of 9 freaks out. She starts making conjectures such as you mentioned, and ends up seeing something that isn't really there.

~Jeordam
ex-Admin at wotmania (all things wot & art galleries)
Saving the Princess, Humanity, or the World-Entire since 1985
Reply to message
We really need to have Logic as a course in high schools. Tom - 20/09/2011 06:50:36 AM 1286 Views
Logic classes would be good in schools. Timthetrolloc - 20/09/2011 10:23:56 AM 835 Views
Ugh. Ghavrel - 20/09/2011 11:30:59 AM 866 Views
Re: Ugh. Timthetrolloc - 21/09/2011 12:03:31 AM 790 Views
Something tells me that no matter who answered your questions you wouldn't believe anyway. everynametaken - 21/09/2011 02:16:52 AM 794 Views
this is a controlled demolition Timthetrolloc - 21/09/2011 12:20:09 AM 905 Views
That is an incredibly stupid argument. Tom - 21/09/2011 01:12:38 AM 823 Views
I've seen controlled demolitions in person. They happen in the opposite order of the WTC collapses. Ghavrel - 21/09/2011 03:54:35 AM 838 Views
Asking questions is never wrong. ironclad - 20/09/2011 12:22:22 PM 744 Views
Re: Asking questions is never wrong. Timthetrolloc - 20/09/2011 11:57:04 PM 905 Views
Agreed Camilla - 20/09/2011 01:09:40 PM 781 Views
I've long advocated this for the reasons Tom states as well as others. Joel - 21/09/2011 06:49:28 AM 742 Views
I don't know if the Internet is degrading skills, or just giving stupid people a voice beetnemesis - 20/09/2011 02:33:24 PM 844 Views
There is compelling evidence that 9/11 was not what it seemed Dark Knight - 20/09/2011 03:06:58 PM 831 Views
No, there is not. Tom - 20/09/2011 03:19:43 PM 937 Views
Well, the circumstances were odd at least Dark Knight - 20/09/2011 03:26:40 PM 818 Views
As far as conspiracies go ... Nate - 20/09/2011 03:36:35 PM 888 Views
what would be the motive for the US doing something that stupid? random thoughts - 20/09/2011 04:40:31 PM 735 Views
I'm not sure you got my gist. Nate - 20/09/2011 04:46:28 PM 747 Views
I don't think there is any evidience that Bush wanted to attack Iraq before 9-11 random thoughts - 20/09/2011 05:21:09 PM 797 Views
Um. Well, sure, that would be true. If you ignored all the evidence. Nate - 20/09/2011 05:45:23 PM 856 Views
Well if you had argued that some Bush advisers wanted to attack Iraq I would have agreed random thoughts - 20/09/2011 06:35:07 PM 844 Views
But that's what I DID argue. Nate - 20/09/2011 06:47:17 PM 820 Views
sorry but you need to be more precise in your terms random thoughts - 21/09/2011 02:37:36 PM 825 Views
I've always seen them as separate. Nate - 21/09/2011 03:33:14 PM 684 Views
and that is why I decided to drop it random thoughts - 21/09/2011 04:07:02 PM 831 Views
Heh. Nate - 21/09/2011 04:15:34 PM 789 Views
And the explicit statement of a Bush Cabinet member. Joel - 21/09/2011 06:59:47 AM 893 Views
I'm still annoyed. Nate - 21/09/2011 01:58:38 PM 728 Views
I stopped responfding when suddenly realized I didn't want to be in a Bush Iraq war debate random thoughts - 21/09/2011 02:53:29 PM 725 Views
Admitting error is a sign of weakness; Don Draper said so. Joel - 21/09/2011 05:37:31 PM 758 Views
and I pointed that it was was just continuin gthe Clinton policy random thoughts - 21/09/2011 02:30:13 PM 790 Views
Even if that were true, it would still be flip flopping on a central Bush platform plank. Joel - 21/09/2011 05:45:10 PM 835 Views
In addition: Nate - 20/09/2011 05:57:33 PM 861 Views
sorry but that is nothing more than a simple statement of fact random thoughts - 20/09/2011 06:40:51 PM 869 Views
This is very frustrating. Nate - 20/09/2011 07:05:48 PM 816 Views
For the war on terror? Dark Knight - 20/09/2011 04:49:12 PM 849 Views
And what was the war on terror supposed to accomplish? random thoughts - 20/09/2011 05:12:11 PM 799 Views
That contradicts the evidence. Tom - 20/09/2011 06:15:48 PM 828 Views
Excuse me? Macharius - 20/09/2011 08:22:21 PM 859 Views
Huh? Dark Knight - 20/09/2011 08:57:14 PM 848 Views
the problem with any other theory is the make no sense random thoughts - 20/09/2011 04:36:02 PM 795 Views
Contemplate this.... Jeordam - 20/09/2011 04:27:52 PM 815 Views
You just did not go Star Trek on me Dark Knight - 20/09/2011 04:44:28 PM 807 Views
And how did you know... Jeordam - 20/09/2011 05:17:10 PM 909 Views
Re: And how did you know... Timthetrolloc - 21/09/2011 12:16:26 AM 899 Views
You should watch the pilot episode of the X-Files spin-off series The Lone Gunmen. TaskmasterJack - 20/09/2011 08:19:15 PM 840 Views
humans tend to be very bad at critical thinking random thoughts - 20/09/2011 04:58:43 PM 747 Views
Won't help Praziquantel - 20/09/2011 08:15:36 PM 823 Views
Make 'em all take debate. nossy - 20/09/2011 08:23:37 PM 791 Views
Would madam like a cane? Elaine - 20/09/2011 09:19:53 PM 908 Views
Maybe a walker with tennis balls on the bottom. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 20/09/2011 10:33:39 PM 378 Views
Do you think it would help? aerocontrols - 21/09/2011 12:09:42 AM 757 Views
Re: We really need to have Logic as a course in high schools. Timthetrolloc - 21/09/2011 12:10:08 AM 800 Views
Yeah, and the 100,000 pounds of sudden extra weight slammed into the towers at 400 mph...? Tom - 21/09/2011 01:05:18 AM 782 Views
Not actually the best example Isaac - 21/09/2011 01:56:03 AM 775 Views
what about the hole it cut into the frame of the building? random thoughts - 21/09/2011 03:23:07 AM 819 Views
Wouldn't make much difference Isaac - 21/09/2011 04:08:27 AM 796 Views
OK thanks *NM* random thoughts - 21/09/2011 02:55:52 PM 417 Views
The fireproofing was scraped off the steel by the crash, so the beams melted. Aeryn - 21/09/2011 07:35:08 PM 1001 Views
Re: Yeah, and the 100,000 pounds of sudden extra weight slammed into the towers at 400 mph...? Timthetrolloc - 21/09/2011 03:02:19 AM 842 Views
But how else would they fall down? Aeryn - 21/09/2011 07:42:27 PM 694 Views
You would force Euler on to the masses? Two Wongs - 21/09/2011 03:21:40 PM 864 Views
You could still argue. Vivien - 21/09/2011 04:06:51 PM 727 Views
I didn't mean to imply that it is no fun to argue with a like-minded person Two Wongs - 21/09/2011 04:15:47 PM 763 Views
Eh, nobody uses pure logic all of the time anyway. Vivien - 21/09/2011 10:43:51 PM 801 Views
Or they could just do more math. Cold, hard, beautiful math. Vivien - 21/09/2011 04:01:05 PM 736 Views
I love geometry proofs. Nate - 21/09/2011 04:10:57 PM 855 Views
Me too <3 proofs! *NM* LaSombra - 21/09/2011 07:55:38 PM 413 Views
For pure enjoyment, here's a non math version. Vivien - 21/09/2011 10:10:40 PM 759 Views
+1 *NM* Isaac - 21/09/2011 07:59:57 PM 329 Views
Now we are talking... Everyone can benefit from some basic Euclid. jh - 21/09/2011 08:32:17 PM 1000 Views
Ha. Ha. Vivien - 21/09/2011 09:56:38 PM 798 Views
As a follower of Cthulhu, I strongly disagree. Tom - 21/09/2011 11:13:55 PM 966 Views
I really and truly appreciate your love of pure math for math's sake, but... Tom - 21/09/2011 11:10:03 PM 772 Views
Well, it requires a lot more science to really dispute things than HS can give someone Isaac - 21/09/2011 11:28:29 PM 765 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes