9/11 questions...

[Wulfe13]

Disintegrated into nothingness.

When is the last time you saw or heard of a plane wreck where there was no major wreckage? This theory that the plane was nose diving exactly at 90 degrees at supersonic speeds and thus pulverized into thin air, sounds more like a convinient explanation than anything else. I don't think that's what happened. Are you really that naive to believe this? I mean, you did see the crash site right?

Go back and read all of jacobybs posts..... it's all there.

[DisCrete]

Disintegrated into nothingness.

When is the last time you saw or heard of a plane wreck where there was no major wreckage? This theory that the plane was nose diving exactly at 90 degrees at supersonic speeds and thus pulverized into thin air, sounds more like a convinient explanation than anything else. I don't think that's what happened. Are you really that naive to believe this? I mean, you did see the crash site right?

True... I do not think the plane hit at the angle indicated in the video... I think it was essentially dive bombed, and noone considered the fact that an engine might have ripped off the plane hitting the light poles?

That might explain the 16foot hole.

U do not have to nose dive at 90 degrees to cause disintigration.

All you need is an excessive amount of speed... and lets face it.. you coast your LS1 down a steep hill.. you accelerate right? What happens if you apply gas to it while going downhil, you accelerate even faster... now throw an extra 20 gallons of gas to your gas tank.. and hit a concrete/brick wall at 150mph. What happens to the car? almost 90% disintigration... what do you think happens to a jet at nearly if not past the speed of sound 761mph give or take?

What happens if you take a 60,000-100,000+lbs plane (with thousands of pounds of jet fuel...and nose dive from 3000 feet, at an angle less than 30-45degrees, if your original velocity is 500mph.. and the speed of sound is 761mph at sea level? Dunno about you but a constant forward thrust from a jet engine coupled with downward angle, and aerodynamics of a plane... = HIGH SPEED DESCENT or wait for it... acceleration as noted by my example of your LS1.

[DisCrete]

Don't confuse side swipping and T-boning the same thing either, similar to what happens in nascar or w/e.

[DisCrete]

CLAIM: The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."

Where is forensic data to support this claim... any explosives leaves a residue be it dust, or explosive elements... NONE were found or even presented as evidence... in ANYONE'S theories.

CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

Kerosene can't... but does anyone know what the estimated red hot ash of a cigarette burns?

Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)

Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)

Anyone know the melting point of steel?

Most steel has other metals added to tune its properties, like strength, corrosion resistance, or ease of fabrication. Steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).
How unrealistic is it to assume other materials more or less benign as a cigarette reached those temperatures within the WTC's?

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat.

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

So this guy is saying if we had enough cigarettes, we could essentially make steel 50% less efficient in strength? Interesting....
Wonder what happens when that steel has a constant load on the beams... the load doesn't change only the ability of the steel to maintain the load... hrmmmm interesting indeed.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Impossible, had to be explosions.. or a bomb attached to the plane... this would just make to much sense?

CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions."
A very bold statement.. how many of us have seen demolitions bring down a city building? Dunno about you guys.. but I see clouds of dust rushing out the sides... but what do I know.. it musta been a weather balloon.

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Again I ask, if this were true, where is the forensic evidence to support a bomb inside the WTC?

FACT: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear--misleadingly--as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves--blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower--start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs
CLAIM:Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

This claim supports no conspiracy... however... if it wasn't a plane.. what happend to the jet that allegedly hit the pentagon? What happend to the passengers?

If people understand structural integrity... I'm sure some military people on these forums can confirm where the strongest point of an aircraft is... is closer to the fuselage... just because the wings are 125 feet long does not mean the hole will be as well.

[x10-wakerider]

Last time I checked their were passengers on the planes? You want to tell their families that it was just a missile that hit the pentagon and not a 757 with their sons and daughters? And try and tell the ATC controllers that they didn't see 4 airliners disappear on their screen. And how do you explain osama and all the other terrorists celebrating and taking responsibility for the acts.

Anyone that believes there was a conspiracy is an idiot!

And the democrats scream about the littlest things, so I know they would be the first ones screaming CONSPIRACY if Bush had anything to with it!

[86 IROC-Z]

You guys should have watched South Park tonight. They explained it all.

[sgt0704]

[Jason05GTO]

sme shit was going on that day and we will probably never know the truth..

cuz some wintnesses said they didnt see any plane around pentagonand they just heard explosion and they didnt see any plane parts after the explosion.

i dont even wanna think about it.. everytime i think about that day.. even though i am not American, it pisses me off!!!

You are livin in Chicago, and drivin an LT1 and a Mustang. Sounds pretty American to me. If you claim to not be an American, where are you from?

[Jason05GTO]

Anyhoo, a conspiracy is a very sexy thing. Its commonly believed that the Gov't let Pearl Harbor happen too. Who knows, does anyone care? Probably the families of those who died. BUT, its much easier to rally a country to war, especially Americans, when the people believe they have been attacked for no apparent reason. Would anyone have supported widespread military action had 9/11 not happened? No. The liberals would have all had strokes at the prospect of that. Am I saying this was all staged to piss the country off? No. But could our Gov't have let it happen like they did 60+ years ago? Yes they could have. Will we ever know? Nope!

[94z28l]

that south park last night was funny as hell