9/11 Science Club: Mass Does Not Accelerate as it Accumulates, It Can Only Slow Down

[FrenchyBearpaw]

True, but at a low velocity, and with not much fuel.

I understand, but what baffles me is (I'm not an architect, mechanical engineer or structural engineer) is how do we go from a building designed to withstand a low fuel, smaller airline, to a larger, full fuel airliner causing the utter destruction and collapse of a steel building? I don't think there would be one architect in the world to have told you this was a remote possibility on 9/10/01, IMO. Yet on 9/11/01, this happened three times!

Even the firefighters (I've listened to the audio) were confident the fire could be contained, had no reason to believe the building was just hours away from total collapse, and were even telling people to stay in the building.

These are the questions I have. Did the US gov. capitalize on the situation? Without a doubt! Did Silverstein come out 11 bil. richer? Were repeated warnings of an attack ignored? It would seem so. Was OBL, a dialysis pt. able to mastermind this from a remote cave? That's what were told. Did it take us ten years to find him? Has the government released any pictures of a dead OBL? Not yet. Do we have precedent of red flag events? Yes.
Has the government lied to us? On multiple occasions.

As I've said before, I'm not a truther. I'm also a skeptic and tend to ask questions. The governments actions post 9/11 speak quite loud.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Not only is this (and the rest of the post this was snipped from) mean-spirited, but it is devoid of any truth; but this isn't the thread to discuss the theological side of it.

I was responding to a poster who voiced her opinion on god saving some from disaster, but not others. I had not brought it up until then.

 

[true2theword]

You want them to be cable spools, you mean.

Some parts of landing gear look rather similar to cable spools.

A thing you have to remember is the aircraft that hit the pentagon supposedly clipped the ground before it hit the pentagon.

An additional factor you have to take into account is the pentagon's shape and structuraly reinforcement this building was kinda designed to be able to take a beating.

Between the loss of significant amounts of kinetic energy in the form of velocity and mass (cause the plane lost some pieces when it clipped the ground) and loss of velocity due to friction. The pentagon didn't even take the same force of impact that either one of the twin towers took. Additionally, the pentagon was lower to the ground and the way it was built gave it significantly more structural strength than the World Trade Center.

The building materials were different from WTC, the overall design gave added structural support (the pentagon could be described almost like a castle with multiple walls in some respect), which meant by the time it reached the next "defensive wall" the plane had lost a lot of its momentum due to plowing through the first wall. The WTC was essentially a series of very tall buildings, not something designed to survive a potential military attack complete with explosives...

not sure who told you the plane clipped the ground before entering the pentagon, look closely at the photos, thats one of the major discrepencies, is that the airline did NOT clip the ground

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

For the record, I don't believe there was a grand conspiracy, as there is no way our government could ever pull off something so complicated with any success. However, I don't entirely believe the "official story." The truth is likely somewhere in between, and the government was likely complicit, encouraged and capitalized on a highly improbable scenario. As I stated previously several pages back, I sometimes like to play devil's advocate and argue a position in order to evoke other's opinions and answers. Btodd has done a great job of providing some facts, and I appreciate that.

 

[Btodd]

I can't make out nor detect any sort of mark from tail, left and right wing on the exterior of the pentagon. If its all there in the chalked out pic, now bout a little help deciphering what it shows?

In post #270, take a look at the photo. The brick is completely gone for the entire width of the plane. In the center is where the fuselage, the heaviest part of the plane, impacted. The tail was directly above the gaping hole where the fuselage went through the building.

Which is exactly why you need to realize there must've been some element of mis-speaking, and you should respond by asking for clarification, not with ridicule.

I've been through this for a over a decade now. Yes, there are some people who simply don't know the facts, have done nothing but peruse conspiracy sites for their information...but to believe that all of the steel from all 3 buildings completely melted shows that the person making the claim never bothered to check it out, or is being dishonest. Either way, I don't really care. I pointed out a simple picture that demolished that idea, and if it bothers you that I ridiculed the intent, that does nothing to refute what I posted a direct picture of. You don't have to like my style to admit that the claim he made was not only false, but grossly false.

This really doesn't describe Mr Bearpaw at all, nor does it pertain to the overwhelming majority of those I've seen you ridicule mercilessly. This individual is about as hard-nosed as they come, and its pretty silly to write him off as simply being gullible.

I'll take your criticism more seriously when you start taking conspiracists to task for their ridicule. Even in their case, you need to focus on the arguments being presented, and not get sidetracked. The bottom line is...'What is the most likely explanation for this event?'

Which brings me to the question...what is it? Where did Flight 77 go, where did all of those passengers go, how did wreckage end up at the site while the building was still burning and the general public was watching the entire scene, who saw a missile, what do you make of the enormous amount of eyewitnesses who watched a plane fly into the building...what's the more likely explanation?

This isn't a game for me, and I assume you feel the same way.


Btodd

 

[seeking Christ]

I understand, but what baffles me is (I'm not an architect, mechanical engineer or structural engineer) is how do we go from a building designed to withstand a low fuel, smaller airline, to a larger, full fuel airliner causing the utter destruction and collapse of a steel building? I don't think there would be one architect in the world to have told you this was a remote possibility on 9/10/01, IMO. Yet on 9/11/01, this happened three times!

Did you see the video footage of AQ (I forget if it was OBL himself or not) reacting to the actual collapse of the towers? Apparently they had NO IDEA this could possibly happen either. I can't say I saw the first plane hit on live TV, but I did see that VERY soon after it struck, and I saw the next one hit live, and I saw both towers collapse live. My SO at the time was having a cat scan done so I was kind of a captive audience. I grew up walking those streets as tiny little tyke, staring up in amazement at how stupid people could be to create such monstrosities with total lack of foresight about what might go wrong.

And yet, this didn't happen 3 times. WTC 7 was a different scenario. I have read the detailed report on the collapse of the towers, but only because it was linked here. I forget the abbreviation - NICS? It seems thorough to me, but I'd be curious in your critique.

Even the firefighters (I've listened to the audio) were confident the fire could be contained, had no reason to believe the building was just hours away from total collapse, and were even telling people to stay in the building.

What building(s) are you talking about here?

These are the questions I have. Did the US gov. capitalize on the situation? Without a doubt!

In what way do you mean? Power grab, removing us from a free society towards totalitarianism? I will agree that "Gov't" somehow seems to have a will of its own to do this, as our FF's foresaw. And I'm the last one to let our Gov't off the hook for anything, but I just can't fathom them intentionally planning this level of destruction. Look what happened to our economy because of it! Where would our debt be w/o that event?

Did Silverstein come out 11 bil. richer?

Insurance usually makes you whole AT BEST. In a case like this its common to have self-insurance of a 20% co-pay or more. I think he probably would've lost money on the deal, unless for some reason it was un-sellable and he just wanted out, even at a loss of unrealized profit. Btw did you ever look at that gold-heist video I embedded? I'm curious what you know about this Silverstein character, I know nothing about him.

Were repeated warnings of an attack ignored?

YES!!

Was OBL, a dialysis pt. able to mastermind this from a remote cave? That's what were told. Did it take us ten years to find him?

We found his general location within months, and retreated from those caves circa Tora Bora. OBL went from "target #1" to "no longer relevant." That whole thing was fishy, but OBL bombed the WTC towers' basement whenever that happened - '93? So to say he was a motivator and financier is reasonable. To say he was some lone mastermind? No, I doubt he had much to do with any actual details. He probably fingered it as a target, and maybe picked a few honored guests as canon fodder.

Has the government released any pictures of a dead OBL? Not yet. Do we have precedent of red flag events? Yes.
Has the government lied to us? On multiple occasions.

First big lie I know of was 100 years ago with the creation of the Fed, but I digress.

As I've said before, I'm not a truther. I'm also a skeptic and tend to ask questions. The governments actions post 9/11 speak quite loud.

Well I for one know you're not a twoofer (for whatever that's worth) I also think its possible that Gov't action taken post 911 is explainable by public panic, giving victory to terrorists. I wish we as a Nation would grow a pair, get rid of the Patriot act, get rid of the maritime court system, and actually use 2nd Amendment rights for what they were designed for; namely the control of public officials so stupid as to dare not represent We the People. That would fix the problem in a hurry!! Forget shotgun weddings, how 'bout lobbyists having their bribes refused at the business end of a double barrel? People talk as if we're fed up, but our FF's declared an armed revolution would be needed about once every 20 years. This "unarmed revolution" nonsense has become a joke. Nothing like that will ever happen though. Instead, we'll just accept whatever big brother feels like handing our way.

 

[seeking Christ]

I was responding to a poster who voiced her opinion on god saving some from disaster, but not others. I had not brought it up until then.

True, and it is indeed a troublesome concept. If you wish to explore it, I invite you to start a thread somewhere that might be appropriate. I'll weigh in, and read other's input with interest.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

If your god was truly concerned with lives lost, it would have been quite simple for him to have diverted those planes into the Atlantic, or better yet, given the highjackers MI's before they even boarded the planes. And people run late and have dr. apts. every day of the week, nothing miraculous about that. To suggest that an omnipotent being who had the power to stop 9/11, but didn't, only demeans the memories of those who lost their lives that day.

Listen to the 9/11 calls and tell me your god had any interest in saving lives.

9/11: Phone Calls from the Towers [1/2] - YouTube

I'm not here to argue about "my god". You asked me if I thought it was coincidence and I answered the question honestly.

I'll agree with you there. That has no bearing on the real-world implications of what happened. Neither party should have brought it up.


Btodd

Yeah, I guess I could've just lied...

 

[Btodd]

I'm not here to argue about "my god". You asked me if I thought it was coincidence and I answered the question honestly.



Yeah, I guess I could've just lied...

I'm not attempting to bust your chops on this, or his. Just agreeing that this issue is irrelevant as to what happened in the real world. I could just have easily jumped on your statement about it involving God, but I didn't. No offense intended; just trying to keep the subject on track as much as possible.


Btodd

 

[seeking Christ]

In post #270, take a look at the photo. The brick is completely gone for the entire width of the plane. In the center is where the fuselage, the heaviest part of the plane, impacted. The tail was directly above the gaping hole where the fuselage went through the building.

I appreciate your help here, but my main problem with the chalky photo is I DON'T see any gaping hole! This is the only pic I've seen like that. Every other pic I've seen has at least a section from the middle removed entirely, and very few (maybe only one?) show that the top was still connected across. What this looks like, to me, unable to decipher depth perception due to the weird shading, is that the outer layer of the building perhaps disintegrated along with whatever part of the plane "vaporized," and some things had enough momentum to keep travelling, pushing non-structural elements forward with it.

If I'm to believe a 767 struck as this pic seems to indicate, I'd really like to see where the lawn was all dug up from the approaching plane, cuz that pilot must've bounced his way in.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Did you see the video footage of AQ (I forget if it was OBL himself or not) reacting to the actual collapse of the towers? Apparently they had NO IDEA this could possibly happen either. I can't say I saw the first plane hit on live TV, but I did see that VERY soon after it struck, and I saw the next one hit live, and I saw both towers collapse live. My SO at the time was having a cat scan done so I was kind of a captive audience. I grew up walking those streets as tiny little tyke, staring up in amazement at how stupid people could be to create such monstrosities with total lack of foresight about what might go wrong.

And yet, this didn't happen 3 times. WTC 7 was a different scenario. I have read the detailed report on the collapse of the towers, but only because it was linked here. I forget the abbreviation - NICS? It seems thorough to me, but I'd be curious in your critique.



What building(s) are you talking about here?



In what way do you mean? Power grab, removing us from a free society towards totalitarianism? I will agree that "Gov't" somehow seems to have a will of its own to do this, as our FF's foresaw. And I'm the last one to let our Gov't off the hook for anything, but I just can't fathom them intentionally planning this level of destruction. Look what happened to our economy because of it! Where would our debt be w/o that event?



Insurance usually makes you whole AT BEST. In a case like this its common to have self-insurance of a 20% co-pay or more. I think he probably would've lost money on the deal, unless for some reason it was un-sellable and he just wanted out, even at a loss of unrealized profit. Btw did you ever look at that gold-heist video I embedded? I'm curious what you know about this Silverstein character, I know nothing about him.



YES!!



We found his general location within months, and retreated from those caves circa Tora Bora. OBL went from "target #1" to "no longer relevant." That whole thing was fishy, but OBL bombed the WTC towers' basement whenever that happened - '93? So to say he was a motivator and financier is reasonable. To say he was some lone mastermind? No, I doubt he had much to do with any actual details. He probably fingered it as a target, and maybe picked a few honored guests as canon fodder.



First big lie I know of was 100 years ago with the creation of the Fed, but I digress.



Well I for one know you're not a twoofer (for whatever that's worth) I also think its possible that Gov't action taken post 911 is explainable by public panic, giving victory to terrorists. I wish we as a Nation would grow a pair, get rid of the Patriot act, get rid of the maritime court system, and actually use 2nd Amendment rights for what they were designed for; namely the control of public officials so stupid as to dare not represent We the People. That would fix the problem in a hurry!! Forget shotgun weddings, how 'bout lobbyists having their bribes refused at the business end of a double barrel? People talk as if we're fed up, but our FF's declared an armed revolution would be needed about once every 20 years. This "unarmed revolution" nonsense has become a joke. Nothing like that will ever happen though. Instead, we'll just accept whatever big brother feels like handing our way.

I have only read parts of the NIST report, I will attempt to read it this weekend, if time permits.

The audio of the firemen can be heard on YouTube, and it was from the first WTC (1) to be hit.

As for the feds capitalizing; within six weeks the Patriot Act was signed, without the approval of Congress, invaded Afghanistan, then Iraq (WMD's), and over ten years later, we're still there. We now have TSA in every airport, many bus stations, train stations and highways, under the guise of keeping us safe from terrorists, but they've yet to catch a one.

Silverstein took out an "acts of terrorism" clause with reimbursed twice the rate (I don't blame him for that), which paid about 11bil.

I haven't watched the gold video you linked. I'll go back and check it out.

As for the morning of 9/11, my father in law called as I was just getting up for work (PST), and I turned on the t.v. and watched along with the rest of America, numb and not really understanding what was happening.

 

[Btodd]

I appreciate your help here, but my main problem with the chalky photo is I DON'T see any gaping hole! This is the only pic I've seen like that. Every other pic I've seen has at least a section from the middle removed entirely, and very few (maybe only one?) show that the top was still connected across. What this looks like, to me, unable to decipher depth perception due to the weird shading, is that the outer layer of the building perhaps disintegrated along with whatever part of the plane "vaporized," and some things had enough momentum to keep travelling, pushing non-structural elements forward with it.

If I'm to believe a 767 struck as this pic seems to indicate, I'd really like to see where the lawn was all dug up from the approaching plane, cuz that pilot must've bounced his way in.

The hole where the fuselage entered is slightly left of center in the pic, and there is fire in there to indicate where I'm talking about.

The point about the lawn being all dug up, because 'the pilot must have bounced his way in' is your own expectation, and is at odds with the multitude of eyewitness reports.

And again...what's the more likely explanation? That matters. SOMETHING happened here...if not the crash of Flight 77, then what? Where did that flight go, where did all of those people go, and how did all of the eyewitnesses mistake a plane crashing into the building for something that never happened...on top of that, where are the witnesses that say anything else happened? That's not ridicule, that's a direct summation of the issue at hand.


Btodd

 

[seeking Christ]

The hole where the fuselage entered is slightly left of center in the pic, and there is fire in there to indicate where I'm talking about.

Thanks. You see my point, that compared to every other photo out there, this is NOT the hole we've been shown?

The point about the lawn being all dug up, because 'the pilot must have bounced his way in' is your own expectation, and is at odds with the multitude of eyewitness reports.

I'm just pointing out that is incredibly low for an impact point, and the contact made seems more like the plane was already in pieces, hurtling at the wall than it does an intact plane flying through the air.

And again...what's the more likely explanation? That matters. SOMETHING happened here...if not the crash of Flight 77, then what?

I never said flight 77 didn't crash there. I just said I've never seen anything that looks like a plane could have. If the plane didn't really remove any major structure at all, then the MSM did a TERRIBLE job of photographic journalism!

 

[Btodd]

Thanks. You see my point, that compared to every other photo out there, this is NOT the hole we've been shown?

It's exactly the same hole. Are you confusing the exit holes of interior walls with the impact hole? That happens a lot. It's plain as day in the photo.

I'm just pointing out that is incredibly low for an impact point, and the contact made seems more like the plane was already in pieces, hurtling at the wall than it does an intact plane flying through the air.

I don't know where you're getting that idea. The wide scale of damage is consistent with Flight 77 hitting there, and nothing else I've heard makes any sense of the data. Do you have a better explanation that explains all of the facts that I presented?

I never said flight 77 didn't crash there. I just said I've never seen anything that looks like a plane could have. If the plane didn't really remove any major structure at all, then the MSM did a TERRIBLE job of photographic journalism!

Right. So you didn't propose any other explanation, you just expressed incredulity about the one presented. But SOMETHING had to hit there that explains where that flight went, where the passengers went, what the numerous eyewitnesses saw, and how debris from an American Airlines flight arrived on the lawn while the building was still burning, while people who were stopped in morning traffic had exited their vehicles were watching the entire situation.

And the plane DID remove major structures...the impact hole (and the path that followed) is where columns were severed by the landing gear and fuselage, and slightly outside that, the engines also severed columns and exited interior walls.

No ridicule required.


Btodd

 

[GarfieldJL]

As for the feds capitalizing; within six weeks the Patriot Act was signed, without the approval of Congress, invaded Afghanistan, then Iraq (WMD's), and over ten years later, we're still there. We now have TSA in every airport, many bus stations, train stations and highways, under the guise of keeping us safe from terrorists, but they've yet to catch a one.

False...

First it wouldn't have mattered concerning Afghanistan in the first place cause that's where the attack on 9/11 was directed from...

Second, Bush actually did get approval from CONGRESS for the War in Iraq...


In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

Senate approves Iraq war resolution - CNN

I know Democrats like rewriting history, but the facts are the facts...

As for the morning of 9/11, my father in law called as I was just getting up for work (PST), and I turned on the t.v. and watched along with the rest of America, numb and not really understanding what was happening.

I kinda understood what was happening, we were attacked and this country was going to fight back.

 

[seeking Christ]

Here's a better shot.

You say your chalked out pic shows "the exact same hole," but it does NOT. The only better comparison I know of, would be the lone shot of the top section of the building still intact, across what you're calling the impact hole. Not having both on hand to compare the two, I can't assert what a comparison would yield; but the decided LACK of hole in your chalked out pic gives a completely different impression than virtually anything else I've ever seen.

If this is what happened, this is what the news should have reported. Apparently every other pic shows the work of demolition crews, and not impact of a plane.

 

[Btodd]

You say your chalked out pic shows "the exact same hole," but it does NOT. The only better comparison I know of, would be the lone shot of the top section of the building still intact, across what you're calling the impact hole. Not having both on hand to compare the two, I can't assert what a comparison would yield; but the decided LACK of hole in your chalked out pic gives a completely different impression than virtually anything else I've ever seen.

If this is what happened, this is what the news should have reported. Apparently every other pic shows the work of demolition crews, and not impact of a plane.

If you don't see the impact hole of the fuselage slightly left of center in the photograph, all I know to do is ask you to post a pic of the impact hole you're referring to, and are claiming is so different.


Btodd

 

[seeking Christ]

I just did. You can't see the difference between the 2 pics in my last post?

 

[Btodd]

I just did. You can't see the difference between the 2 pics in my last post?

Your last post shows the building in two different stages, one before the upper portion collapsed, and one after. Once the upper portion collapsed, the impact hole is completely obscured.

So, what comparison are you making? If you cannot see the large center hole in the picture I posted, I really don't know what to do for you. You said that the hole I posted wasn't consistent with what you had previously seen, but then you posted a picture after the collapse. That doesn't even make sense...there is no longer any 'hole', there is a collapsed portion of the building. Perhaps you should compare apples to apples?


Btodd

 

[seeking Christ]

You said that the hole I posted wasn't consistent with what you had previously seen, but then you posted a picture after the collapse. That doesn't even make sense...there is no longer any 'hole', there is a collapsed portion of the building. Perhaps you should compare apples to apples?


Btodd

I have no other apple to compare it to. Your pic isn't remotely like any other "pre collapse" pic I've ever seen before. The hole in your pic is TINY compared to any other hole I've ever seen. The only other pre-collapse pic I've seen, shows the same huge gaping hole every other pic shows, except the building is still connected along the roof line.