I would like to agree with you, but my mind won't allow it since I know the center columns were all interconnected to each other in the center. The floor panels were connected from the outer center columns to the exterior face columns. So in a pancake collapse, the floors surrounding those center columns may fall to the floors below, I can see that, but the interconnected center colums would then cause a topple, not a straight down collapse, or they would fall leaving the center columns standing like a stack of records would falling from the spindle on a record player.

I watched a video of the construction. The center columns were erected first, all locked together, bearing elevators, not floors, and the floors were constructed outward from there to the exterior walls. The floors may fail, but it would only effect the outer center columns they were connected to.

I work construction, not high steel, but I do know some basics of a solid structure. Perhaps that is my hardship in accepting your theory. What I saw in the construction videos lead me to believe what happened that day, what we saw, the explaination we received, is impossible. Too much resistance for a freefall speed collapse in a straight down trajectory.

I believed the top of tower one might topple. Its pitch was too great to maintain integrity for any period of time with the weight of 20 floors working against it. But the structure below was not impaired and should have stood. Heat and flame rises, effects floors above, not below.

Sorry to make this difficult, but everything in me says "impossible!" The resistance factor alone of 80 "normal" floors below says it can't happen.

Metalwing = you're really smart

sojourn = so one of your basis for not being able to accept the information given is because of what you saw first hand from a video (well maybe not first hand)?

Not just from a video but from almost 40 years working with building construction, and the video of how the towers were constucted.

Flame and heat rise. That would effect the floors above, and they could weaken, even collapse, but 80 "normal" floors below would slow and eventually halt a collapse, maybe lead to toppling at a point, but it could never in reality fall straight down at freefall speed. It would be impossible. Every bolted joint, every weld, every bit of concrete would have to fail at precisely the same time, and without help (explosive forces below the collapse) that is impossible.

If you can bring down a steel highrise building in such a manner, by setting a few small fires on the upper floors, why do we need professional explosives engineers that take weeks for such planning, and they can sometimes fail?

In that same scenerio, if those small fires can do this in only an hours time, who would want to build or work in such a possible death trap? Where is the logic?

Look at the Madrid fire site that was posted. For 2 days it burnt like a torch and didn't collapse. The fires in the tower were nothing compared to this inferno. It was more smoke than fire, very low heat, oxygen starved as evidenced by the billowing black smoke. Structural engineers or not, when a fire chief says they can "knock it down (the fire) with 2 lines" it's not much of a fire!

I won't cast blame as to who is responsible, I don't know, I can only say the events of that day produced many "miracles" that went against the laws of science or logic. It would require someone with power, enfluence and access to pull it off and sell its acceptance to and thru the media.

I have questions official explainations don't, won't or can't answer. If that makes me a conspiracy theorist, so be it, but I simply see it as a "lemon on a car lot" the salesman needs to move to make room for something else, and they are the only car lot in town.

All my opinions are just that, my opinions, and I would truely like to think I'm no fool because I ask questions. I would consider myself a fool if I didn't.

You've been in the industry for x amt of years and are allowing yourself to be influenced by a video. Videos are like pictures, they can be altered.

And I for one would never consider you a fool, I like inquiring minds, I like questioning authority, I don't normally settle for things, just because someone says so. I say keep on asking questions, I like learning.

What would make the answers you are being given more plausible or credible?

Pooling…There was enough jet fuel, that did not burn up in the original explosion, that ran down through the building and into the sub basement, to “pool” and have these INTENSE heat signatures for weeks upon weeks after the building collapsed???
1. How did the fuel get from the upper floor at impact, down into a sub basement? There were survivors from the lower floors, were they dowsed by the fuel. Were the elevator shafts flooded? Were the stairwells?
2. If the fuel did spill down the shaft, would not the flame follow it like one of those cartoons where they lay the long fuse and once it hit the “pool” of unburned fuel, would it not ignite?
3. Do you have any other documented occurrences of a jet fuel fire having 1200deg heat signatures, weeks after the burn???
4. Are you aware of other materials that do have those exact same characteristics?

Fnet = m * a

Newtons Second law of motion..

Mass times acceleration equals net force.

A Boeing 757 traveling at 500 mph and weighing more than 200,000 lbs can create enough impact force to do the job.

Perhaps the government did it to have justification to go to war. I have no evidence, but mere observations, which lead me to believe that there was more happening behind that presidential cabinet at the time then what we are suppose to know or believe. All of the main evidences has probably been destroyed to leave the public as of Congress bewildered.

Perhaps waterboarding would be an appropiate practice against the Bush Administration and all those who planned this strategy to find out the truth on these events. Not that I support waterboarding for if one is drowning they will say anything you want to hear anyway, yet would you be surprised if these cronies actually would confess that there were no significant threat to the US in the first place? Of course suggesting waterboarding on politicians would be very unpatriotic wouldn't it, yet do you actually think our politicians are as patriotic as you would like to see them? What fowl secrets are they keeping stored in their memories?

Too bad that the president and the vice president are not required to justify their actions in any supreme court. They knew this from the start as they were very clever to plan their strategy as of find justifications to go to war with both Afghanistan and Iraq. Next up will be Iran, but first the US will be trying to ease relations with China and Russia. It doesn't look like they are going to far with it thus far, but I am sure they will find a way eventually. Perhaps more unfair trading (that is for us) with China and maybe a different alternative to provide energy resources to Russia to make Iran less important for the two nations.

However it will be done the US will find a way and reason to go to war with Iran. Maybe not with this President but certainly with the next one.

One can see why many foreigners are dissappointed with Americans especially the American government. Just ask foreigners to find out. The US is not that kind of image of "a good loyal and fair justified people or some would say the good guys" like Americans would like to believe they are.

Democracy is an illusion that the government likes to use to keep control of its people. Of course the US is a Democratic Republic that loses occassionally a war with its people, so the people of this nation can gain some civil liberties to lean forward in gaining what everyone truly wants in this country in which it is called a True Democracy. The people against the government? Who will win most of the time? I will let you figure that out.

I fear today that many leaders don't offer wise decisions for the good of the people, yet there is that word "hope" that everyone loves to hear. Perhaps you are right. Maybe one person will have a large following to make truly good changes to restore the image of this country and to preserve peace, justice, and liberty for all as it was intended. Some would say it is already happening with Obama.

Of course the government will have great speech givers, charmers, and beautiful smiles to try to regain the trust of the government, yet do you think that will be enough to rebalance a ruined economy of 11 trillion dollars and rising. Do you think it will bring justification of thousands of 19 year old men and women who died for nothing. Yes nothing! Was it to protect their country? Was it for oil or money to the private contractors to the executives to rich corporations. Ask yourself truthfully - Was it worth it?

The building was designed with exactly that scenario in mind and was constructed in a manner that the force of such a blow would be dissipated around the main support columns in the middle. And as Metal wing has pointed out, the majority of the plane is simple aluminum. Those materials that would have incinerated in the explosion milliseconds during impact and would have never made it that far into the building.

The debate is not whether it is plausible that structural damage “could” have been obtained by such a method, it is whether the damage conceivable from such a strike, could cause the “failure” that we witnessed that day. I submit to you that it is scientifically impossible.

How about a real investigation, by real people (not politicians), with real funding, not hampered by bureucratic red tape preventing access to all the evidence of that day?

They spent $60m to investigate Bill and Monica, they spent $3m later increased to $9m to investigate 9/11. To make things worse, they didn't even try to investigate it until 18 months AFTER the fact, and then only because the "Jersey Girls" got attention forcing them to.

Better yet, who did the WH appoint to head the investigation at first....? Henry Kissinger! Mr Secrecy himself! He later resigned when he was asked to detail his "client list" by the Jersey Girls during questioning. Many of his "clients" are Arab oil shieks, including the Bin Laden family...... sound like they wanted a REAL investigation to you?

Later they did pretty much the same thing by appointing Phillip Zelikow to head it. He wrote a book with Condi Rice, was on the Bush transition team when he entered the WH, and worked within the WH thru the Bush years. Again, what chance of an investigation if the WH may be complisite in the events of that day?

Bush and Cheney refused to be interviewed separately, refused to be sworn, would not allow their testimonies to be taped or open to the public, and reserved the right to edit any transcript before published to the commissions final report...... cause for alarm maybe? Did they have something to hide? Not like they were going to be asked state secrets, only questions regarding their knowledge of the events of THAT day!

As I stated before, too many questions, too many efforts to conceal, lack of proper funding or even a desire to investigate, lack of access to evidence..... sorry, but this smells of a coverup. My question on this would be "what are they trying to hide?".

Not meaning to contradict you in any way because I can and do understand your view, but even if this were ever to happen an investigation, there will always be someone/some group that will negate the findings. The new question will be about the group hired to investigate, the investigation itself, the people who hired them, the people who were not hired, etc.

Here on this thread members are offering (yourself included) life experience, work experience, education, knowledge on subject, etc. Yet it is not enough to satisfy "everyone's" curiosity.

We shall never satisfy everyone's curiousity and so long as one person can put/place doubt in the mind of another - this and any other subject shall remain unanswered (to some at least).

You may be right to a degree, but an open PUBLIC OR CITIZEN committee to investigate couldn't be a bad thing. OPEN means just that. Anyone has the right to ask questions or be represented. They need supeona powers, so need to be sanctioned by the government, but not staffed by government employees or contractors.

A real investigation would allow such things, give the PEOPLE a voice, the right to question, something lacking in the governments 9/11 commission. Phillip Zelikow directed their commission, decided what was relivent and what was not, what to ask and who to question, the type of questions..... they may as well have waterboarded them.... they got only the answers they wanted.

I had a first hand report of this. There is film footage of it as well. My nephew was flying with the Bush ontagage that day. They flew up the coast to Washignton, DC. He was peering out of the plane window crying at what he saw.My nephpew grew up in the Military in the DC area. This was his home. His home on fire.

After turning and heading to the secure place he was nearly shot out of the sky, as the last plane in the order, there was no room on the runway for them to land. It was real. No one can fake all that. Face it. It was real. Some things we are not privagled to know for our own protection. One can speculate about it. But It was real. Ask the thousands that lost loved ones that day. It was real to them.

I certainly don't know the physics behind building collapses caused by commercial jets crashing in to them. In general I accept the opinion of the experts, unconnected to the event, that have given a reasonable explanation of this. You can do some research and draw your own conclusions.

But let me assume, for a second, that I have a reasonable doubt. How do I reconcile the following facts that I do know.

Four aircraft are missing. Two aircraft hit the towers. One crashed in Pennsylvania.

If the pentagon was not struck by an aircraft, why make 4 aircraft go missing? And if the jets that struck the towers were not two of the ones that were missing, why make 2 commercial aircraft disappear but not use them to crash in to the towers, but use different ones. And if you did pull a switcheroo and crash different ones in to the towers.... why would they not use an aircraft to crash in to the pentagon?

And on a more personal note. What has happened to the 4 plane loads of passengers and crew? I know they are missing. There's a few families upset about it.

I am certain that two of those aircraft were hijacked... cell phone conversations would indicate such. All parties would have to be part of the consipiracy. One of those planes crashed in a field in Pennsylvania and remains were recovered. So I'm pretty sure where these passengers ended up. So at least one of these 4 commericial planes is accounted for.

There were many eye witnesses to the aircraft hitting the pentagon. here's a link to one... I can't vouch for the web site, but I've read many in various places. You can take it or leave it.

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/index.html

And what would be the motive? If the motive was to draw the U.S. in to a war in the middle east, 1 plane and 1 target would have likely been just as effective. Maybe 2 just to be safe. But 4 planes and 4 targets?

And there are plenty more questions that make the theory seem unreasonable. These questions, with the facts as I see them still lead me to believe the generally accepted explanation. As Occam's razor would suggest, I am leaning strongly toward the simplest solution.

F=MA works vertically too. The "Force" punching through the floor under the one damaged by the fire is doubled as there is now the mass of two floors falling times the acceleration of gravity and punching through the third floor below the one with the fire. Every floor multiplies the force of impact rapidly turning the failure in to a "free fall" condition where each floor below is overwhelmed by the increasing mass falling above. This is (again) not a theory but simple math. The "theory" of the floors below slowing and stopping the collapse is ridiculous. Each floor is only designed to support 40 to 100 pounds per square foot of live load. F=MA applies to the impact forces on the floors below. Jump on a bathroom scale and watch the needle.

Can we all agree there is a REAL investigation needed?

Disregard how the towers fell, what hit the Pentagon, if there really were "hijacked" planes involved.

Think about it.....
$60M for Clinton and Monica
$9M for the murder of 3000 people

$600B and counting on the Iraq war alone (we know we were led into this war with 9/11 based lies.... shows the Bush WH [maybe not GW himself] were capable if not culpable for the events of 9/11.... my suspictions lean strongly towards "Mr Torture", D. Cheney, knowing far more than anyone could imagine)

(by the way.... has your cell phone ever worked on an airplane in flight? Were you allowed to try? Do you think a hijacker would allow you to? If it is possible, why are airlines now considering installing systems that would cost them several million dollars to make it possible? Wouldn't it also work in a private aircraft as well then? .....just a thought)

Cell phones work line of sight. I'm a private pilot and have used one in the air, although not at any great altitude. But these planes were not very high. Those that claim they don't work in airplanes, because the aluminum shields them, are obviously wrong.... you can turn your phone on while taxiing and it works just fine. Back in 2001 it's very likely that phones that were used were likely older analog phones with a better range. And... and this is just a guess.... but I'm guessing that it would be pretty easy to check the cell phone record to see that it actually happened.

Since you know the FAA regs do not allow us to use our cell phones in the air I know you are jokeing. It would be so convenient to call to the FBO and have the fuel truck waiting but we can't do that. It would also be great to call our friends and tell them we are close and when it is time to come pick us up, but we can't turn the phone on in the air. It is sad that we will never know the range and usefulness of a cell phone in the plane. I have a Bose N/C headset with cellphone interface that someday might be useful.

Lol.. well, it was actually a passenger in this hypothetical situation....