/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6029145
The planes were much smaller, travelling at lower speeds and the buildings had much greater tolerances.

Also, your terminal velocity claim is as laughable as it is laughably easy to disprove. Note the debris massively overtaking the collapsing portion.

does nobody realize that most of the jet fuel was burned up in the giant fireball on impact?

Also even though steel only has to weaken, there's no chance in hell that the beams weakened uni formally from top to bottom for a downward collapse.

saying the steel was "only weakened" actually supports "conspiracy theories". If the beams were only weakened the building would have fallen to the side as the force of the building coming down would have favored the weakened section.

>more disproof of pancake. Top section falling to side as nature intends yet it still "pancaked" and turned to dust

Putting the fact that 3k innocent people died in this terrible tragedy, have any of you ever stopped to think how unbelievably fucking awesome this was?