What do you guys think about this one?
Please no politics, this is about the scientific aspects of 9/11.
Please post your thoughts below!
Here are some great resources on this topic:

http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

Im an aeronautical engineer student and I have to say, those were planes used in the attacks. There is just too much eye-witness evidence and the dynamics of the damage indicate an aircraft. We have discussed the failure of the structural steel in my materials, physics, statics, and dynamics courses and I have yet to see any evidence NOT supporting a plane hit. Ill quick focus on a common point 'against' the gov't story of the collapse of the towers is that the fire would not melt steel. The truth is you do not need to melt steel to make it fail. As you heat a material to even 30% of the melting temp the material begins re-crystalization and crystal growth. During this process the yield strength drastically begins to decrease as ductility drastically increases. So an individual steel beam that is being heated for a sustained period of time (30min is more than enough) plus the increased load due to fewer beams (some were destroyed from the impact) leads to plastic deformation of the steel. As time goes on, the strain (deformation) weakens the material as well as the longer the steel is heated the more crystal growth and reforming occurs leading to a progressively weaker material. So the steel was bound to fail from that hit. A missile impact and detonation would have been much MUCH more impact, just look up videos of missiles hitting targets. Also the way the towers collapsed follows the gov't story. A couple of floors fail, this leads to the floors above it literally falling on the floor beneath (a dozen or so floors of a building falling is a LOT of kinetic energy!) so the floors beneath, the hit causes them to fail leading to it to fall with the others leading to the next floor to fail from the hit and so on. Domino effect. As far as the Pentagon hit is concerned, I first thought it was a smaller aircraft like a corporate jet, but I found out the Pentagon is a freaking bunker so it makes sense its reinforced structure would shatter an aluminum aircraft. Watch the video of a F-4 being fired into a re-inforced cement wall. The F-4 simple evaporates! There is more I can say but Ill keep it as short as possible for now unless someone asks.

I agree, PLEASE no political stuff!!! Nothing about Big Brother either!!!

I watched, live on tv, an aircraft hit the world trade center.  End of discussion.

Honestly, I think it's disrespectful to even consider that it was a missile instead of a plane with passengers.

Unfortunately, like the moon landing, there will always be people who refuse to accept the truth.  I guess if it makes them feel better then I'll let them continue to live in denial, but we do NOT need to discuss this here, or anywhere.

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Oct 19^th, 2011 at 12:05am:


I totally agree, you say you don't want to get political, but theres other web sites that carry this nonsense! We don't need this BULLSHIT here! I say to the MODS  SHUT this DOWN

Regardless of how or why you think it happened, the common truth in both camps is that it DID happen, and a lot of innocent people lost their lives that day. This whole thread is in incredibly poor taste.