rockdrummer

You have done your homework on the heat required to vaporize aluminum. So lets assume there is no fire at all. Lets just work with the pure laws of physics involved here. What about considering the following hypothisis;

When a mostly aluminum plane impacts a reinforced concrete wall (such as the exterior of the Pentagon) at 700-800 feet per second, much of the kinetic energy of the plane converts to thermal energy, and much of the aluminum converts to vapor, burning to aluminum oxide.

Now add to that additional heat from the explosion and fire. What is compelling to me are those laws of physics and other known facts are what debunk the conspiracy. Regarding the pancaking of the WTC towers. I disagree with you. The were many floors above where the planes hit. It was the weight of all of those floors comming down that started the pancaking effect. As each floor collapsed, additional weight was put on the next floor down so the speed of the collapse would actually increase as the additional weight from the floors above was applied. You are right when you say a single floor was designed to hold more than it required. It was not designed to hold the weight that came down upon it on that day. I have seen documentaries on TV that tell excatly why those buildings collapsed that are backed up by what's known about how the buildings were erected, the laws of physics, computer models, eye witness accounts and actual evidence from the site. Now are the media, public citizens and the scientific community involved in the conspiracy too?

So lets examine the otherside of this issue. Lets assume it was a conspiracy. What motivated the conspiracy and what was gained and who gained from it? If it's a conspiracy by the US government, why did they do it? To support the war on terror movement? I don't think so. That would be like shooting your self in the foot just to prove a point. And do you honestly belive a government that put us to war on the false pretense of WMD in Iraq is capabable of such a thing when they could not even plant WMD in Iraq to support their claims? Do you really think that planting WMD would be more difficult than orchestrating 9/11. So if that's not it, then what? All I have seen thus far are theorys about each incident that are shot down by science, eyewitness accounts and evidence. The only question I would have to those that believe it's a conspiracy is WHY? I would also wonder if they belived the US government manipulated the weather to cause hurricane Katrina so they could drive up the price of oil. Both are equally obsurd.