5

My answer has been deleted with a pretty strange reason: Did planes crash into the WTC on 9-11?

This is a theoretical answer, but we expect answers to be based on facts - not to make a speculative prediction. I am deleting it for this reason.

I feel like this is a very opinionated removal of my answer. If you don't think it is helpful and speculative, downvote it. I'm stating that one of the claims in the original citation is wrong. Other claims were covered in the other answers and I don't want to duplicate that information. I do not see how my answer is any different from the most upvoted answer to the question at the moment - it merely outlines why the claims are not justified. This is exactly what I do.

According to FAQ, the reasons for deletion are:

  • commentary on the question or other answers
  • asking another, different question
  • “thanks!” or “me too!” responses

(my answer is not any of the above)

  • exact duplicates of other answers

(this was not covered in other answers)

  • barely more than a link to an external site

(no)

  • not even a partial answer to the actual question

(it is a partial answer, concerning the last paragraph of the claim which was not covered by other answers)

I'm surprised that the only answer supported by actual science is removed as "not based on facts". I'm a physicist by the way...

  • This question is a bit old, but due to a Community edit it got up in the list, so read through it before realizing it was old. Allow me to point you in the direction of this question on meta right now which is quite relevant to half your question (it should never have been deleted, the other half is whether it should be up or downvoted). meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2908/… (Please make your opinion known by voting on the various answers). – David Mulder Aug 27 '14 at 21:23
-1

The answer was deleted because it's not an answer to the question. If the question was "Is it possible physically that a high speed moving object crashes by crunching the head before the tail?", then it would be a very good answer.

On the other hand, the question is about whether a specific event happened "Did planes crash into the WTC on 9-11?": what is the evidence that it happened? The fact that it's physically feasible does not prove that it happened, or is an answer to the question.

More in general, we don't (generally) allow theoretical answers for the same reason:

  1. if they show something is possible based on physical law, they don't show that it happened
  2. if they show something is impossible based on physical law, then they could be accepted, but they still need to be applied specifically to the situation, and not to a gendankenexperiment of the situation.

Your answer falls in category 1, here is an example of point 2:

If the question is "Will you get shocked if a lightning strikes you in a car?", then "It's impossible because the car is a Faraday cage" is not only not allowed here, it's actually wrong. The correct answer is that "It depends, because not all cars are Faraday cages".

On a physics site, where the public can be assumed to be physicists, one can assume that answers like the former get voted upon accordingly. Skeptics' public though are experts in examining evidence, not physics and can't really judge -- we answer questions on any physical science, plus history, social sciences, etc... They might look at the link in the latter answer and ponder whether the "National Lightning Safety Institute" is a reputable source, not whether Maxwell laws allow for it.

  • 5
    1. The answer by Articuno should be then deleted for exactly the same reason. (as well as a huge amount of other answers son Skeptics) 2. I believe wrong answers should not be deleted. For that, there is voting system. Moderators are there to clean up spam & misuse of the site, not to judge the answers' clarity and relevance. 3. I do understand your reasoning, I just do not agree with the action. – sashkello Mar 9 '14 at 23:41
  • @sash 1. the other answer links to the official report and other positive evidence. I do think that what he writes is in fact supported by the evidence, which he is adapting to answer point by point. I don't see how this is a theoretical answer; 2. We never delete answers simply because they are wrong, however answers that do not cite evidence are much more likely to be wrong. So, it does happen we delete wrong answers but always for other reasons. I understand how it can look different. – Sklivvz Aug 26 '14 at 20:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .