9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Over 18 ONLY! For grown-ups. . .

Moderators: Sluggo, Amskeptic

Post Reply
User avatar
Amskeptic
IAC "Help Desk"
IAC "Help Desk"
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by Amskeptic » Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:22 am

glasseye wrote:
Lanval wrote:Question answered. Again.
Huh? "Again"? I asked several pointed questions and you addressed none of them. Not one. Rather poor rebuttal, IMHO.
Lanval wrote:I'm done with this "conversation" ~ nothing will convince you you're wrong;
I'm not "wrong", any more than you're "right". I simply have unanswered questions

Hello MikeExtremelyPuzzledByColin,

Let's say I have read Popular Mechanics since I was a little boy (I have).
I used to read their car reviews with complete slavish attention to every word.
I even memorized the specifications pages. I resented the shit out of their review of the '63 bus up against the Ford Econoline and Corvair Greenbriar.
I have read several other magazines over the years. I now know VWs well enough to catch the errors easily. PV4, for example, reviewed the '73 Bus and went off half-cocked about how VW mysteriously narrowed the '73 bus by an inch "probably to improve the handling." WHAT? How about the new bumpers no longer had the side steps of the old ones.

My dearly departed uncle could rip innumerable articles in Sports Illustrated/ Road&Track/ Car&Driver/ Automobile Quarterly/ ad infinitum/ to shreds, because he was A) the object of the article and B) he was there, and he was continually baffled and pissed at the liberties taken by writers to make their arguments have internal logic. He also was subjected to "peer experts" in the antique automobile business, man, what steely patience he had to listen to blowhards bloviate about the cars he knew intimately while they had just picked up the hobby five years ago.

I have a healthy h-e-a-l-t-h-y skepticism of what I read!

The "conventional wisdom" (that I did not accuse you of accepting - you offered that you do) of how these buildings collapsed I cannot accept, not because of an ExtremelyPuzzledByColin defect of personality or character or intelligence or logic nor by a need to "hate on the government", but because there are too many loose ends surrounding the event. Like any scientist will tell you, Subsequent Theories always evolve with ever-widening spheres of evidence. The real reasons for these unprecedented building collapses will necessarily include greater evidence than the current bullshit explanations. Einstein toasted Sir Isaac Newton with a far greater reach of understanding, but guess what? everything Newton had postulated fit inside the new greater understanding. I feel like Einstein being rebuked by Newton. There is a vast additional amount of evidence that just is not being addressed.

a little Wiki, anyone?

The FEMA report also determined that thinning of the steel had occurred by the severe high-temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation, that heating of the steel in a hot corrosive environment at temperatures approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) resulted in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel, and that this sulfidation attack of steel grain boundaries accelerated the corrosion and erosion of the steel.[54] The FEMA report concluded that the severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of the steel columns examined were "very unusual events" and that there was "no clear explanation" for the source of the sulfur found.[55]
. . . and . . .
The large pile of debris left on the site burned for three months, resisting attempts to extinguish the blaze until the majority of the rubble was finally removed from the site.[82][83]

Three months? What building fire/ collapse has ever taken that long to put out? Perhaps one laced with thermite? Sort of like the confusion firefighters have had with old Volkswagen fires when the magnesium gets going ... ?

I reject the official explanation (get ready Mike, steel yourself) because it makes no sense. I know when people are stretching too far. I told you to your face when you still liked me, that I will never fill the shoes of "guru" because I am far happier to say "I don't know" when confronted by things I do knot know. I also told you to your face that I will always defer to the experience of my customers before I would ever ask them to accept my "answers", particularly when my answers conflict with their experience. Here in this discussion, there are two of us at least, who refuse to stop at little "a" answers when we have big "Q" questions.

There is no fucking way on this Earthly Plane that central steel column supports can COLLAPSE so fucking entirely neatly at the speed of gravity when it has been exhaustively explained by the information PROVIDED that buildings CANNOT just collapse through their greatest resistance. It is not I, nor others who have questions like glasseye does, who is stuck in an illogic loop, "who just doesn't get it". Sometimes the truth is more complex and more messy than a tidy little report with glaring omissions.

The scope of the NIST investigation was focused on identifying "the sequence of events" that triggered the collapse, and did not include detailed analysis of the collapse mechanism itself (after the point at which events made the collapse inevitable).

When all the evidence is taken into account, there are remaining questions. For those who cannot tolerate ambiguities and loose ends, this is NOT the time to claim "cognitive dissonance" in those of us curious enough to wait for answers that have yet to be generated. Hell no. Not when you refuse to acknowledge iron microspheres and sulphur residue and molten steel (melting airplane aluminum does not glow orange-red) down in the basement levels where even a collapsing building that had a fire 78 stories up CANNOT TRANSMIT THAT SORT OF HEAT. Even if the jet fuel had not completely combusted within seconds, and had theoretically poured down elevator shafts to the basement, the thermal insulation on the beams was intact throughout the building save for a few floors where the planes hit. We did not have "days of jet fuel fires ...." in the basement!!!

The behavior of those three buildings and the subsequent physical evidence can currently be fully explained only by targeted demolition. That doesn't mean I am a zombie "it was a demolition" groupie. I don't know what happened! I am trying to fit all the evidence together! You cannot deny the evidence to make me buy your acceptance of the official story. I am not demanding that you "believe" me or accept my questions, so don't demand that I stop with my questions. They are based in reality, on physical material reality. Deal with it. Even acknowledge it!! as you go ahead and disagree that iron microspheres and sulphur residue and that the force of acceleration of the upper building mass cannot be used in the pancake scenario when it was clearly blown up way up top, all of these questions cannot yet be explained by the current conclusions.

Note, please, that I am not going to descend into any judgments of those who think that the WTC building collapses were all due to the plane crashes. I could give a damn to answer to anyone saying one argument is more preposterous than another. The fact that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred at all was Preposterous.
Colin
BobD - 78 Bus . . . 112,730 miles
Chloe - 70 bus . . . 217,593 miles
Naranja - 77 Westy . . . 142,970 miles
Pluck - 1973 Squareback . . . . . . 55,600 miles
Alexus - 91 Lexus LS400 . . . 96,675 miles

Lanval
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by Lanval » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:55 pm

glasseye wrote:
Lanval wrote: Question answered. Again.
Huh? "Again"? I asked several pointed questions and you addressed none of them. Not one. Rather poor rebuttal, IMHO.

This from the guy who paraphrased an anonymous "expert" to support his argument, and who, when called on it, responded with silence....

:roll:

User avatar
ruckman101
Lord God King Bwana
Location: Up next to a volcano.
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by ruckman101 » Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:46 pm

If the empirical evidence is so cut and dried, why is the issue still being studied and debated amongst the experts?


"But not everyone in the industry agrees with the simpler, official explanation. Roughly 1,600 architects and structural engineers across the country, who have banded together in a group called "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth," say it does not fully account for the buildings' collapses."




neal :munky2:
The slipper has no teeth.

User avatar
glasseye
IAC Addict!
Location: Kootenays, BC
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by glasseye » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:42 pm

Lanval wrote:
glasseye wrote:
Lanval wrote:Question answered. Again.
Huh? "Again"? I asked several pointed questions and you addressed none of them. Not one. Rather poor rebuttal, IMHO.

This from the guy who paraphrased an anonymous "expert" to support his argument, and who, when called on it, responded with silence....

:roll:
Sorry, let's go back. By "expert", do you mean the guy whose interview I photographed for "The World at War" ? Is this what you're referring to?
"This war will pay for itself."
Paul Wolfowitz, speaking of Iraq.

User avatar
glasseye
IAC Addict!
Location: Kootenays, BC
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by glasseye » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:51 pm

RSorak 71Westy wrote:"The only story more preposterous than "It was an inside job" is the story the folks who believe it was an inside job tell to support their idea."
But, I ain't telling any story at all. I have no story. I'm simply pointing to obvious irregularities, deficiencies and inconsistencies in the official story. And asking questions. Lots of questions.


How about an answer to this one:

How likely is it that something that has never happened before, anywhere, and that appears to defy both logic and simple physics can happen three times in one day at one location?

How likely?
"This war will pay for itself."
Paul Wolfowitz, speaking of Iraq.

User avatar
Amskeptic
IAC "Help Desk"
IAC "Help Desk"
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by Amskeptic » Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:50 am

glasseye wrote:
RSorak 71Westy wrote:"The only story more preposterous than "It was an inside job" is the story the folks who believe it was an inside job tell to support their idea."
But, I ain't telling any story at all. I have no story. I'm simply pointing to obvious irregularities, deficiencies and inconsistencies in the official story. And asking questions. Lots of questions.


How about an answer to this one:

How likely is it that something that has never happened before, anywhere, and that appears to defy both logic and simple physics can happen three times in one day at one location?

How likely?
This is the crux of it.

This is why I look at this discussion with some amazement, the unexpected vehemence of some respondents.
Colin
BobD - 78 Bus . . . 112,730 miles
Chloe - 70 bus . . . 217,593 miles
Naranja - 77 Westy . . . 142,970 miles
Pluck - 1973 Squareback . . . . . . 55,600 miles
Alexus - 91 Lexus LS400 . . . 96,675 miles

User avatar
RSorak 71Westy
IAC Addict!
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by RSorak 71Westy » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:52 pm

By not accepting the official explanation this implies you think that there was some kind of conspiracy. To think there was some kind of conspiracy means that something would have to been done to the buildings in advance to help them fall. This would involve many people and according my knowledge of human nature it's impossible to keep a sensational secret this long.

Besides how could anyone do something in advance to the buildings and then make the planes crash into those same places? Far to complicated to have happened.
Take care,
Rick
Stock 1600 w/dual Solex 34's and header. mildly ported heads and EMPI elephant's feet. SVDA W/pertronix. 73 Thing has been sold. BTW I am a pro wrench have been fixing cars for living for over 30 yrs.

DoubleNickle
I'm New!
Location: NW Oregon
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by DoubleNickle » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:27 pm

Don't know if this link will work but it's an interesting new theory...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... c78898.131
1975 Riviera
1.8 FI

DoubleNickle
I'm New!
Location: NW Oregon
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by DoubleNickle » Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:26 pm

I have followed this discussion from the beginning and find it quite interesting to say the least. I am not a structural engineer, nor am I an expert in any kind of structural architecture or design. I am by trade a Horticulturist, raised thru the '60's and 70's with degrees in Psychology, Political Science and Horticulture.... nice mix huh? What my experiences and education have taught me is to question authority... not except the standard explanation of events when offered - especially by our government. Doesn't mean I believe in conspiracy, just means I believe our government isn't always forthcoming with the complete truth. I had a great professor in college that stressed the importance of being able to recognize the difference between rhetoric and reality. I would offer that the folks in this thread that have expressed concerns with the official explanation of events surrounding 911 are not as much conspiracy theorists as they are folks like me that just have questions. Doesn't mean conspiracy at all - just means that there are things that don't add up, that perhaps - it is after all unprescendented - that perhaps there's more to the story. Perhaps there's not... that could be proven over time to be the case... so be it. But god help us if we quit questioning. Paul Harvey used to talk about people in the US being Lemmings ... I for one don't intend to go over the cliff with the masses. I also believe Jefferson would have wanted us to ask questions and demand answers from time to time. The original question was "do the conspiracy theories surrounding 911 hold water" - the simple answer is probably not (to endorse a conspiracy thoery would give too much credit to the CIA, NSA, FBI, DEA or whatever other shadow organization's out there) but there are certainly questions that have yet to be answered - may never be answered - but still need to be asked. The fact that our government was so quick to release an offical explanation didn't help their case. Once in awhile it would be ok to say... You know, we really don't know what happened but we're working on it and when we have a good idea we'll let you know what we know - and we'll use what we learn to keep something like this from ever happening again. I don't want you to think I am anti US governtment either - I wouldn't choose to live anywhere else in the world - but I believe to be a good citizen means to have a certain level of activism and to constantly question - at all levels. Enough rambling.... please agree to disagree but respect each others opinions... we are after all each entitled to our own. :)
1975 Riviera
1.8 FI

User avatar
dingo
IAC Addict!
Location: oregon - calif
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by dingo » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:43 pm

..thats very well put, 55. I would go so far as to say that keeping open-minded and genuinely questioning all authority is closer to the idea of democracy than any of the superficial rhetoric labeled 'patriotic'. Bill Moyers said something to the effect that 'almost everything stated by politicians/authorities thru the media is carefully worded to hide information, not reveal information."
'71 Kombi, 1600 dp

';78 Tranzporter 2L

" Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it itches."

User avatar
ruckman101
Lord God King Bwana
Location: Up next to a volcano.
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by ruckman101 » Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:17 am

DoubleNickle wrote:I have followed this discussion from the beginning and find it quite interesting to say the least. I am not a structural engineer, nor am I an expert in any kind of structural architecture or design. I am by trade a Horticulturist, raised thru the '60's and 70's with degrees in Psychology, Political Science and Horticulture.... nice mix huh? What my experiences and education have taught me is to question authority... not except the standard explanation of events when offered - especially by our government. Doesn't mean I believe in conspiracy, just means I believe our government isn't always forthcoming with the complete truth. I had a great professor in college that stressed the importance of being able to recognize the difference between rhetoric and reality. I would offer that the folks in this thread that have expressed concerns with the official explanation of events surrounding 911 are not as much conspiracy theorists as they are folks like me that just have questions. Doesn't mean conspiracy at all - just means that there are things that don't add up, that perhaps - it is after all unprescendented - that perhaps there's more to the story. Perhaps there's not... that could be proven over time to be the case... so be it. But god help us if we quit questioning. Paul Harvey used to talk about people in the US being Lemmings ... I for one don't intend to go over the cliff with the masses. I also believe Jefferson would have wanted us to ask questions and demand answers from time to time. The original question was "do the conspiracy theories surrounding 911 hold water" - the simple answer is probably not (to endorse a conspiracy thoery would give too much credit to the CIA, NSA, FBI, DEA or whatever other shadow organization's out there) but there are certainly questions that have yet to be answered - may never be answered - but still need to be asked. The fact that our government was so quick to release an offical explanation didn't help their case. Once in awhile it would be ok to say... You know, we really don't know what happened but we're working on it and when we have a good idea we'll let you know what we know - and we'll use what we learn to keep something like this from ever happening again. I don't want you to think I am anti US governtment either - I wouldn't choose to live anywhere else in the world - but I believe to be a good citizen means to have a certain level of activism and to constantly question - at all levels. Enough rambling.... please agree to disagree but respect each others opinions... we are after all each entitled to our own. :)

Paul Harvey????
Just kidding. I think you've summed it up in a nutshell. :notworthy: No pun intended.


neal
The slipper has no teeth.

RussellK
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by RussellK » Thu Sep 29, 2011 6:34 am

Isn't it amusing that Al Qaeda wants Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to shut up already about 9/11 conspiracies too?

User avatar
Amskeptic
IAC "Help Desk"
IAC "Help Desk"
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by Amskeptic » Thu Sep 29, 2011 8:07 am

RussellK wrote:Isn't it amusing that Al Qaeda wants Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to shut up already about 9/11 conspiracies too?
Yes. I, being possessed of very little patience, would not care to hear half-baked rants by intellectually lazy people harboring resentments and agendas. But i would sit all day in rapt attention at an engineering symposeum devoted to the mechanics of 9/11.
Colin
BobD - 78 Bus . . . 112,730 miles
Chloe - 70 bus . . . 217,593 miles
Naranja - 77 Westy . . . 142,970 miles
Pluck - 1973 Squareback . . . . . . 55,600 miles
Alexus - 91 Lexus LS400 . . . 96,675 miles

User avatar
ruckman101
Lord God King Bwana
Location: Up next to a volcano.
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by ruckman101 » Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:06 pm

Lots of people, lots of questions. It's a shame getting to the bottom of it wasn't as important at the time as building a case to go to war in Iraq.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/9/29/m ... call_to_re


neal
The slipper has no teeth.

User avatar
Velokid1
IAC Addict!
Status: Offline

Re: 9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

Post by Velokid1 » Thu Sep 29, 2011 6:21 pm

I've been following this thread wondering why it is that I care so little whether our govt was involved or not. I think it's because it changes nothing for me. If they didn't have anything to do with it, it doesn't change the fact that they could have, and would have. That the wealthy men in power care not one shot for you or me or any worker in that building. They care about their wealth and their companies' profits, and those things alone. Which is how a person becomes that wealthy and powerful. Not by talent or because they love their lives but because they are obsessed with the game of acquiring wealth.

Whether those men had anything to do with it or not doesn't change the fact that they are the kind of people who WOULD.

Let's be done with it and instead be vigilant for the incident that's around the next corner.

Post Reply