I hate conspiricy theories. I hate Rosie O'Donnell. But I've been looking at this and damn it all to hell if I'm not really starting to worry that those towers were brought down with demolitions.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
The notion has been thoroughly refuted. There're reasons the really popular videos and websites advocating such stances have to keep taking down and changing their 'evidence'.
Is there any particular piece of evidence you find worrisome that you'd like to see refuted in detail?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Gah. Jay and Resh both return to the board on the same day? What did we do to deserve this?
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
Haven't we been through this several times here already?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
I hate conspiracy theories too, but the idea that JFK's assassination was in fact a suicide assisted by time travel, especially considering the video evidence produced by the BBC (in its Red Dwarf science series) has begun to make me question if it can be true.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Gah. Jay and Resh both return to the board on the same day? What did we do to deserve this?
Probably the same thing that brought you back.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
I'm starting to worry about alien abductions, myself.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Dang! My tinfoil hat ripped last week, and I haven't made a new one yet. I imagine that I'm responsible for most of the things in this thread.
Sorry Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
I've been playing a lot of records backwards lately.
Posted by Little_Doctor (Member # 6635) on :
My favorite argument against the conspiracies was the observance that the guys who made loose change are still alive. If the government really was responsible for 9/11 and didn't have a problem killing so many innocent Americans, why not get rid of those guys before their ridiculous movie hit the Internet?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
That's what the government wants you to think. Killing them would be a giveaway.
Posted by RunningBear (Member # 8477) on :
They were killed. didnt you notice?
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
The government tried, but the guys behind Loose Change distributed Guy Fawkes costumes to hundreds of thousands of citizens, and the government killed the wrong people.
The ensuing riots resulted in the overthrow of the democratic tyranny, and we're currently enjoying a utopian anarchy.
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
Ah so thats what that was.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: I hate conspiricy theories. I hate Rosie O'Donnell. But I've been looking at this and damn it all to hell if I'm not really starting to worry that those towers were brought down with demolitions.
...
You may cease worrying until some evidence comes out to support those claims that stands up to critical review.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Some things don't stand up on the face of it. This blows most conspiracy theories out of the water:
* It's hard to keep secret things as big as a plot to blow up WTC, when you have to share it with as many people as you'd have to to make it work. It would be big news. There would be FBBUB (Federal Bureau of Blowing Up Buildings) agents in Switzerland right now trading full disclosure for immunity
* The motive for these conspiracies is almost always money. But you'd make way more money investing in the stock market than you would from destroying billions of dollars in property, which makes everyone poorer instead. Even if you're a building contractor, and building contractors don't run the FBBUB.
But the lack of credible evidence would be enough.
Conspiracies exist, but usually the obvious culprit and the obvious motive is a good enough explanation.
The real story here is the power of rhetoric. It doesn't matter how smart you are, if you listen to something silly long enough it starts to sound reasonable.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Occam just slipped and cut his face. Poor Occam. He should get one of those safety razors.
Posted by Todoni (Member # 10460) on :
It all got started because some of the buildings did have to be demolished. I think it was building #4 (I am probably way wrong here, but there were at least 7 buildings in the complex, 2 the big towers, and the rest all 9-20 stories) Well one or two of the small buildings sustained so much damage they decided to bring those down on purpose rather than risk them falling down without any warning while resuce crews were still in the area. Not a lot of news coverage for this because everyone was feeling so much pain. My company had a small 2 room branch in one of those smaller buildings and we were told to get all of our stuff and get out.
So someone could easily take the secretive stuff about a small building at the world trade center being dynamited on purposer and think that meant one of the big two towers, and either be confused, or use it to twist the truth around to suit some wierdo purpose.
Posted by Todoni (Member # 10460) on :
It all got started because some of the buildings did have to be demolished. I think it was building #4 (I am probably way wrong here, but there were at least 7 buildings in the complex, 2 the big towers, and the rest all 9-20 stories) Well one or two of the small buildings sustained so much damage they decided to bring those down on purpose rather than risk them falling down without any warning while resuce crews were still in the area. Not a lot of news coverage for this because everyone was feeling so much pain. My company had a small 2 room branch in one of those smaller buildings and we were told to get all of our stuff and get out.
So someone could easily take the secretive stuff about a small building at the world trade center being dynamited on purposer and think that meant one of the big two towers, and either be confused, or use it to twist the truth around to suit some wierdo purpose.
Posted by Reshpeckobiggle (Member # 8947) on :
The whole thing about the scope of the conspiracy is what kills it for me pretty much. I find it nigh impossible to imagine how it could have been done. But the video of what looks like "squids" going of several floors below where the collapse was taking place looks exactly like what happens during a controlled demolition. Then there´s the black smoke which someone pointed out (and it's true) only gets produced when a fire is smoldering. But the hardest thing for me to swallow is the way WTC 7 came down. It suffered a fraction of the damage that the buildings closer to the towers received, and they didn't collapse. And the video of it falling shows the classic "crimpling" effect which is done during controlled implosions. It falls down perfectly. And there were only isolated pockets of fire, by the firefighters own accounts up to the point that they received warning that the building was going to come down. The fact that the CIA and FBI offices are located there don't help.
Please disprove this for me. Like I said, I hate conspiracy theories and I'll gladly welcome evidence that effectively refutes this stupid thing.
Posted by Reshpeckobiggle (Member # 8947) on :
Also, the towers were closed off the entire weekend prior or a week and a half prior, and power was completely shut off. This was for supposed Internet upgrades to the entire building. That would have been when the buildings would have been wired. And it seems that the whole place was a money pit, and were long overdue for asbestos removal which would have cost the port authority billions. Theres a whole bunch of other stuff from this DVD someone showed me that I can't remember, but the whole thing just seems to fit so nicely. I'm just saying they (the conspiracy theorists, who also do a good job of making me not want to have anything to do with them) tell a good story, and maybe the official story deserves a more critical eye.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
In "this DVD" "someone" showed you that you "can't remember".
Well, who could fail to be convinced in the face of such overwhelming evidence?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Nothing says motive like accusing a bunch of white-boy corporate types of blowing up the largest white-boy corporate tower in the US (if you add the two towers together, anyways). That's like accusing them of conspiring to raze a golf course to the ground.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: [QB] The whole thing about the scope of the conspiracy is what kills it for me pretty much. I find it nigh impossible to imagine how it could have been done. But the video of what looks like "squids" going of several floors below where the collapse was taking place looks exactly like what happens during a controlled demolition.
First of all, they're called "squibs," not "squids." Secondly, the video shows them going off as the building collapses. In real controlled demolitions, the squibs are the first things you see- the puffs of smoke are followed by the collapse of the building because they're what sets off the demolition in the first place. Furthermore, the puffs on the WTC are seen descending floor to floor, rather than going off all at once as you would expect if they were remote detonations. What was actually happening was that the pressure of, y'know, thousands of tons of office building falling from above is compressing the air in the floors below and blowing out the windows.
quote:Then there´s the black smoke which someone pointed out (and it's true) only gets produced when a fire is smoldering.
False. The color of the smoke is due to sooty particulate matter, like plastic, carpeting, and dead people.
quote:But the hardest thing for me to swallow is the way WTC 7 came down. It suffered a fraction of the damage that the buildings closer to the towers received, and they didn't collapse.
quote:And the video of it falling shows the classic "crimpling" effect which is done during controlled implosions. It falls down perfectly.
The fact that controlled demolitions happen to "crimp" does not suggest that uncontrolled demolitions do not. In fact, AFAIK a building of that size will always "fall down perfectly," at least insofar as it will fall straight down rather than collapse to one side and obliterate half a city block like in the movies. We're talking a big ass chunk of material being pulled down very hard by gravity, and which suddenly no longer has anything holding it up.
quote:And there were only isolated pockets of fire, by the firefighters own accounts up to the point that they received warning that the building was going to come down. The fact that the CIA and FBI offices are located there don't help.
First of all, cite please on the "firefighters' own accounts"?
Secondly, does this look like a small fire to you? We're talking about one of the largest buildings in the history of civilization, remember. And contrary to what the conspiracy theorists like to claim, you don't have to melt steel to cause catastrophic collapse. It doesn't actually take that much heat to weaken steel- how do you think they bent the steel into its original shape to begin with?
quote:Theres a whole bunch of other stuff from this DVD someone showed me that I can't remember, but the whole thing just seems to fit so nicely. I'm just saying they (the conspiracy theorists, who also do a good job of making me not want to have anything to do with them) tell a good story, and maybe the official story deserves a more critical eye.
Resh, haven't you learned by now that citing some DVD/book/whatever you saw somewhere just doesn't cut it?
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
Much profanity in the link above.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
A documentary I say clearly stated that a large reaosn why the buildings collapsed is do to trustes. Basically the intiial crash burned off the fire proofing on the materials and the resulting plane fuel fire weakened the trusts. when one floor collapsed it fell onto the next one below, like a domino affect. This also contributes to the buildings falling straight down as the damage was in the upper levels not the lower ones until the upper levels fell ontop of it.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"...this DVD someone showed me that I can't remember..."
I am very near certain that the video Reshpeckobiggle is referencing is 911 Mysteries. It was seductive the first time I watched it, but as my thread shows, I soon saw the blatant errors.
Resh, if you don't have the time to go through and read all of the counterpoints (it is time consuming), and it was 911 Mysteries that you saw, consider watching Screw 911 Mysteries. It is 911 Mysteries with subtitles and pauses so that the maker of Screw 911 Mysteries can show all of the problems of that video. In the process, you can start to see all of the errors in the Conspiracy Theories.
I do feel for you tho. I felt manipulated from 911 Mysteries--partly because I have a belief system that says governments left unchecked can do horrific things. I don't like the direction our government seems to be heading. I wish we had more cameras looking at the the government instead of the citizens. However, misleading conspiracy theories only make people more blase to government crimes in the long run.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I am more open to the possibility that some in the Government let it happen than that they made it happen. However, considering the 911 panel showing the history of bad decisions about terrorisim, it is still a remote possibility to incompetance.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Cheney I could maybe see allowing 9/11.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Steven: that's only because a huge mythology has built up on the left surrounding Cheney. I doubt you know the man well enough to know his heart.
Why don't you go hunting with him? (dammit, I can't even resist making a cheney joke...)
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Ummm....follow the money. I've never looked at Haliburton's stock prices before and after 9/11, but I would guess they are higher now than before. Cheney has been paid several million dollars in compensation from them since taking office. I'm not saying it proves anything, because I can't see that it does.
To be fair, though, Cheney was not in office during the whole Osama bin Laden affair during the 90's. I assume he didn't have access to privileged info regarding that. If he had, that might be different.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Gah. Jay and Resh both return to the board on the same day? What did we do to deserve this?
Probably the same thing that brought you back.
Posted by Reshpeckobiggle (Member # 8947) on :
quote:Originally posted by lem: Thanks for reminding me of that link aspectre.
I am very near certain that the video Reshpeckobiggle is referencing is 911 Mysteries. It was seductive the first time I watched it, but as my thread shows, I soon saw the blatant errors.
Resh, if you don't have the time to go through and read all of the counterpoints (it is time consuming), and it was 911 Mysteries that you saw, consider watching Screw 911 Mysteries. It is 911 Mysteries with subtitles and pauses so that the maker of Screw 911 Mysteries can show all of the problems of that video. In the process, you can start to see all of the errors in the Conspiracy Theories.
I do feel for you tho. I felt manipulated from 911 Mysteries--partly because I have a belief system that says governments left unchecked can do horrific things. I don't like the direction our government seems to be heading. I wish we had more cameras looking at the the government instead of the citizens. However, misleading conspiracy theories only make people more blase to government crimes in the long run.
That was the DVD. Thanks. I'm gonna watch that video you mentioned. The word you used -seductive- is accurate, I think.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: Ummm....follow the money. I've never looked at Haliburton's stock prices before and after 9/11, but I would guess they are higher now than before.
Based on the last decade of stock prices, Haliburton has performed similarly to the SP500 and the DowJones, all up approximately 80% since the late 90s.
Haliburton closed at 28.73 per share on 9-10-01, and 26.6 per share on 9-17-01 (when the NYSE reopened).
Doesn't look to me like there's any evidence there.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I wonder if they've posted higher profits in the 00s as opposed to the 90s.
Posted by Little_Doctor (Member # 6635) on :
I love the opening comic.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
Oh, wow. That folding the $20 bill trick is priceless. Along with spelling out Osama's name. And 9+11=20? I think I'm going to go cry myself to sleep.
Posted by Little_Doctor (Member # 6635) on :
If you enjoyed that you should read some of his other essays, they're hilairous.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
Debunking 9/11 Myths is a book that was published by Popular Mechanics. It takes a very extensive look at all of the conspiracy theories, and debunks every single one of them, at least the ones that existed at the time it was published last year. The nuts in charge of the conspiracy theories always have new explanations and "facts," so I imagine a new volume is probably necessary, but I don't believe anything is planned.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)