[Closed] 9/11

Who knows....good video though.

<

Watched til the first blatant misinformation, lost interest.

Watched til the first blatant misinformation, lost interest.

re tell it how it is NorthW

got to architects and engineers for 911 truth

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Quite a lack of information, Northwind, from you about exactly what was "blatant misinformation". or should we automatically know that?

Where's Kaesae when you need him, eh? 😉

This is old news...

is this bike related?

Really? OK, the first one that jumps out at me is the "missing money" (which people pretend was actually lost, rather than just poorly accounted for due to the DOD's sprawling and antiquated systems).

But you can have a second one for free, because in the next breath they claim falsely that it was announced the day before (9/11 nuts like to pretend that the attacks were a distraction from that, when in fact it was originally made public in 2000.)

There might well be something earlier in the vid, though, so I can't promise that's the very [i]first[/i] misinformation.

Oh just realised. Quite right - most vital points at hand here are a; it was a while ago and we can just forget all about it now, and b; posted in the wrong forum and therefore beneath contempt.

Not forgetting c; definitely in a category called conspiracy, and therefore also not worthy of discussion - isn't it fabulous to live in a world where conspiracies just don't exist? Except - er, hang on - isn't it the official line that these terrorists [i]did[/i] conspire to commit these crimes? So - it's ok for conspiracies to exist, provided the narrative is set by [i]our[/i] official good guys.

Many respected architects and engineers think we should have an independent investigation into the collapse of the 3 skyscrapers.
Yes, THREE skyscrapers not 2. It makes no sense to these architects and engineers at all. But what do they know? They are probably crazy.

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Actually Northwind, that's the first I ever heard about missing money, so that didn't sound any bells with me. Guess that means that everything else in that video is also false. Makes sense.

Oh hang on though - if there is one truth in there, does that mean by the same "logic" that everything else is true?

It's all just too complicated - better just ignore it.

[url= http://www.davidicke.com/articles/911-mainmenu-33 ]The truth is out there...somewhere...probably[/url]

glenp - Member

Guess that means that everything else in that video is also false. Makes sense.

Nope- but it does tell you that the makers of the video are either liars or incompetents. So why waste my time watching a video made by at best, an incompetent?

It's all too frequently the case with these alleged conspiracies that the people who subscribe to them have not examined evidence from both sides. There seems to be a tendency to form a conclusion before a thorough critical examination of the evidence. Also, many people are seemingly incapable of determining what good evidence actually means.

For example I've spoken to people who believe all sorts of craziness because a website/YouTube video has posted an explanation with no empirical evidence or credible sources.

Please look at both sides of the argument, examine who has the most evidence/most reliable evidence and then form a conclusion. The last time I looked in to this, all of the conspiracy theories surrounding the controlled demolition of the towers was completely evicerated by numerous highly respected experts in their respective fields. A glance through that website is offering no new compelling evidence that makes me want to change my mind.

Conspiracies definitely exist, but they're ususally of the more mundane CIA assaniation, subtefuge variety and even they usually get exposed. Apart from the lack of credible evidence, I just don't think the US Government has the competency to pull it off.

[img] [/img]

Oh god, not this one again. Haven't we all got bored with it by now?
Edit: Beaten to it, but the feeling is still the same.

Ropey phone means no video viewing for me, but do these videos include proof of the laser spot on the buildings? That's my favourite 'fact'

Many respected architects and engineers think we should have an independent investigation into the collapse of the 3 skyscrapers

YEY, love these threads.

Glad to see the Architect and Engineer truther site has already received a plug.

More science facts please, pretty please

Yes, THREE skyscrapers not 2

Wow really, I didn't know that. Very suspicious... oh no, wait, hang on, that was all shown live on global news networks.

i knew nothing about the third building collapsing, but what do I know............

I've just seen Elvis in McDonalds...

INWTS

You are kaeses and I claim my £5.

Just what would happen if it was exposed as a hoax ?

pentagon a good pilot that 😉

tower 3 perfect sense that it collapsed 😯

Just what would happen if it was exposed as a hoax ?

What, you mean that the buildings didn't really collapse and are, actually, still standing?
🙄

Smoke & mirrors? 😉

What, you mean that the buildings didn't really collapse and are, actually, still standing?

jeez! How much like a religious website does that architects and engineers site look?

If there was a conspiracy to destroy all the towers then the people who organised it will love stuff like that. It makes all people claiming a conspiracy existed look like kooks and detracts from the facts in their case (if there are any)

Reston, Va.- The World Trade Center towers would likely not have collapsed if the spray-on fireproofing had not been dislodged by the impact of the aircraft, concludes a report issued today by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST urged the technical community to examine changes to design, materials and techniques-including possible changes to codes and standards-that could improve building performance and increase the safety of occupants and first responders, focusing largely on the effects of fire in relationship to other structural loads.

Wind-ups aside, I do think there are unanswered questions which it should be ok to ask without all the "conspiracy theory" nonsense and finger pointing. And finding errors in a video doesn't mean you should dismiss it entirely - if that were the case I would dismiss the official story in its entirety purely because there is no good reason for WTC7 falling down.

And, to reiterate - nobody can dismiss things with a blanket "conspiracy theory" call, especially if their own version of events is itself a conspiracy theory.

Shussssshhhh shhhhhh shhhhh back to sleep everyone there's good boys n girls 😉

Glenp+1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

.....there is no good reason for WTC7 falling down.

I'd be interested in the Professional Qualifications and relevant experience you have to make that statement ?

TF1 showed NORAD successfully tracking Father Christmas all the way around the planet. A little surprising then that they failed to pick up and intercept two slow-flying passenger jets.

GlenP - 1

There is nothing where we have complete and total knowledge and it is just a bunch of non experts/loons/conspiracists using videos to reinforce their ill informed views whilst claiming to be experts etc

Its like debating with the religious tbh - and the conspiracists have as much proof and as much faith

A little surprising then that they failed to pick up and intercept two slow-flying passenger jets.

I have no credentials whatsoever, Junkyard, nor do you. You are as ignorant as me, we both have to rely on the media. The media has relayed all sorts of excuses and stories on behalf of NORAD, non of which seem very plausible to me. The fact I am not convinced by any of their excuses does not make me ignorant, just a little hard to convince.

I am not questioning their account from a position of ignorance and referring to their facts as excuses though.

As I said religious zeal, despite the evidence, borne from ignorance

Edukator - Member
TF1 showed NORAD successfully tracking Father Christmas all the way around the planet. A little surprising then that they failed to pick up and intercept two slow-flying passenger jets.

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

Conspiracy theorists have long pointed to the collapse of the 47-story structure as key evidence that the U.S. government orchestrated or abetted the 9/11 attacks. No planes struck the building, and the commonly available views of the exterior didn't show significant damage. Yet, at 5:20 pm, 7 hours after the collapse of the Twin Towers (WTC 1 and 2), WTC 7 rapidly fell in on itself. Since WTC 7 housed Secret Service and CIA offices, conspiracy theorists claimed that the building was destroyed in a controlled demolition in order to obliterate evidence of the U.S. government's complicity in the terrorist attacks. [b]"It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved," stated actress and TV personality Rosie O'Donnell of ABC's The View in March 2007. "For the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible," she said.[/b]

Today's report confirms that a fire was, indeed, the cause. "This is the first time that we are aware of, that a building taller than about 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fires," Sunder told reporters at the press conference. "What we found was that uncontrolled building fires--similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings--caused an extraordinary event, the collapse of WTC7." The unprecedented nature of the event means that understanding the precise mechanism of the collapse is important not just to answer conspiracy theorists' questions, but to improve safety standards in the engineering of large buildings.

The final report describes how debris from the collapse of WTC 1 ignited fires on at least 10 floors of WTC 7 at the western half of the south face. Fires on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 burned out of control, because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system had failed. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply. Those water lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. These uncontrolled fires in WTC 7 eventually spread to the northeast part of the building, where the collapse began.

Read more: World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics