September 11 and other conspiracy theories

[powpig]

Powpig:

I'd love for you to actually present something substantive that proves the PM piece wrong, in any part, but you can't. You wack jobs should really leave it alone.

Geez Dex -

Awfully eager to sling personal attacks there aren't ya?

Like me, Professor Jones believes further investigation is in order. In the interview I linked above he states:

"There is a clear disconnect between what the official reports say happened and what actually happened. A scientific theory has to be falsifiable. It must be able to be tested and challenged.
The data stands on it's own. Where are the honest scientists? Take the blinders off and find out what happened."

Thomas W Eagar of MIT, Zdanek P Bazant of Northwestern U, and Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl at UC Berkeley all were asked to review Professor Jones' paper but all 3 refused.

Slinging personal attacks is always easier than refuting the actual substance of an argument and unfortunately seems to be the American way these days.

The government you appear to be siding with couldn't wait to plow under the largest crime scene in the history of the world. Wouldn't an investigation of this crime scene have been a first honest step to determine exactly what happened that day? Oh sorry, guess that's only a question a conspiracy theorist wack job would ask.

[Squatch]

here's a personal attack, powpig:

your boy jones: he's just looking for publicity. if he really believes the shit that he says, he is nuts. at the very least he has extremely limited engineering knowledge, and shouldn't even be writing papers about this.

as for the crime scene, i think the first priority was rescue and recovery, dumbass.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Plowing under the crime scene? WTF are you talking about? Do you know how long we had to sit there with the smell of burning, acrid metal permeating every particle of air we breathed? It was months before they even finished digging through the gigantic pile of debris. There were fires burning in the metal right up to the end.
You haven't got a leg to stand on. I'm not trying to make this personal, but when you posit a crackpot theory it sort of makes you a crackpot as well.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY CONSPIRACY. You have yet to provide any, and all the facts point to the most logical explanation, which is exactly what we all witnessed that morning. When an almost fully fueled plane of that size connects with a building at 500 knots it's going to do exactly what we witnessed, and no alternative explanation is necessary nor sensible. End of story.
A waste of time for us to even debate this, and certainly a waste of time and money for people to investigate this--the only reason to do so is to refute the conspiracy theorists.

Not only that, but for what you propose to be in any way fathomable there would have to be such an extensive government (or private?) operation that it would be impossible to conceal. There is absolutely no evidence of this either, and given the government's tendency to make errors in other areas it is simply impossible to accept that they so perfectly executed and then successfully covered up this 'conspiracy'. You can't produce one credible person who was a part of this conspiracy or found evidence of it because no conspiracy (on our side) ever existed.
You've placed yourself in the camp of 'moon landing was fake' people. Leave while you can.

[Dexter Rutecki]

oh, and if you're going to quote my plea to you to present something substantive, you need to do better than quoting that same discredited idiot.

[powpig]

AGAIN, no shortage of evidence out there. Many unanswered questions, too bad the proponents of the offical story are so hyper-sensitive they attack and criticize the credentials of the messenger rather than attempt to refute or answer the actual argument(s). I see nothing different here among the maggots. How sad.

[Viva]

" A scientific theory has to be falsifiable. It must be able to be tested and challenged. The data stands on it's own. Where are the honest scientists? Take the blinders off and find out what happened."

I've heard of Jones and have debated his ideas already on one of the USC boards. Tell me, Powpig, WTF is the above quote supposed to mean? Please feel free to break it down and explain one sentence at a time. And then tell me what this has to do with the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.

See, when someone (Dr. Jones) talks like an idiot, he's not gonna be taken seriously.

[powpig]

I've heard of Jones and have debated his ideas already on one of the USC boards. Tell me, Powpig, WTF is the above quote supposed to mean? Please feel free to break it down and explain one sentence at a time. And then tell me what this has to do with the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.

See, when someone (Dr. Jones) talks like an idiot, he's not gonna be taken seriously.

Do you need me to hold your hand while I explain?

"A scientific theory has to be falsifiable." Don't know, seems like a strange statement. I don't believe in quoting out of context so I included the whole thing. Pretty irrelevant to his theory, just like your request for my explanation.

"It must be able to be tested and challenged." Don't shoot the messenger, address and answer/refute the findings.

"The data stands on it's own." This means the data stands on it's own, even if you don't like what it says.

"Where are the honest scientists?" I'm not an expert, you're not an expert. Me saying it's valid holds just as much water as you saying it's not valid. Why won't credentialed experts openly and publicly dicuss his findings? Oh I forgot, much easier to just laugh him off as a whack job.

"Take the blinders off and find out what happened." Get your head outta the sand (or elsewhere) and examine more than one side of the story.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I must admit I'm pretty stunned by some of the maggots response. I had no idea on this board that anything could be so taboo. Without question, you're all free to believe what you wish, but the responses:
"THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY CONSPIRACY.",
"your boy jones: he's just looking for publicity. if he really believes the shit that he says, he is nuts.",
are laughable at best if not downright ignorant.

As i've said from the beginning, there's tons of research and mountains of evidence out there. Whether it's credible or reputable is left to the discernment and open-mindedness of each individual. Don't like Professor Steven Jones and his research? There's lots more, here's just a few:

See Alex Jones' DVD MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/...martiallaw.htm
Or just peruse the 100s of linked articles on his information resource page:
http://www.martiallaw911.info/

Or read David Icke's book, Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Centre Disaster

Here's another 68 articles most with additonal links:
http://www.davidicke.com/content/category/6/19/33/
They're revamping the website so the 100s of linked articles will be added again in the coming months.

Or go to http://www.americanfreepress.com and punch "9-11" into their search box for another 108 articles.

Septmeber 11 - Evidence to the Contrary - Google Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...815&pr=goog-sl

The one that gets me the most is those who claim the Pentagon wasn't struck by AA 11.

Evidence aplenty. Breathe the fresh air or stick your head in the sand.
My work here is done.

[Squatch]

what the fuck is wrong with our schools? i swear to god, people believe any old website these days. i'm gonna start a myspace page called 9/11_Never_Happened and I'm gonna throw all sorts of crackpot shit on there. i'll also add circular logic and wild, easily refutable claims. then i'll bash everyone who refutes them as being "controlled by the government."

you can add that to your list of "evidence"

edit: i'm through with this shit. powpig, you have yet to provide any evidence or reasoning as to why 9/11 was a conspiracy. all you have done is made crazy claims about the situation without backing anything up. You sir are a fucking moron. Go write your manifesto in your basement.

[shmerham]

We know some fuckers hijacked some planes and they crashed into the skyscrapers. This is FACT. We have proof of these two events.

So, yeah, sure, there's a chance that this was a conspiracy. I can't say with 100% certainty that there isn't proof to disprove this possibility. ...but the burden of proof is on the conspiracy theory, not what we can deduce from the facts that we have. This is not a court trial, and this is not a new scientific breakthrough. This is a logical explanation of events.

[Viva]

You miss my point, powpig. I alread know about what I'm asking you to explain. It's great that you can define it, but can you use it?

[Dexter Rutecki]

[QUOTE=powpig]Do you need me to hold your hand while I explain?
[QUOTE]

No, but you might want to buy a clue before you spout.

"A scientific theory has to be falsifiable." Don't know, seems like a strange statement. I don't believe in quoting out of context so I included the whole thing. Pretty irrelevant to his theory, just like your request for my explanation.

Why is it irrelevant that you're asked to clarify what you now admit is meaningless? If it's so meaningless then why did he write it, and why did you post it? Posting nonsense really isn't helpful.

"It must be able to be tested and challenged." Don't shoot the messenger, address and answer/refute the findings.

The 'challenge' has been definitively answered. Unless there's evidence you're not presenting, you've still got nothing.

"The data stands on it's own." This means the data stands on it's own, even if you don't like what it says.

But there's no data disproving anything, so there's nothing to stand on its own. Unless this was just meant as another meaningless quote.

"Where are the honest scientists?" I'm not an expert, you're not an expert. Me saying it's valid holds just as much water as you saying it's not valid.

Absolutely not, your statement is based on one looney at BYU whose own department has disavowed him, and who probably isn't qualified to comment on this in the first place. Our saying it's not valid is based on overwhelming evidence that has been reviewed by the scientific community.

Why won't credentialed experts openly and publicly dicuss his findings? Oh I forgot, much easier to just laugh him off as a whack job.

He's dismissed as a whack job because they have seen his claims for what they are.

"Take the blinders off and find out what happened." Get your head outta the sand (or elsewhere) and examine more than one side of the story.

Look at this with some discernment. Simply because a claim is made doesn’t mean it requires your blanket approval. It’s not closed minded to dismiss drivel as drivel.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I must admit I'm pretty stunned by some of the maggots response. I had no idea on this board that anything could be so taboo. Without question, you're all free to believe what you wish, but the responses:
"THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY CONSPIRACY.",
"your boy jones: he's just looking for publicity. if he really believes the shit that he says, he is nuts.",
are laughable at best if not downright ignorant.

Again, nothing is taboo, but some things are stupid, and what you posted is bullshit.

As i've said from the beginning, there's tons of research and mountains of evidence out there.

Nearly all of it refuting what you posted.

Whether it's credible or reputable is left to the discernment and open-mindedness of each individual.

No, you’re wrong. Its credibility is based on how likely it is that it’s true.What you posted is manifestly false.

Don't like Professor Steven Jones and his research? There's lots more, here's just a few:

See Alex Jones' DVD MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/...martiallaw.htm
Or just peruse the 100s of linked articles on his information resource page:
http://www.martiallaw911.info/

Or read David Icke's book, Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Centre Disaster

Here's another 68 articles most with additonal links:
http://www.davidicke.com/content/category/6/19/33/
They're revamping the website so the 100s of linked articles will be added again in the coming months.

OK, David Icke, an infamous anti-semite who believes the world is controlled by a race of alien lizards (no joke) is where you should be refusing the Kool-Aid. The guy is a total, unadulterated nut. Idiot. Fool. Asshole. And how the fuck is he qualified to comment on what brought down the WTC?

Or go to http://www.americanfreepress.com and punch "9-11" into their search box for another 108 articles.

108 pieces of shit does not a cogent argument make.

Septmeber 11 - Evidence to the Contrary - Google Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...815&pr=goog-sl







Evidence aplenty. Breathe the fresh air or stick your head in the sand.
My work here is done.

Learn to think critically about things and pull your head out of the lizard men’s asses.

edit: to note the video has been similarly debunked, including by one of our own who was on the scene at the Pentagon.

[powpig]

what the fuck is wrong with our schools? i swear to god, people believe any old website these days. i'm gonna start a myspace page called 9/11_Never_Happened and I'm gonna throw all sorts of crackpot shit on there. i'll also add circular logic and wild, easily refutable claims. then i'll bash everyone who refutes them as being "controlled by the government."

you can add that to your list of "evidence"

edit: i'm through with this shit. powpig, you have yet to provide any evidence or reasoning as to why 9/11 was a conspiracy. all you have done is made crazy claims about the situation without backing anything up. You sir are a fucking moron. Go write your manifesto in your basement.

mo·ron A stupid person; a dolt.

what the fuck is wrong with our schools?

Why don't we start with reading comprehension.

all you have done is made crazy claims.

What claims have I made? Only 2 that I can see.
I did claim:
"The steel columns of the WTC have a higher melting temperature than jet fuel burns at." &
"The government.......couldn't wait to plow under the largest crime scene in the history of the world."

Steel melts at 2777F and jet fuel burns at only 1517F though this reasearch http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/read/1064 indicates there's no way the temps got that high.
You could argue that they waited plenty long but the place was indeed plowed under before an investigation as sizeable as the tragedy was completed.
Guess that's what you call "crazy" talk huh?


Now, I have provided links with mountains of evidence compiled by tireless researchers like Alex Jones & David Icke. I have read a couple of Icke's books and have heard each interviewed many times, Jones just last night. I consider these two men to be highly credible researchers, and I certainly believe their documented research a lot more than the habitual lies spewed forth from our corrupt, for sale to the highest bidder public servants. And that makes me a "fucking moron" in 'ol Squatch's book. Guess I just don't have the deep throat capability to swallow all those lies like he does.

[Dexter Rutecki]

OK, you're an idiot if you're a follower of Icke's. You'd be better off believing in Don Rumsfeld and the tooth fairy.

Oh yeah, you can leave off on this, too:

The documentary focuses on the combustion temperature of jet fuel (1517 °F / 825 °C) which is much lower than the melting point of steel (2777 °F / 1525 °C). This is true but irrelevant as it does not elaborate on the combustion temperatures of office equipment and open air flame which can be much higher. It also fails to note that "steel loses 50 percent of its strength at 1,200 degrees F [650 °C]." [24]

As temperatures rose in the buildings, the remaining core columns softened and buckled, shifting much of the burden to the building's exterior. The floors, which largely remained intact outside the impact zone, reacted by pulling the exterior columns inward, adding to the extreme stress on the exterior columns. In the north tower, as fires consumed office furniture and other debris, softening the steel in the exterior columns, they gradually started to bow inward and then buckle. [25]

This buckling and the resulting floors falling could be heard as "secondary explosions" and "crashes" prior to the collapse. As the Twin Towers had strong outer shells and light weight trusses for floors, that would force the collapse inward as the towers were — structurally speaking — 95% air because of their open floor designs. It would allow the interior of the building to collapse first; so that debris and floors could fall inside the tower and blow out windows ahead of the exterior collapse. Sally Regenhard, founder of the Skyscraper Safety Campaign, has urged a reassessment of using trusses to create open floor designs; as she points out fire experts have a motto to "Never trust the truss" in a fire. [26] The Twin Towers open floor design, greater height (wind and structural loads), their supporting columns and fireproofing being compromised by the initial impact; is significantly different from all the notable high-rise fires used as comparisons in the documentary.
[edit]


References


24. ^ Shermer, Michael (June 2005). "Fahrenheit 2777". Scientific American.
25. ^ Lipton, Eric. (October 2004) FreeRepublic.com – Study Suggests Design Flaws Didn't Doom Towers
26. ^ SkyScraperSafety.org – Regenhard Calls for New High-Rise Codes and Code Group Composition. Fire Engineering Magazine (April 2002)

[powpig]

The 'challenge' has been definitively answered. Unless there's evidence you're not presenting, you've still got nothing.

Everytime I provide links to research you dismiss it as from a "looney.....whose own department has disavowed him", or a "whack job", or "an infamous anti-semite.....unadulterated nut. Idiot. Fool. Asshole. or 108 pieces of shit does not a cogent argument make."

Just more name calling and refusal to accept or discuss the evidence that rocks your pre-determined comfort zone. As I said earlier,
"Slinging personal attacks is always easier than refuting the actual substance of an argument and unfortunately seems to be the American way these days."

At least you're consistent.

Look at this with some discernment. Simply because a claim is made doesn’t mean it requires your blanket approval. It’s not closed minded to dismiss drivel as drivel.

No but it is closed minded to dismiss any dissenting view you disagree with without bothering to consider the evidence as drivel.

Again, nothing is taboo, but some things are stupid, and what you posted is bullshit.

No, you’re wrong. Its credibility is based on how likely it is that it’s true. What you posted is manifestly false.

Such ridiculous accusations say a lot more about your credibility than mine.

OK, David Icke, ....... And how the fuck is he qualified to comment on what brought down the WTC?

Sounds like idol worship. Gotta be qualified and on a podium to comment? Researching the details far more than you or I have is what makes him qualified.

Learn to think critically about things and pull your head out of the lizard men’s asses.

Learn to think for yourself! If you really believe there's not a shred of evidence against the official 9-11 explanation than I really feel sorry for you. Maybe you should read Icke's chapters on Mind Control.


Enough already, I'm going for a ride!

[iceman]

Powpig you are a know-nothing stupid-ass motherfucker and that's that. I'm amazed at the patience you've been shown in this thread, I personally have none for you, there's no reason to argue with a close-minded zealot like you. Fuck off.

[TJ.Brk]

hey Powpig. How is ball treating you this summer. I do have one question for you. Could you please explain how the DNA from the passengers from the flight that hit the Pentagon ended up there? Especially where there is footage of those same passengers boarding the plane not an hour before it hit. What about the FAA control tower tapes from all over the eastern seaboard airports monitoring the situation? What about the cell phone calls from people on board that plane calling loved ones before it crashed. Can you explain that?

I understand you trying to play devils advocate. However, you have to have an unbiased attitude to pull that off. It is certain you do not have an unbiased tude towards this issue. I get the feeling that you are spending your day walking around town telling people that their shoes are untied when they are not.

[SkiingBear]

powpig, I'm a chemical engineer, so I understand a little something about how hot jet fuel burns, and melting points of metal...and I can also spot bullshit conspiracy theories that are intended to deceive idots.

What are your credentials to back up your beliefs? Or are you blindly following the word of others?

Here's how it works:

1. Go to school, get an education
2. Shake your head in a frustrated fashion when you see idiots believing crap like this
3. Call them a fucking idiot

YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT!

[stuckathuntermtn]

i believe the conspiracy was that 20 arab terrorists got together to learn to pilot airliners at mach .9 into several buildings. How many of you at least saw the dust cloud? I understand many of you were downtown when it happened and experienced it in a way most people couldn't come close to Imagining. But i've lived on the river towns for the past 12 years and had to see that dust cloud that hung in the air for MONTHS where some buildings should have been. as far as undground explosions, perfectly resonable expenations: ever been around a bunch of buildings when a plane or helicoter goes by? the sound bounces off so many places that you can't tell where the source is. if you were next to a large building, and a large twin engine plane with its engines at full were coming in, the sound would envelope you.

EDIT: what i'm trying to say is: GET OVER THE CONSPIRACRY THEORIES, THE PEOPLE THE ALL THE OTHER ASSHOLES IN THE COUNTRY KEEP VOTING FOR ARE TOO INCOMPITANT TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT. let alone stop it.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Everytime I provide links to research you dismiss it as from a "looney.....whose own department has disavowed him", or a "whack job", or "an infamous anti-semite.....unadulterated nut. Idiot. Fool. Asshole. or 108 pieces of shit does not a cogent argument make."

Don't you get it? That guy HAS been dismissed as an idiot by his own colleagues. It's not just me saying something about him, I'm telling you the facts that prove he lacks credibility. Why would you believe what he says when nearly every other qualified scientist (a group of which he is not really a member) says the opposite? You admit to not having expertise in this area, so why accept the word of the one guy who we know should not be taken seriously? What makes his voice so authoritative, except for your desire to believe there's some massive, secret conspiracy at work?

Just more name calling and refusal to accept or discuss the evidence that rocks your pre-determined comfort zone.

No, I started calling the kettle black because it is, and I resented your condescending tone (Do you need me to hold your hand?). The evidence has been addressed and accurately assessed, and there's nothing to what you claim.
And again, if you're going to embrace patent morons like David Icke as a source, you can't be taken seriously. Assholes looking to profit from 9/11 (whether friends of Cheney or former Australian rugby commentators) are scum.
Sorry, that's just the way it is.
Now listen to iceman.

[Keoni]

I heard there are these pills you can get from a Dr. that will make your dick 3" bigger. He is a real doc and I saw it on the internet so it must be true. Want the link there powdude?

What's that phrase? "There's a dumbassmotherfucker born every..."

[13]

powpig, here's some more things to think about, if you're capable:

1. Pieces of AA 77 were found on the Pentagon's lawn from the Pentagon after the strike. Parts of the left wing were found buried 10 ft. into the soil in front of the Pentagon, since it struck the building at a left bank (left wing below right wing). The black box was discovered intact within the building. People in the building at the time of impact recall having jet fuel sprayed all over them as the plane was shredded while decelerating from 500+ mph to 0 mph.

2. Metal does not have to completely melt to cause a building to collapse. Simply heating metal to a point where its' pliable enough to lose structural integrity is enough to bring a building down. Any firefighter can tell you that.

3. Do your homework on aluminothermic reactions. You obviously don't understand the chemical process involved... Example: 3Fe3O4(s) + 8Al(s) → 4Al2O3(s) + 9Fe(s).

4. Common sense dictates that if it were a massive conspiracy, you'd have to have a fucking lot of accomplices to pull off one of this magnitude, and a way to shut up the ones unwilling to go along with it. I highly doubt that the government has the money or resources to keep that many of their own people in line and quiet.

5. If explosives were used to bring down the twin towers, don't you think there would be explosives residue everywhere? If so, where's evidence of this? Even the most sophisicated explosive material leaves traces.

[VTskibum]

blah blah i'm a fucking retard..... Registered: Oct 2003 Posts: 200

I liked it better when he hadn't posted for the last 2 1/2 years... lurking suits you maybe you should try it again.

[Tippster]

This is fucking GREAT! There are these "protesters" walking around in front of the White House who totally agree with you Powpig. You are not alone, my friend.

If "they" can't keep a petty burglary (Watergate) or a blowjob secret how in the name of all that is good and pure do you think "they" could keep a lid on this?

[Dexter Rutecki]

That's a pretty dumb question, Tipp. C'mon, a blow job is infinitely harder to keep secret than a conspiracy involving hundreds to thousands of people that results in the collapse of the largest office tower complex in the world and partial destruction of the Pentagon. Oh, and a few thousand dead.
That's easy to cover up.
But a blow job? My god, everytime I get one I'm telling everyone I know about it, so you can imagine how Bill felt after scoring that fat intern.
Yeah, i'm starting to buy into this whole conspiracy theory thing. It doesn't make much sense, but that's what we've got willing suspension of disbelief for, right?

[mr_gyptian]

guys, let powpig have at it. I think we'd all rather have him and his believers cooking up shit like Loose Change than mixing fertilizer.

Powpig, I thought your avatar would depict your flat earth society badge.

edit: I think powpig is liveblogging from here http://www.time.com/time/nation/prin...202840,00.html