No this is where you confuse what a theory is. By definition a theory is a supposition, an idea, a concept, a hypothesis. Let me give you an example, in theory if I purchase a raffle ticket I could win a prize, now as long as I don't purchase a ticket my win is theoretical, but once I purchase a ticket the win is no longer a theory, it becomes a possibility, and the more tickets I purchase the more possible and eventually probable the win becomes. Such is the case with this 911 conspiracy theory as long as their is evidence no matter how flimsy or circumstantial, it becomes a possibility and the more evidence that is gathered the more probable and possible it becomes.
Remembering 9/11
- Thread starter Insidious Von
- Start date
No this is where you confuse what a theory is. By definition a theory is a supposition, an idea, a concept, a hypothesis. Let me give you an example, in theory if I purchase a raffle ticket I could win a prize, now as long as I don't purchase a ticket my win is theoretical, but once I purchase a ticket the win is no longer a theory, it becomes a possibility, and the more tickets I purchase the more possible and eventually probable the win becomes. Such is the case with this 911 conspiracy theory as long as their is evidence no matter how flimsy or circumstantial, it becomes a possibility and the more evidence that is gathered the more probable and possible it becomes.
I'll never understand why 911 truthers always insist on using a mystery to explain away another mystery. In this case, the mystery explanation is a government conspiracy to explain away 911. Our entire history and progress is based on having mysteries explained by the application of the scientific method. This is the difference between diagnosing disease via bacteriology as opposed to blaming it on evil spirits.
I'm no scientist, but "Debunking 9/11 Myths" edited by David Dunbar & Brad Reagan states, "In addition, NIST estimated that it would take .13 pounds of thermite to heat a pound of a steel section to the necessary weakening point--which would require literally tons of thermite to cause the extensive column damage that Flight 175 wrought in WTC 2. That again brings up the challenges of wiring the tower clandestinely. As NIST described it, 'Many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unliely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.'"
This is a task that would have required huge amounts of manpower. No one has ever explained how the government (headed by Dubya, no less) has been able to keep the hundreds of people (thousands including those who worked in the towers & might see something) quiet while they planted these explosives.
Particularly since 5 years earlier, the government couldn't even keep the fact that Clinton got a hummer from his aide from getting out. Lmao.
Really, neither of the sides are totally believable.
That a handful of people with almost no training could take over planes and fly them accurately enough to hit buildings and then those buildings and one other not touched all collapsed exactly on the spot is incredibly unlikely and almost unbelievable.
But to claim that somehow those same buildings were all wired with thermite bombs and nobody noticed and a plot that big was kept secret by a government that's been hit repeatedly by wiki leaks is even more unbelievable.
Really, neither of the two are believable.
It's a fake journal. It only ever published two issues the purpose of which was 9/11 conspiracy theory. It hasn't published anything since the shoddy article you keep spamming us with.
It's the academic equivalent of spam.
Who knows if the people they listed even knew that were part of it. Often these fake journals nominate editors who don't ever participate and never know what they are involved in.
Certainly the only thing you ever find this journal being chief for is 9/11 nonsense. It's not a credible journal.
Current status of the thread:
No one has proposed any theory that is more compelling than the NIST explanation.
All the alternative theories have ludicrously glaring problems that totally exclude them from the realm of possibility, while the NIST explanation stands up with only minor quibbles over small details.
The cranks keep spamming one bullshit link after another, which are all destroyed by reasoned review, but they think if they ignore their string of embarrassing defeats they can win by spamming just one more bullshit site.
No one has proposed any theory that is more compelling than the NIST explanation.
All the alternative theories have ludicrously glaring problems that totally exclude them from the realm of possibility, while the NIST explanation stands up with only minor quibbles over small details.
The cranks keep spamming one bullshit link after another, which are all destroyed by reasoned review, but they think if they ignore their string of embarrassing defeats they can win by spamming just one more bullshit site.
This is the amusing part to me. Instead of presenting his findings to a conference of structural engineers he did so to a panel of lawyers who self selected because of their existing bias towards 9/11 conspiracies.
You previously claimed that video showed thermite cutting away the load bearing exterior structure. How could those 'elevator service men' have installed termite around the exterior of the building without either the charges being seen attached to the exterior beams or having had to have ripped up the floor on every level of the building?
Not in science. A philosophical or religious theory would apply to that definition.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
And of course you take a minor unknown about 9/11 as reason to reject the truth and then buy into an extremely convoluted and unsubstantiated theory. You have faith that the government did it. Good for you. Stop trying to pretend that science backs you faith. You are doing the exact same thing as people trying to claim science proves the bible correct.
Its impossible to tell where that thermite is coming from all we know is was leaking out the exterior. Personally I think it was only the center support columns that were set to fail because thats where most of the buildings weight Is. The exterior beams may not have had the strength and would pull inwards while the center caved in followed by springing back out as the connections broke. Which would explain why there is beams sprouting off on all sides.
Your personal theory is that thermite was set in advance on the exact floors the plane hit?
Ludicrous.
And that it leaked out all the way from the center try pour out the side, instead of pouring down the center?
Ludicrous.
And that it wasn't destroyed or ignited by the plane which totaled the floors it was on?
Ludicrous.
And that the entire investigation involving thousands of people covered it up?
Ludicrous.
If you knew anything about thermite you would know there is no way it could travel along the floor of the building from the core to the exterior. It would have simply burnt straight down through the floors. Therefore if your claim that thermite was seen at the exterior was true it must have been placed there and no one noticed.
All of the evidence was removed, you can't do science without evidence, unfortunately there was alot of evidence. The pieces of columns, the steel. No crime scene would ever have been taken care of this way. NIST refuses to release the full report. You cant do science when the evidence has been deprived.
Its true thermite would melt through, but im pretty sure the floors surrounding the center columns are paved with cement. If the floor was sloped from the planes collision the thermite could run alond the cement without melting through.
Wow. It is amazing that you claim that all the evidence was removed but you still try and claim random clips from the internet are evidence of massively convoluted and unsubstantiated conspiracy.
There is tons of science explaining how the buildings fell and tons of evidence supporting that science. You simply choose to ignore it because your faith has you believing it isn't true.
The floor between the center columns and the exterior frame were not. The thermite would have simply eaten through the floor. Beyond that, do you know how much thermite would be needed to create a flow along the nonexistent concrete floors instead of going down as it your conspiracy would require?
Then there is fuji's question about why the thermite didn't ignite when the plane collided. You would think that masses of burning jet fuel and other debris would have ignited the thermite long before the buildings actually collapsed.
And not surprisingly you ignore that videos of the collapse show chunks of the exterior falling away from the building, not collapsing inwards as you belief would have it.
You see this is where truth and fiction collide. I have NOT posted random clips of anything. I posted one video of tower 7 at a conference that takes place every year with many professionals and all you did was give me a long winded response to that video about how the engineers are quacks. Period. No random videos. Thanks for twisting the truth though I appreciate that bro
You have failed to explain the conspiracy. And so has everyone else. And if thermite WAS planted, why have planes flown into the buildings? Just detonate the charges remotely. The remaining evidence would be the same. This theory makes zero sense.
Seriously: the government is sophisticated enough to organize this conspiracy & keep everyone involved quiet about it, but at the same time incompetent enough not to cover their tracks? Laughable.
Disagree. It's very believable that people with minimal training would be able to hit 2 massive buildings with a plane. The flight schools they all attended testified that none of them showed much interest in taking off or landing; holding a course steady & hitting the tallest building in the city wouldn't be much more difficult than steering a car. You say one building "wasn't touched"...but what about the jet fuel that poured everywhere (both planes were fully laden, remember), not to mention the shock wave & debris from the collapsing towers. That's a shitload of kinetic energy for a neighbouring building to absorb & when combined with the fact that it burned for 8 hrs, it isn't surprising at all that it collapsed.
Iv lost count of how many times the media lemmings in this thread have twisted my words around and or failed to read my posts. Im tired of answering the same questions over and over again.
All the questions have been explained, and I shouldn't have to answer the simple common sense questions like "how would they know where to plant the thermite exactly where the planes hit" when it was on every floor lmao.
Im leaving this kindergarten classroom of a thread alone before I lose any more brain cells.
All the questions have been explained, and I shouldn't have to answer the simple common sense questions like "how would they know where to plant the thermite exactly where the planes hit" when it was on every floor lmao.
Im leaving this kindergarten classroom of a thread alone before I lose any more brain cells.
Yes, those engineers who support it being a government conspiracy and controlled demolition are either glory hunters or so far out of their area of specialization that the term quacks accurately describes them.
What you have is doubt about what happened. That is your choice. The fact that you take that doubt and invent a fantastical, counter-factual, and religion like alternate reality shows that science is not on your side. Stick to your belief system if you want but stop trying to pretend that science supports your imaginings.
I'm not surprised that you are trying to cast yourself as a martyr and a victim. It is standard MO for conspiracy theorists and people who can not defend their views.
But no, you have not answered any questions about your creation.
