Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 11:47am PT
|
Conspiracy theorists exist for one simple reason, because conspiracys do exist. Past conspiracys have been shown to have played critical roles in many historical moments. Throughout the whole of human existence it seems likely that conspiring would have been the 'norm'. It is also 'standard proceedure' to discredit those who would disagree with 'party line' thinking. Discredit the messenger discredit the message. Calling someone a Conspiracy theorist is a way of imparting lunacy to them and the theory. But history has also shown us that those whack job nuts are often more right than lunatic. F.D.R clearly had advanced knowledge of the impending Pearl Harbour attack and ample time for defensive action, hell he did all he could do to provoke it and nothing to stop it. He was aware of the risks and hopeful of the outcome but he NEEDED the support and complicity of the American people who at that time were clearly isolationists and NOT interested in war. Within a few days of the shock wearing off there were many who said F.D.R. knew and did nothing. Those people were labelled traitors, and branded as seditious. Years later when even more people believed the "F.D.R. Conspiracy therory" they were put out on the fringe like UFO watchers. Well sometimes, in time, truth will out and it is now fashionable to believe He knew. Well, time may tell this time as well what truth will out.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 11:59am PT
|
No, they exist because you CANNOT disprove them. If you try, people then accuse you or your source of being a conspirator or you get dismissed as being some kind of naive sheep.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 12:46pm PT
|
"it is now fashionable to believe he knew too"
Hey, I've got the Robert Stinnet book too, but what made it fashionable?
|
|
John Vawter
Social climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 12:57pm PT
|
I hate Bush and conspiracy theories. What camp does that put me in?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 01:02pm PT
|
Welcome to my camp.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 01:35pm PT
|
Keep your blinders on folks ........
Auxiliary Fireman Lt. Paul Isaac Jr. also spoke of bombs in an interview with internet reporter Randy Lavello. Isaac had served with Engine Company 10 in lower Manhattan during the late 1990s, so he knew the area around the WTC. Isaac said that many New York firemen were very concerned about the ongoing cover-up of why the World Trade Center collapsed. Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, he revealed, but they are afraid for their jobs to admit it because the higher-ups forbid discussion of this fact. There were definitely bombs in those buildings. Among those suppressing real discussion about what had happened, Isaac cited the neocon heavy James Woolsey, who had been CIA Director under Clinton, who had become the New York Fire Department’s antiterrorism consultant.
The laboratory director from a South Bend firm had been fired for attempting to cast doubt on the federal investigation into what caused the World Trade Center's twin towers to collapse on Sept. 11, 2001. Kevin R. Ryan was terminated Tuesday from his job at Environmental Health Laboratories Inc., a subsidiary of Underwriters Laboratories Inc., the consumer-product safety testing giant.
Ryan wrote that the institute's preliminary reports suggest the WTC's supports were probably exposed to fires no hotter than 500 degrees -- only half the 1,100-degree temperature needed to forge steel, Ryan said. That's also much cooler, he wrote, than the 3,000 degrees needed to melt bare steel with no fire-proofing.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 01:45pm PT
|
Werner,
let me get this straight. The bombs were preplaced to detonate after the jets hit AND in the same locations (floors, towers, etc.)?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 01:59pm PT
|
It's funny how the best (and most used) argument to debunk 9/11 conspiracy theories is that "too many people would need to be involved in the job for them to pull this off, how come there are no whistle blowers?"
Nobody addresses the real questions raised by the conspiracy theorists.
Try this one on for size:
"How come there is no explaination given for the collapse of World Trade Center 7, one of three steel-framed buildings to fall on 9/11 due to the terrorist attacks?"
Don't bother trying to find the explaination in the 9/11 Commission Report, it does not devote a single word to this event (which is kind of surprising).
Have you ever watched footage of 7 WTC falling? Have you tried to find a sensible explaination for why it fell? Other than planned demolition, no other cause fits the bill so perfectly for why it collasped. Total collaspe to the ground in less than 7 seconds. Perfectly within its footprint.
Please report back here when you find a solid explaination, and one that withstands scrutinity, for why this building collasped in the way it did.
By itself and without any other facts from 9/11, World Trade Center 7 alone makes me question the unquestionable. Could this have been an inside job?
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 02:07pm PT
|
Don't get me wrong Werner, as I've got a lot of respect for you as a climber and a person, but making a statement like "there were definitely bombs in those buildings", pretty much automatically discredits you in my book.
There are certainly some things about 9/11 that the American public deserves better explanation on. But there's simply not enough scientific evidence to make definitive statements like that. All statements like that do is make it easier for people to label you a conspiracy whacko.
As for temps and steel, it doesn't need to melt. Just needs to get hot enough for a long enough time that it weakens and cannot support the tremendous weight above. And I think that there is pretty good evidence that those temps could have happened with all that jet fuel.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 02:12pm PT
|
As for temps and steel, it doesn't need to melt. Just needs to get hot enough for a long enough time that it weakens and cannot support the tremendous weight above. And I think that there is pretty good evidence that those temps could have happened with all that jet fuel.
BS. Jet fuel cannot reach the temperatures needed to get the steel hot enough for collaspe. Do the research.
Besides, there was no jet fuel in 7 WTC.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 02:12pm PT
|
I repeat my request;
were the jets hijacked just to cover up the detonations?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 02:54pm PT
|
WTC 7 collapse explained
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y
Then again, some of you are convinced that P. Mechanics is part of a cadre of bogeymen that includes:
-the military
-Hearst publications
-other MSM corporations
-the Bush Administration
-NYC fire department
-probably the mayor
-the FAA
-the families of those missing on the planes "crashing" into the WTC
-"eyewitnesses" such as Chaz's uncle who "claim" to have seen a plane crashing
-Someone else, someone else, and someone else
-and all their underlings of the people listed above, which probably totals several hundred or thousands of people but who have all amazingly, managed to keep their mouths shut for five years about what "really" happened.
Remarkable, huh?
bunk + bunk + bunk +.... = BUNK!
K-man, I don't I have read reports by experts that said fire temperatures were plenty strong to soften (not melt) the metal.
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 03:21pm PT
|
Here's your research K-man. Article from a peer-reviewed scientific journal:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
And the main investigative report, produced by among others, the American Society of Civil Engineers:
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtcreport.htm
Both show that it didn't need to get past roughly 600 degrees Celsius to cause weakness and thermal expansion issues that led to the failures. And the jet fuel and combustible materials were capable of generating that temp.
But I guess all those engineers and eggheads are in on it too. A much better source it some random internet site, or a BYU Astronomy prof that believes in cold fusion.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 03:24pm PT
|
"FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated."
A "working hypothesis." I wonder where they got their "facts" to make the determination that the building was more comrimised than originally thought. Funny how actual pictures of the building before it collapsed do not show structural damage large enough to bring the building down. Everything in the Popular Mechanics report on WTC 7 is hypothetical, no real facts there.
There was no fire fighting going on in WTC 7 because there were no real fires in the building. Do real some research other than just pointing to some "myth-busting" done by Popular Mechanics.
K-man, I don't [sic] I have read reports by experts that said fire temperatures were plenty strong to soften (not melt) the metal.
Right. Explain how the entier building came down at almost free-fall speeds. 47 floors pancaking on each other with "softened" metal being the cause. Also, why all the molten metal found underneath the buildings, weeks after their fall, if the metal was only softened? Let me guess, jet fuel.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 03:30pm PT
|
I really should just listen to what Chaz wrote a few days ago.
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 03:45pm PT
|
k-man, do you have any idea what the scientific method is? Or a hypothesis? Nobody is going to duplicate that event to prove it.
So yes, it is a hypothesis. But it's one that is based on some pretty reasonable science, not just wild speculation.
Second, if you had bothered to read the JOM link, it's pretty obvious why the buildings collapsed so fast. Once there was one floor failure, you had 45,000 tons of weight above coming down on floors meant to support on static loads. That's what caused the rapid pancaking.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 03:53pm PT
|
"And I think that there is pretty good evidence that those temps could have happened with all that jet fuel."
Three words in that sentence "think" and "could have" all equal pure speculation.
Doesn't matter what I believe, what natters is the truth.
Do you know the real truth .........?
Oh yeah, right ..... popular mechanics.
|
|
TradIsGood
Fun-loving climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 04:04pm PT
|
stevep - Hah, I bet you think you can convince the non-believers that gravity caused the building to fall straight down. Good luck on that one!
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 04:28pm PT
|
Sometimes it does feel like these people believe that laws of physics and engineering wouldn't have let these things happen.
And any scientist worth their salt is not going to tell you 100% that they know exactly what happened in these collapses. Absent exact re-creation, which will never happen, there's always going to be some speculation. But I'd rather trust scientific analysis from experts in the appropriate field than internet hearsay.
And to be clear, I'm not a fan of Bush and company. The Iraq war was a horrible mistake to begin with, and terribly executed. But the fact that they are a bunch of bumbling idiots doesn't mean that 9-11 was faked.
|
|
Walt Heenan
Trad climber
Voorheesville, NY
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2006 - 04:31pm PT
|
If the Neocons had the ability to pull off something of this magnitude, why haven't they just made the folks who are at the forefront of exposing this massive conspiracy dissappear?
You know, Utah Prof has a "Heart Attack", a couple of upstart young film-makers wreck their car after a a night of partying, Muckraking author found dead of a drug overdose, etc.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!