ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 911 conspiracy theory

Reply
Old 9th March 2007, 02:26 AM   #81
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 23,755
One contradiction that I think applies to anything on the woo-ish side of LIHOP:

Bush was allowed to stay in the classroom, proving foreknowledge that the school wasn't a target. Cheney was immediately hurried into the White House armoured basement, proving foreknowledge of attacks that didn't include the White House as a target.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2007, 09:03 PM   #82
The Demon's Head
Crime cannot be tolerated
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,416
This thread proves that the troofers can't even get their looney theories straight. Troofers believe in a different theory than a fellow troofer.
__________________

The Demon's Head is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2007, 09:12 PM   #83
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by The Demon's Head View Post
This thread proves that the troofers can't even get their looney theories straight. Troofers believe in a different theory than a fellow troofer.
And I've seen them actually try and claim that's their strength- as if consistency (read science) means you're not being "open minded" and having one big gigantic orgy of anything goes- science, truth, and logic be damned- is appealing to these people.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2007, 04:13 AM   #84
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by The Demon's Head View Post
This thread proves that the troofers can't even get their looney theories straight. Troofers believe in a different theory than a fellow troofer.

Actually some of these mutually exclusive theories are believed by the same Truther simultaneously.

It's true.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2007, 04:29 AM   #85
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
Actually some of these mutually exclusive theories are believed by the same Truther simultaneously.
For example, Griffin claims that the WTC should have fallen sideways. He also claims that there could have been no expulsion of material sideways because gravity acts vertically.

Since the CT mantra is that they are just asking questions, one would hope that when the contradictions are pointed out, they would say "Thank you very much, that's a useful contribution to finding the truth."
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2007, 09:56 AM   #86
Jennie C.
Thinker
 
Jennie C.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 245
Skeptics have not explained the free-fall/near free-fall rate of collapse of the Towers.

The rate of collapse is irrelevant.

Both from Chrisophera, sometimes on the same day.
__________________
May I suggest you stop trying to prove rigorously the bumble-bee cannot fly; instead, seek out the direct evidence. --jsfisher

Spelling lesson: ad nauseam; ad infinitum; noun form of "lose" = "losing," not "loosing"; you are = you're
Jennie C. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2007, 10:08 AM   #87
firecoins
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,206
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Which is stupid: If Saddam had any WMDs, they would have had "Made in the USA" printed on them anyway...

All the gubmint needed to do was dump a couple - just a couple - of WMDs somewhere in Iraq, and Bush wouldn't have a hard time explaining why they weren't there.

You can land SEALs just about anywhere, but not equip them with a couple of VX gas containers, to be buried in the sand somewhere, in a country controlled by the US Military?

SEALs and other US special ops groups most likely were in Iraq prior to any war conductiong recon missions. With 2 no fly zones already over Iraq for a decade, it would have been easy to simply "drop" ship some into Iraq and let some special ops group handle the rest.
firecoins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2007, 10:23 AM   #88
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by firecoins View Post
SEALs and other US special ops groups most likely were in Iraq prior to any war conductiong recon missions. With 2 no fly zones already over Iraq for a decade, it would have been easy to simply "drop" ship some into Iraq and let some special ops group handle the rest.
The reason that they didn't - assuming that the Bush administration were entirely without scruple and knew in advance that there were no WMD's - was that even in a small scale operation like that, the conspiracy would be certain to leak out.
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 05:06 AM   #89
eddyk
Thinker
 
eddyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 209
I know this thread is old, but it couldn't hurt to bring it back. I'd love some more examples.


The fires were not hot enough to weaken the steel. Steel Melted.
eddyk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 05:14 AM   #90
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by eddyk View Post
I know this thread is old, but it couldn't hurt to bring it back. I'd love some more examples.


The fires were not hot enough to weaken the steel. Steel Melted.
And nary a post from our resident truthers. I wonder why?
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 07:08 AM   #91
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
The FDNY predicting 7's collapse is suspicious. The FDNY was not in on it.

Our points are obvious. Most people can't see the Truth.

People clearly saw the plane flying north of Citgo. Those exact same people did not really see the impact and could not see the flyover.

Last edited by 000063; 17th October 2012 at 07:10 AM.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 08:31 AM   #92
Brass
Critical Thinker
 
Brass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by 000063 View Post
The FDNY predicting 7's collapse is suspicious. The FDNY was not in on it.
This. If you believe in a 9/11 conspiracy, then you have to believe the FDNY was in on it.
Brass is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 02:58 PM   #93
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,776
Well I'm not up to looking through to see if its already been mentioned but...
according to poster mudlark and the CiT the description of the workers at the ANC as seeing Flt 77 coming right at them and being over the ANC parking lot is bolstered by both the Citgo station witnesses and Boger,
BUT
Morin also saw the plane and put it with only part of the aircraft over the south edge of the Navy Annex and he says he watched it as it went down and below his line of sight directly at the Pentagon.

These are mutually exclusive flightpaths as there is no path in which the plane is over any part of the ANC and would allow Morin to even see the aircraft without at least turning around and facing north in which case the plane would be in a position that would preclude him seeing it from the Annex parking lot when he ran there.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 08:46 PM   #94
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,029
The mainstream media were in on it (specifically: BBC reporting 7 WTC collapse 20 minutes early, "blowing the script).

The (MSM) reported some of the hijackers were still alive after 9/11 (the BBC again).
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2012, 08:51 PM   #95
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 19,078
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
Well I'm not up to looking through to see if its already been mentioned but...
according to poster mudlark and the CiT the description of the workers at the ANC as seeing Flt 77 coming right at them and being over the ANC parking lot is bolstered by both the Citgo station witnesses and Boger,
BUT
Morin also saw the plane and put it with only part of the aircraft over the south edge of the Navy Annex and he says he watched it as it went down and below his line of sight directly at the Pentagon.

These are mutually exclusive flightpaths as there is no path in which the plane is over any part of the ANC and would allow Morin to even see the aircraft without at least turning around and facing north in which case the plane would be in a position that would preclude him seeing it from the Annex parking lot when he ran there.
we'll also ignore the fact that the mopes most conservative "north of Citgo" path would require the damn plane to be banked over just about on its side, while at the same time the mopes star witnesses (who accurately described the exact location of the plane in a 3 dimensional space, Craig said so! Pinky swear!) neglected to mention it.
The Big Dog is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2012, 04:58 AM   #96
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,029
FDR's were not recovered at the WTC from Flights 11 and 175.

FDR for Flight 77 at the Pentagon was faked.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2012, 05:24 AM   #97
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,368
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
FDR for Flight 77 at the Pentagon was faked.
Even worse, the faked FDR showed the wrong flight path...
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2012, 05:42 AM   #98
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
 
aggle-rithm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
Originally Posted by eddyk View Post
I know this thread is old, but it couldn't hurt to bring it back.
OW!!

My EYES!!

I'm not supposed to get necromancy in them!


Quote:
The fires were not hot enough to weaken the steel. Steel Melted.
The really silly thing about this is that they can't come up with a coherent reason that melted steel is significant. Something to do with thermite, but they're not sure what exactly.
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
aggle-rithm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th October 2012, 03:09 PM   #99
Brass
Critical Thinker
 
Brass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 441
Article supporting our side; "You can't use that source! The government controls the media!"

Article from same source supporting their side; "Look! This is from the media! How can you deny that?!"
Brass is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 12:33 AM   #100
FrankHT
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 145
The sad part is that there are nearly as many 'official stories' as there are conspiracy theories.
The first 'official story' was no planes were scrambled until AFTER the Pentagon was hit (Think MAYBE a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though didn't they?).
The second 'official story' stood for 3 years & was agreed upon by both NORAD & the FAA. It included a set of notification times,including the claim NORAD was tracking Flight 93 at 9:16 (before it was even hijacked). Think maybe a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though,didn't they?
So,today's official story,should we believe it? Why? Oh,I know,because if it wasn't true someone would have TALKED? NOT!

Last edited by FrankHT; 20th October 2012 at 12:40 AM.
FrankHT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 12:45 AM   #101
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
The sad part is that there are nearly as many 'official stories' as there are conspiracy theories.
The first 'official story' was no planes were scrambled until AFTER the Pentagon was hit (Think MAYBE a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though didn't they?).
The second 'official story' stood for 3 years & was agreed upon by both NORAD & the FAA. It included a set of notification times,including the claim NORAD was tracking Flight 93 at 9:16 (before it was even hijacked). Think maybe a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though,didn't they?
So,today's official story,should we believe it? Why? Oh,I know,because if it wasn't true someone would have TALKED? NOT!
FrankHT the guy who ignores the most simple questions has spoken !

You never did answer my question did you Frank
Spanx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 01:05 AM   #102
FrankHT
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 145
Originally Posted by Spanx View Post
FrankHT the guy who ignores the most simple questions has spoken !

You never did answer my question did you Frank
`

What was the question? Was I in the military? NO,that's just an appeal to authority to suggest I can't under things military or 911 & therefore should accept,without question,the comments by those who were?
No,try again.
Or was the question,what was NORAD's mission? It was to protect AMERICAN air space. BUT with the COP OUT that it was only looking OUTWARD? No,that's not their ONLY Mission.
FrankHT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 01:27 AM   #103
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
`

What was the question? Was I in the military? NO,that's just an appeal to authority to suggest I can't under things military or 911 & therefore should accept,without question,the comments by those who were?
No,try again.
Or was the question,what was NORAD's mission? It was to protect AMERICAN air space. BUT with the COP OUT that it was only looking OUTWARD? No,that's not their ONLY Mission.
For someone who claims to be an expert in the events of 11 years ago I would tend not to believe anything you say.

I believe I asked my question 3 times including bumping a thread and another poster asked twice.

If you have trouble remembering the last 10 days how on earth can you claim to remember the events of 11 years ago ?
Spanx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 03:19 AM   #104
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by Brass View Post
Article supporting our side; "You can't use that source! The government controls the media!"

Article from same source supporting their side; "Look! This is from the media! How can you deny that?!"
There's an anti-vaxxer who says that the medical industry is all covering up the harmful effects of vaccines. He also says that the medical industry is conducting several studies into how harmful vaccines are (while ignoring the ones that have already been done). The funny thing is, he's made both of those claims within a single page of each other.

Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
The sad part is that there are nearly as many 'official stories' as there are conspiracy theories.
The first 'official story' was no planes were scrambled until AFTER the Pentagon was hit (Think MAYBE a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though didn't they?).
The second 'official story' stood for 3 years & was agreed upon by both NORAD & the FAA. It included a set of notification times,including the claim NORAD was tracking Flight 93 at 9:16 (before it was even hijacked). Think maybe a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though,didn't they?
So,today's official story,should we believe it? Why? Oh,I know,because if it wasn't true someone would have TALKED? NOT!
Oh, look, baseless incredulity and misrepresentation of facts.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 03:26 AM   #105
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
It is an insult to the brave deda fire officers who gave their lives to say the New York Fire Department was in on some kind of conspiracy.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 03:41 AM   #106
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
The military always obeys orders. The fighter pilots had to be stalled, because they couldn't be relied upon to follow orders not to fire.

Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
It's as simple as this: military people do what they're told.
Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
...
The pilots knew it couldn't be done by the book. And the perpetrators knew the pilots knew it and couldn't be trusted to follow the book which is why this elaborate game of 'keep away' had to be played in the first place.
So,beachnut,I guess are right about military people. They do have original thoughts.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th October 2012, 11:16 AM   #107
Brass
Critical Thinker
 
Brass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by FrankHT View Post
The sad part is that there are nearly as many 'official stories' as there are conspiracy theories.
The first 'official story' was no planes were scrambled until AFTER the Pentagon was hit (Think MAYBE a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though didn't they?).
The second 'official story' stood for 3 years & was agreed upon by both NORAD & the FAA. It included a set of notification times,including the claim NORAD was tracking Flight 93 at 9:16 (before it was even hijacked). Think maybe a few people knew that wasn't true? Kept quiet though,didn't they?
So,today's official story,should we believe it? Why? Oh,I know,because if it wasn't true someone would have TALKED? NOT!
"Hey, we should constantly change the story so that nobody becomes suspicious about September 11th!"

See how that doesn't make any sense at all, Frank?
Brass is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2012, 09:18 AM   #108
Poetry Hound
Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 36
Here's my list. Sorry if some have already been posted.

1.There’s a ton of evidence but all the evidence was shipped to China.

2. Bin Laden worked for the CIA but the CIA used a “fake” Bin Laden in the video.

3. Everybody’s asleep but everybody’s waking up.

4. The debunkers disrespect the victims’ families but the families who said they spoke to their loved ones on the planes are liars.

5. You can’t trust what the government says except when you can trust the government (e.g., the FBI lies, but we know Bid Laden wasn’t guilty cuz the FBI didn’t include 9/11 on his Most Wanted entry).

6. You can’t trust what the media says except when you can trust what the media says. (e.g., the BBC reported WTC 7’s collapse early so they can’t be trusted, but we know some of the hijackers are alive because it was reported by the BBC).

7. The government-funded investigations were corrupt so we need another government-funded investigation.

8. Cheney ordered that the Pentagon plane not be shot down but there was no Pentagon plane.

9. Hanjour couldn’t have made the difficult maneuvers in the Pentagon plane but there was no Pentagon plane.

10. Silverstein told an FDNY official to “pull it” but he never spoke to an FDNY official.

11. A firefighter said WTC 7’s going to "blow" so he had advance knowledge of the inside job, but the firefighters weren’t part of the inside job.

12. Thermite/thermate was used in order to disguise the demolitions by avoiding the sound of explosives, but people heard explosives.

13. According to various truthers, the people involved in the plot included demo crews, building maintenance staff, building security staff, first responders at all 3 sites, ground zero crews, FEMA, NIST, DOD, CIA, United Airlines, American Airlines, scientists at MIT, Purdue, Northwestern, Berkeley, etc., insurance companies, Rudy Giuliani, Larry Silverstein, the Mossad, all the media in the world, etc. etc. etc. and yet . . . it would only take a relatively small handful of people to pull off 9/11.

14. Who was behind 9/11? It was the Bush Administration! No wait! It was a rogue group of government officials! No wait! It was the NWO! No wait! It was the Jews! No wait! It was Haliburton and other defense contractors! No wait! It was the Vatican! No wait! It was the illuminati! Aw hell, it was all of ‘em!

15. What hit the Pentagon? It was a Global Hawk! No wait! It was an A3 Skywarrior! No wait! It was a missile! No wait! It really was Flight 77 but Hanjour wasn’t at the controls! No wait! It was all done with explosives!
Poetry Hound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st October 2012, 03:30 PM   #109
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,438
Originally Posted by Poetry Hound View Post
Here's my list. Sorry if some have already been posted.

1.There’s a ton of evidence but all the evidence was shipped to China.

2. Bin Laden worked for the CIA but the CIA used a “fake” Bin Laden in the video.

3. Everybody’s asleep but everybody’s waking up.

4. The debunkers disrespect the victims’ families but the families who said they spoke to their loved ones on the planes are liars.

5. You can’t trust what the government says except when you can trust the government (e.g., the FBI lies, but we know Bid Laden wasn’t guilty cuz the FBI didn’t include 9/11 on his Most Wanted entry).

6. You can’t trust what the media says except when you can trust what the media says. (e.g., the BBC reported WTC 7’s collapse early so they can’t be trusted, but we know some of the hijackers are alive because it was reported by the BBC).

7. The government-funded investigations were corrupt so we need another government-funded investigation.

8. Cheney ordered that the Pentagon plane not be shot down but there was no Pentagon plane.

9. Hanjour couldn’t have made the difficult maneuvers in the Pentagon plane but there was no Pentagon plane.

10. Silverstein told an FDNY official to “pull it” but he never spoke to an FDNY official.

11. A firefighter said WTC 7’s going to "blow" so he had advance knowledge of the inside job, but the firefighters weren’t part of the inside job.

12. Thermite/thermate was used in order to disguise the demolitions by avoiding the sound of explosives, but people heard explosives.

13. According to various truthers, the people involved in the plot included demo crews, building maintenance staff, building security staff, first responders at all 3 sites, ground zero crews, FEMA, NIST, DOD, CIA, United Airlines, American Airlines, scientists at MIT, Purdue, Northwestern, Berkeley, etc., insurance companies, Rudy Giuliani, Larry Silverstein, the Mossad, all the media in the world, etc. etc. etc. and yet . . . it would only take a relatively small handful of people to pull off 9/11.

14. Who was behind 9/11? It was the Bush Administration! No wait! It was a rogue group of government officials! No wait! It was the NWO! No wait! It was the Jews! No wait! It was Haliburton and other defense contractors! No wait! It was the Vatican! No wait! It was the illuminati! Aw hell, it was all of ‘em!

15. What hit the Pentagon? It was a Global Hawk! No wait! It was an A3 Skywarrior! No wait! It was a missile! No wait! It really was Flight 77 but Hanjour wasn’t at the controls! No wait! It was all done with explosives!
Well, when you put it like that!
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2012, 08:14 PM   #110
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
They used thermite, which is quiet, because obviously you wouldnt want explosions to give away your project!

VS...

They used explosives SO INTENSE they hurled heavy steel hundreds of feet away from the towers. (something no demolition on earth is even attempting to achieve.)


This is actually a Richard Gage one that got to me so much I made a video about it

Last edited by Edx; 24th October 2012 at 08:15 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 01:38 PM   #111
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,776
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
They used thermite, which is quiet, because obviously you wouldnt want explosions to give away your project!

VS...

They used explosives SO INTENSE they hurled heavy steel hundreds of feet away from the towers. (something no demolition on earth is even attempting to achieve.)


This is actually a Richard Gage one that got to me so much I made a video about it
I'll have check that out when I can view videos

Concerning therm?te/explosives, I am particularly fond of the idea of explosives with therm?mate added being touted as an explosive form of therm?te
In order for an explosive to sever column it uses the blast front to separate the material of that column , therm?te does this by the much slower mechanism of heating a small volume to the melting point faster then the heat can be lost.

Adding more heat to the blast will not qucken the effect of the explosive by heating the column. It can increase the blast front velocity by causing the gasses of the explosion to expand faster BUT thats going to result in a bigger, more distinctive BANG! So much for hushaboom
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 04:31 PM   #112
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
They used thermite, which is quiet, because obviously you wouldnt want explosions to give away your project!

VS...

They used explosives SO INTENSE they hurled heavy steel hundreds of feet away from the towers. (something no demolition on earth is even attempting to achieve.)


This is actually a Richard Gage one that got to me so much I made a video about it

They looked like CD's except they hurled steel in a manner that CD's don't?


They looked just like CD's so they were CD's

They didn't look like CD's so they were CD's.

All "facts" lead to the same conclusion.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 05:04 PM   #113
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
Adding more heat to the blast will not qucken the effect of the explosive by heating the column. It can increase the blast front velocity by causing the gasses of the explosion to expand faster BUT thats going to result in a bigger, more distinctive BANG! So much for hushaboom
Yea, the part I just find so hilarious and confounding is why they will at the same time say that it wasnt a traditional demolition because they wanted to not give it away like Gage says thats why they used thermite because its quiet, but then at the same time tell you that they used explosives hundreds of times more powerful than any demolition ever carried out! So, what was the point in the thermite then? I tend to liken it to a planned robbery where they say they are going to use special shoes so they dont make a sound when they walk, ok so they want to be quiet, that makes sense, but at the same time they are going to use megaphones when talking to each other....

Last edited by Edx; 25th October 2012 at 05:05 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 06:52 PM   #114
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Poetry Hound View Post
Here's my list. Sorry if some have already been posted.

1.There’s a ton of evidence but all the evidence was shipped to China.

2. Bin Laden worked for the CIA but the CIA used a “fake” Bin Laden in the video.

3. Everybody’s asleep but everybody’s waking up.

4. The debunkers disrespect the victims’ families but the families who said they spoke to their loved ones on the planes are liars.

5. You can’t trust what the government says except when you can trust the government (e.g., the FBI lies, but we know Bid Laden wasn’t guilty cuz the FBI didn’t include 9/11 on his Most Wanted entry).

6. You can’t trust what the media says except when you can trust what the media says. (e.g., the BBC reported WTC 7’s collapse early so they can’t be trusted, but we know some of the hijackers are alive because it was reported by the BBC).

7. The government-funded investigations were corrupt so we need another government-funded investigation.

8. Cheney ordered that the Pentagon plane not be shot down but there was no Pentagon plane.

9. Hanjour couldn’t have made the difficult maneuvers in the Pentagon plane but there was no Pentagon plane.

10. Silverstein told an FDNY official to “pull it” but he never spoke to an FDNY official.

11. A firefighter said WTC 7’s going to "blow" so he had advance knowledge of the inside job, but the firefighters weren’t part of the inside job.

12. Thermite/thermate was used in order to disguise the demolitions by avoiding the sound of explosives, but people heard explosives.

13. According to various truthers, the people involved in the plot included demo crews, building maintenance staff, building security staff, first responders at all 3 sites, ground zero crews, FEMA, NIST, DOD, CIA, United Airlines, American Airlines, scientists at MIT, Purdue, Northwestern, Berkeley, etc., insurance companies, Rudy Giuliani, Larry Silverstein, the Mossad, all the media in the world, etc. etc. etc. and yet . . . it would only take a relatively small handful of people to pull off 9/11.

14. Who was behind 9/11? It was the Bush Administration! No wait! It was a rogue group of government officials! No wait! It was the NWO! No wait! It was the Jews! No wait! It was Haliburton and other defense contractors! No wait! It was the Vatican! No wait! It was the illuminati! Aw hell, it was all of ‘em!

15. What hit the Pentagon? It was a Global Hawk! No wait! It was an A3 Skywarrior! No wait! It was a missile! No wait! It really was Flight 77 but Hanjour wasn’t at the controls! No wait! It was all done with explosives!
That's quite a list. I linked it to my chrismohr911.com debate with the 9/11truth side under the category of "A New Investigataion?" near the end of the 238 reasons.
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 06:59 PM   #115
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
They used thermite, which is quiet, because obviously you wouldnt want explosions to give away your project!

VS...

They used explosives SO INTENSE they hurled heavy steel hundreds of feet away from the towers. (something no demolition on earth is even attempting to achieve.)


This is actually a Richard Gage one that got to me so much I made a video about it
See point 53 of my debate on chrismohr911.com; I added a linky to your little video.
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 08:30 PM   #116
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,641
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
See point 53 of my debate on chrismohr911.com; I added a linky to your little video.
Cool.

But they wont understand it, If you go back through the loooong comments on that video I dont think I remember a single truther ever actually understanding the point. Either that or they claim there were loud explosions but never produce the video. They claim that demolitions really are that loud, yet never produce a video (even though what they claim would have to be much louder that the most powerful demolition ever carried out) or they make up some secret technology saying that the government could engineer a quieter explosive, which means they dont understand the basics of how sound and explosives work although I have to then ask if they can do that why would you need thermite at all if there exists ridiculously powerful explosives that can hurl heavy steel around that are quieter than a small shaped charge.

Last edited by Edx; 25th October 2012 at 09:32 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 10:36 PM   #117
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,064
WTC7 must have been a controlled demolition because it wasn't hit by a plane; WTC1 & WTC2 were hit by planes and were controlled demolitions.
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 11:38 PM   #118
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,064
My compilation of the best contributions so far (I've made edits where I thought it appropriate):


NORAD stood down; Flight 93 was shot down.

Damning evidence of there being charges inside the towers is the numerous reports of explosions; Thermite (a non-explosive) reactions were used to weaken the steel beams.

The towers fell neatly within their own footprints, indicating controlled demolition; Heavy steel columns from the towers landed as far away as 600 feet, indicating controlled demolition.

9/11 enabled the US to invade Afghanistan so they could build a pipeline; Al Qaeda and the Taliban are puppets of the CIA/ISI (why the need to invade?).

The fact of controlled demolition is obvious from watching videos; The collapse was designed to not look like controlled demolition.

The announcement to tenants of WTC 2 that it was safe to remain in or go back to their offices was intended to maximize casualties; The fact that the first building was hit before 9:00 AM was intended to minimize casualties.

Firefighters and police officers were given a gag order not to talk about what they experienced in the towers on 9-11; Many firefighters and police officers have conducted interviews about what they went through.

Flight attendant Betty Ong should not be believed because she sounded too calm in her telephone call; Flight attendant Madeline Sweeney should not be believed because she did not sound calm enough in her telephone call.

Firefighters should be believed when they say that they heard explosions in the twin towers; Firefighters should not be believed when they say that they saw massive damage and fires on multiple floors in WTC7.

It wouldn't be difficult for the government to keep a massive conspiracy like this completely secret; Conspiracy theorists have discovered the truth.

The conspirators were evil geniuses and faked the phone calls; The conspirators faked phone calls that were impossible at the time.

The Flight Data Recorders (FDRs) from the WTC were never found, the FBI made them disappear; The FDRs from the Pentagon and Shanksville, were found, the FBI planted them.

The east penthouse of WTC7 collapsed 8 seconds before the rest of the building, and this is a sign of controlled demolition; All of the supports failed at the same time, and this is a sign of controlled demolition.

The Pentagon FDR indicated a flyover; The Pentagon FDR was faked.

Steven Jones - credible when talking about thermite; Not credible, when talking about Pentagon (he believes a plane hit it).

Bush - credible when talking about New World Order stuff; Not credible when talking about 9/11.

Osama Bin Laden - credible when denying the attacks; Not credible when claiming responsibility of the attacks.

Eyewitness – credible when saying they saw no plane parts; Not credible when they say they saw a plane hit the Pentagon.

Flight 11 being caught on film is suspicious; Flight 77 not being caught on film is suspicious.

The evidence was whisked away before anyone could perform any investigation; Steven Jones has taken samples which show evidence of nanothermite.

The FDNY predicting 7's collapse is suspicious; The FDNY was not in on it.

The mainstream media (MSM) were in on it (e.g. the BBC reporting the WTC 7 collapse 20 minutes early and "blowing the script”); The MSM reported some of the hijackers were still alive after 9/11 (the BBC again).

Bin Laden worked for the CIA; The CIA used a “fake” Bin Laden in the video.

Everybody’s asleep; Everybody’s waking up.

The debunkers disrespect the victims’ families, but the families who said they spoke to their loved ones on the planes are too stupid to recognise faked voices.

The government-funded investigations were corrupt; We need a new government-funded investigation.

Cheney ordered that the Pentagon plane not be shot down; There was no Pentagon plane.

Hani Hanjour couldn’t have made the difficult manoeuvres in the Pentagon plane; There was no Pentagon plane.

Silverstein told an FDNY official to “pull it”; Silverstein never spoke to an FDNY official.

A firefighter said WTC 7’s going to "blow" so he had advance knowledge of the inside job; The firefighters weren’t part of the inside job.

Thermite/thermate/nanotherm*te was used in order to disguise the demolitions by avoiding the sound of explosives; People heard explosives.

WTC7 must have been a controlled demolition because it wasn't hit by a plane; WTC1 & WTC2 were hit by planes and were controlled demolitions.

Who was behind 9/11? It was the Bush Administration! No wait! It was a rogue group of government officials! No wait! It was the NWO! No wait! It was the Jews! No wait! It was Halliburton and other defence contractors! No wait! It was the Vatican! No wait! It was the Illuminati! Aw hell, it was all of ‘em!
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2012, 11:59 PM   #119
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,064
I created a blog post of my compilation above, just in case anyone's interested in linking to it elsewhere.

http://orphia-nay.blogspot.com.au/20...adictions.html
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th October 2012, 06:37 AM   #120
Carlos
Critical Thinker
 
Carlos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 285
The media ignored the collapse of WTC7.

BBC announces WTC7 collapse before it happened.
__________________
In most cases debating with a 9/11 truther is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.

The customer with the knife is always right - Quohog, the bartender
Carlos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:45 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.