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.
Reply
Old 8th January 2017, 06:24 AM   #41
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,758
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Welp, that convinced me! 9/11 Was An Outside Job 100%
Pick one of MarkF's replies (all are good), and address it with facts and reason.

I recommend you start with the one question/reply that you feel is most relevant to proving or disproving whatever you want to prove or disprove.
In other words: Please present us with the one bit of evidence pro "inside job" that you feel is the strongest - by being most certainly true, by most certainly supporting some "inside job" hypothesis (which?!), and by most certainly refuting some element of what you think the "official version" is (be specific).
Try to state your case - that one bit of evidence, how you know it is based on fact, and the reasons why you think it helps prove inside job and disprove official story - as tightly, coherently and comprehensively, yet cocisely, as you can. Then, if you find that your strongest bit of evidence turns out not to be evidence at all, you should reconsider you entire Gish Gallop and entertain the possibility that perhaps all are not evidence for inside job.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th January 2017, 06:29 AM   #42
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,198
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
[...]
Why does NIST refuse to release their work for public review?
[...]
Why did NIST reject the pancake theory?
[...]
And basically every claim made in this video
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Why do you care what NIST says? NIST's investigation was about building safety, not a criminal investigation. Whatever they say may be of concern for new building construction, not for the causes of 9/11.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 8th January 2017, 06:32 AM   #43
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,758
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
...
How come the steel at the WTC wasnt analyzed?
...
What about the swiss cheese found in WTC7?
...
Are you aware that these two questions are based on two mutually exclusive premises?

The first assumes that no WTC steel was analyzed
The second is based on a WTC steel analysis.

I hope you can spot - and acknowledge! - the contradiction.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th January 2017, 06:36 AM   #44
C_Felix
Master Poster
 
C_Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Just outside Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,152
Originally Posted by Macgyver1968 View Post
I'm 98% convinced that you are not 98% convinced 9/11 was not an inside job.
I need a flow map.
__________________
Eqinsu Ocha!
Eqinsu Ocha!
C_Felix 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 8th January 2017, 06:44 AM   #45
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 22,550
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
I will be 100% convinced that 9/11 was not an inside job(right now I am 98% convinced that it was not) if these few remaining questions are answered here

I will be 100% convinced that your questions are being asked in good faith if this one remaining question is answered by you here:

What other complete explanation better fits the totality of the evidence?
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader 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 8th January 2017, 06:57 AM   #46
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
Dude, funny bone time. It's Saturday night. Others here are making Swiss Cheese jokes*


*What kind of Swiss Cheese? Gruyere? Fontina? Or just the ones with the holes?
I actually had to look that up because the Fontina I am familiar with I would have described as more of an Italian flavor; say a mozzarella with a little more flavor. The original is still from the Italian Aosta Valley region but certainly will have a Swiss influence and much stronger than I knew of.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 07:08 AM   #47
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post

<snip>

Note also that this was the pancake initiation theory, not pancake collapse propagation.

<snip>
There are still things to learn in the 9/11 Conspiracy sub-forum. I never knew that distinction before. Thank you Dave.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 07:10 AM   #48
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,331
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I literally have Swiss cheese in my fridge, about 10 feet away from me as I post.

Should I be concerned.
...it's too late to be concerned...

Run.

Keep running.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 8th January 2017, 07:13 AM   #49
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Classical Gish Gallop.

I'll pick one:


What a stupid question. It is perfectly clear why that paint ignites around 425 C: That is the temperature at which epoxy decomposes and ignited.

The smart question would actually be:
If the red chips were thermitic why do they ignite at low temperatures?
Because even the references on nano-thermite that the Harrit et al paper presents document that nano-thermite ignites at at least 100 C more. They even put the evidence in the paper - Figure 29:

[imgw=400]http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/i328/MikeAlfaromeo/ActiveThermiticMaterial/ActiveThermiticMaterial_Fig29.jpg[/imgw=400]

See? The actual nano-thermite peaks far beyond the paint chip. By leaving out three of the four paint graphs, and by not drawing the ordinate (y-axis) at 0 W/g, this Figure kinda hides how bad the comparison really is. Here I overlayed all four DSC traces by Harrit ed al with the actual nano-thermite graph:

[imgw=400]http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/i328/MikeAlfaromeo/ActiveThermiticMaterial/DSC-overlaid2.png[/imgw=400]

Note that Harrit ed al picked the one paint trace that is least different from actual nano-thermite.
Note that the actual nano-thermite reacts endothermally up until at least 270 C, and doesn't turn exothermal until about 380 C. Contrast this with the four Harrit-traces which all react exothermally since att least 200 C. The peaks for paint begin in earnest between ca. 360 C and ca. 410 C, nano-thermite only at ca. 500 C.

The other obvious difference is how much more energy the paint releases - that's the area under the graph: Up to 7.5 kJ/g - that's twice as much as even the most ideal thermite reaction could possibly release. How come? Harrit et al provide the explanation in their very crap paper:

This is perhaps the only true conclusion in the paper. In fact, it is inevitable that the organic matrix burns on air and releases MUCH MUCH more energy than a thermite reaction would, if there were any thermite in that matrix (there is, of course, none). It can be shown that the very data in Harrit et al proves that at least 98% of the energy released in their DSC tests must come from comustion of the organic matrix on air. Consider the specific energy of the alleged components:
  • Ideal, perfect thermite: 3.9 kJ/g
  • Actual, measured nano-thermite: ~1.5 kJ/g
  • Organic polymers: ~15 to 40 kJ/g (for example epoxy: ~20 kJ/g)
  • Iron oxide (the gray layer): ~0 kJ/g
As you can see, every ordinary organic substance is a LOT more energetic than nano-thermite: Paper and wood ~17 kJ/g. MrFliop, your ear wax and your dried ejaculate are more energetic than nano-thermite!

Since the gray layer is inert (Harrit et al state this in the very crap paper: "The gray layer was found to consist mostly of iron oxide so that it probably does not contribute to the exotherm,"), and since it is more dense than the red layer, and since its volume is of the same order of magnitude as the red layer's, the inert gray layer probably contains, on average, >50% of the chip's mass, and its mass is included in the average experimental result of ~4 kJ/g. From this we can conclude that the red layer must contribute >8 kJ/g on average - twice what thermite could do even in theoretical perfection. This can only be explained by organic combustion!

It follows that the DSC traces are dominated by organic combustion - and in fact "thermite" adds zero explanatory value.



The true question you ought to ask is therefore:
Why has the Truth Movement not renounced the Steven Jones and Niels Harrit HOAX that the red-gray chips are thermitic? And why do you believe any claim at all made by Movement that is unable to see through such a hoax?
#cantonear1968

I hope this bookmark works for future reference.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited quoted pictures for size
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump

Last edited by Loss Leader; 8th January 2017 at 09:43 AM.
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 07:17 AM   #50
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,444
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Pick one of MarkF's replies (all are good), and address it with facts and reason.

I recommend you start with the one question/reply that you feel is most relevant to proving or disproving whatever you want to prove or disprove.
In other words: Please present us with the one bit of evidence pro "inside job" that you feel is the strongest - by being most certainly true, by most certainly supporting some "inside job" hypothesis (which?!), and by most certainly refuting some element of what you think the "official version" is (be specific).
Try to state your case - that one bit of evidence, how you know it is based on fact, and the reasons why you think it helps prove inside job and disprove official story - as tightly, coherently and comprehensively, yet cocisely, as you can. Then, if you find that your strongest bit of evidence turns out not to be evidence at all, you should reconsider you entire Gish Gallop and entertain the possibility that perhaps all are not evidence for inside job.

Well, aren't you an optimist.
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 8th January 2017, 09:13 AM   #51
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,198
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
I will be 100% convinced that 9/11 was not an inside job(right now I am 98% convinced that it was not) if these few remaining questions are answered here

Why does NIST refuse to release their work for public review?
How was molten iron, molten molybdenum, and aluminum oxide produced in the rubble?
How come the steel at the WTC wasnt analyzed?
Why were there Iron Microspheres(indicating molten Iron floating through the air)discovered in the WTC dust?
If the red chips were normal paint why do they ignite at low temperatures?
Why were there flashes seen in WTC 7s collapse?
What about the swiss cheese found in WTC7?
Why was there a power down in the weekend before 9/11?
Why did NIST reject the pancake theory?
Why did Bush say there were explosives in the WTC?
If the squibs really are just air ejections why do they have the same color as gypsum and concrete?
Why was there no jolt in the upper sections of the towers collapses?
How did a passport susrvive the plane crash?
Why does thermal imagery show low temps in the towers?
Why are there not any broken windows or huge flames as is such where there are skyscraper infernos?
Why was there a Demolition truck parked next to WTC7?
How did Al Qaeda capture the video of the second plane from underneath the bridge then give it to the FBI with no questions asked?
And all the Wall Street documents destroyed in the 3 buildings?

And basically every claim made in this video
I've stricken out all questions that have already been answered in this thread. The remaining ones are questions about which people have asked you for clarification. Once you do, we can give you answers. Then you'll be 100% convinced, right?

Or aren't you prepared to accept the answers? (see my sig)
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 8th January 2017, 09:57 AM   #52
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,003
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Pick one of MarkF's replies (all are good), and address it with facts and reason.
Somehow I don't see that happening. The OP got what he wanted. 2 pages of attention.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
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 8th January 2017, 10:48 AM   #53
MrFliop
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Quote:
How was molten iron, molten molybdenum, and aluminum oxide produced in the rubble?
This is actually a question that was given to me while I was debating a truther on YouTube a while ago. The guy sent me a link to a government report that had conducted studies on the molten metal and discovered these metal compositions. I can't find the link to it but it was a report by the USGS released sometime around 2012
MrFliop 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 8th January 2017, 11:02 AM   #54
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
 
Macgyver1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,027
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
This is actually a question that was given to me while I was debating a truther on YouTube a while ago. The guy sent me a link to a government report that had conducted studies on the molten metal and discovered these metal compositions. I can't find the link to it but it was a report by the USGS released sometime around 2012
You do know that molybdenum has a melting point of 4700F? A higher temperature than even a thermite reaction can produce?
__________________
"Fixin' crap that ain't broke."
Macgyver1968 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 8th January 2017, 11:10 AM   #55
MrFliop
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Quote:
Why does thermal imagery show low temps in the towers?


Quote:
Why was there a demolition truck parked next to WTC 7?
Again this is a claim that I've heard while debating someone. Apparently there is a video of a Demolition Inc. truck parked right outside WTC 7's entrance with the towers burning in the background. I asked the person making this claim to show me the video and he refused. So I really believed that he was just making it up but when I heard different truthers making the claim I began to doubt that it was made up.

Last edited by MrFliop; 8th January 2017 at 11:41 AM.
MrFliop 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 8th January 2017, 11:17 AM   #56
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 12,624
I'm very imaginative, but I'm having difficulty thinking of any plausible reasons why anyone would or should care whether or not you are convinced of 9/11 not being an inside job.

You're also welcome to believe that water is dry, the Pope is Methodist, bears leave the woods to ****, or Lord Xenu will soon return to Teegeeack to pass out lemon poppy seed mini-muffins by way of apology for the whole atom-bombs-and-volcanos thing. The rest of us will just have to live with the oh-so-distressing fact that you're wrong.
__________________
A zmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad 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 8th January 2017, 11:29 AM   #57
Macgyver1968
Philosopher
 
Macgyver1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,027
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
IMG]https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/nist-thermal.jpg[/url]



Again this is a claim that I've heard while debating someone. Apparently there is a video of a Demolition Inc. truck parked right outside WTC 7's entrance with the towers burning in the background. I asked the person making this claim to show me the video and he refused. So I really believed that he was just making it up but when I heard different truthers making the claim I began to doubt that it was made up.
Hotlinking images is not allowed on this forum. You might want to just use the "[url]" tag.

https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.co...st-thermal.jpg

It only took 10 seconds of google-fu to find this:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


It shows a trash truck owned by Demolition Inc. pass by on the street, blocks away from the WTC. It wasn't right outside WTC7.
__________________
"Fixin' crap that ain't broke."
Macgyver1968 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 8th January 2017, 11:36 AM   #58
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,407
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
IMG]https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/nist-thermal.jpg[/url]

Again this is a claim that I've heard while debating someone. Apparently there is a video of a Demolition Inc. truck parked right outside WTC 7's entrance with the towers burning in the background. I asked the person making this claim to show me the video and he refused. So I really believed that he was just making it up but when I heard different truthers making the claim I began to doubt that it was made up.

Demolition expert Brent Blanchard, has stated the following:

Quote:
Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event.

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Articl...09-8-06%20.pdf

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7li...tc7resembledac

Last edited by skyeagle409; 8th January 2017 at 11:40 AM.
skyeagle409 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 8th January 2017, 11:37 AM   #59
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,444
What's supposed to be the deal? Whoever blew the towers up arrived and departed on the day in a Demolition Inc truck?
Someone thought that would be a good idea?
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 8th January 2017, 12:21 PM   #60
Elagabalus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,189
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
This is actually a question that was given to me while I was debating a truther on YouTube a while ago. The guy sent me a link to a government report that had conducted studies on the molten metal and discovered these metal compositions. I can't find the link to it but it was a report by the USGS released sometime around 2012
I'm a little confused here. To the hilited, that's just a highfalutin way of saying that samples were analyzed. Yet, your question (No. 3) states that nothing was analyzed. So which is it?

ETA: Ninja-ed by Oystein. Again.

Last edited by Elagabalus; 8th January 2017 at 12:26 PM.
Elagabalus 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 8th January 2017, 12:48 PM   #61
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,407
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
What's supposed to be the deal? Whoever blew the towers up arrived and departed on the day in a Demolition Inc truck?
Someone thought that would be a good idea?

And, in a bright red truck parked on a busy street. Not a very bright way to secretly hide sinister intentions involving the use of demolition explosives in the area.
skyeagle409 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 8th January 2017, 12:59 PM   #62
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,157
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I literally have Swiss cheese in my fridge, about 10 feet away from me as I post.

Should I be concerned.
If it ain't moldy don't be concerned.
Steve001 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 8th January 2017, 01:05 PM   #63
MrFliop
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Wish I could go back in time to when I was debating that truthe- I mean twoofer, now that I have all the answers.
MrFliop 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 8th January 2017, 01:14 PM   #64
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,758
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
ETA: Ninja-ed by Oystein. Again.
I hope this pony is some comfort:
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th January 2017, 01:18 PM   #65
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,758
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
[IMG:]https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/nist-thermal.jpg
...
Oh. KenDoc.
Ken Dockery is known for a pretty obnoxious habit of censoring any and all information contrary to his delusions. If you were to comment on his blog, or in his 9/11 groups on Facebook, information like that which we have provided you with here, you'd be banned in half an hour.

This man is not about truth, not about arguments, not about facts. He is all about propaganda.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th January 2017, 01:27 PM   #66
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,003
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Again this is a claim that I've heard while debating someone. Apparently there is a video of a Demolition Inc. truck parked right outside WTC 7's entrance with the towers burning in the background. I asked the person making this claim to show me the video and he refused. So I really believed that he was just making it up but when I heard different truthers making the claim I began to doubt that it was made up.
When the person making the claim refused to provide the evidence to prove the claim that should have ended the claim and the discussion.

But you didn't do that.

Following your line of reasoning, if I can get say 5 other people on this forum to state 9/11 was not an inside job (shouldn't be hard to do) and was in fact done by terrorists with a long history of attacking the United States, we don't have to produce any evidence to support that claim at all.

Just as long as enough of us say it, right?

That's what you just did. Accepted an unproven assertion as fact simply because enough people repeated the same lie.

If a bunch of people told you the clear daytime sky was plaid would you look up, or would you take the claim at face value because enough people said it so it must be true. What if we said the Earth's Moon was made of Green Cheese?

Had it occurred to you that all you did was encounter a bunch of people repeating the same lie, which they all probably got from the same source?

Lets work through the claim a bit further even.

So a bunch of people claim there is a video of a "Demolition Inc." truck parked right outside WTC 7's entrance with the towers burning in the background.

Seems almost too good to be true, doesn't it? Extraordinary even. Practically unbelievable. And what do they say about extraordinary claims? (Hint: They require extraordinary evidence. In this case any evidence at all would be nice.) But whadawegot?

Naught. Nuthin. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Zippo.

Not that it is your burden to find it for them since these CT's were the ones making the claim but when they utterly failed to produce did you make any attempt at all to find this video? If such a video did exist it would be absolutely famous in CT circles and certainly very widely available.

Is "Demolition Inc." a thing? Does such a company exist? Did you try to find out? (Just for fun, the first Google hit I got was for a remodeling company in Cincinnati, Ohio.)

If "Demolition Inc." did actually exist, and lets say for amusement they had a big truck with their logo plastered on it parked anywhere in the vicinity of the WTC on 9/11/2001 what does the actually prove, I mean other than that a truck was parked on the street?

What claim is actually being made here? If the claim is only that a truck was parked on the street and there is a video of it then produce said video (or even a still) and good enough, you just proved a truck was parked on the street.

If trying to claim something more than that then you need to be much more specific. Is this truck supposed to be significant somehow? If so, how? Remember, to this point we have a claim of a truck belonging to a company that may or may not exist parked in the street with no proof it was parked in the street.

That's it.

If you or anyone else wants to claim the (unproven) presence of said truck proves some sort of malicious human intervention in the destruction of a building using means other than hijacked aircraft then that claim needs to be stated explicitly.

I hate all this wishy-washy CT bull feces of nudge, nudge, know what I mean vague innuendo and insinuation because the lack the balls and the brains to make an explicit claim and stick to it.

PS

Curious, if you were Dr. Evil and were executing your super secret operation to secretly blow up a building of no particular significance for no plausible reason and wanted to make sure that there was no trace of your actions, would you allow the crew to park a big truck with their logo on it outside?

Just wondering if that had occurred to you. Remember what I said about this being an extraordinary claim, unbelievable even.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
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 8th January 2017, 01:30 PM   #67
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,758
Originally Posted by cantonear1968 View Post
There are still things to learn in the 9/11 Conspiracy sub-forum. I never knew that distinction before. Thank you Dave.
In case the distinction isn't clear to you, or anyone lurking:

The pancake hypothesis of initiation stated that the rapid phase of the collapse of the twin towers started when a floor slab disconnected entirely from their seats at the perimeter and core columns. This would have happened when the floor trusses got so hot they started sagging. This results in catenary forces, like a hammock pulling on its poles with a much higher force than its vertical weight. It was speculated that perhaps enough floor trusses disconnected from their column seats by high tension because of that to rip free an entire floor. That first falling floor would impact the floor below like a pancake, and rip that one loose also - a pancake initiating collapse.

This was dismissed - it was found that the pull-in forces of the sagging floor trusses would sooner pull the columns inward than tear loose the floor-to-column connections, and collapse most likely started when a row of columns was pulled inward and out of plumb so much that they could no longer support their loads - collapse would thus initiate by column failure, not by floor ("pancake") failure.


The pancake hypothesis of progression is almost certainly true, and acknowledged as true by NIST in their FAQ, even though NIST didn't bother to study collapse progression in much detail. It holds that once the top part of the towers - an assembly of connected floors, walls and core system - descended, all of its parts descending inside the perimeter would inevitably hit floors still intact and totally overwhelm their truss seats - that would result in a pancaking collapse progression all the way down, and this action is recorded on video and described by fire fighters on the scene.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th January 2017, 01:42 PM   #68
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by cantonear1968;11659801

[edit=Loss Leader
Edited quoted pictures for size[/edit]

I will remember that for the future.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 01:47 PM   #69
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
In case the distinction isn't clear to you, or anyone lurking:

The pancake hypothesis of initiation stated that the rapid phase of the collapse of the twin towers started when a floor slab disconnected entirely from their seats at the perimeter and core columns. This would have happened when the floor trusses got so hot they started sagging. This results in catenary forces, like a hammock pulling on its poles with a much higher force than its vertical weight. It was speculated that perhaps enough floor trusses disconnected from their column seats by high tension because of that to rip free an entire floor. That first falling floor would impact the floor below like a pancake, and rip that one loose also - a pancake initiating collapse.

This was dismissed - it was found that the pull-in forces of the sagging floor trusses would sooner pull the columns inward than tear loose the floor-to-column connections, and collapse most likely started when a row of columns was pulled inward and out of plumb so much that they could no longer support their loads - collapse would thus initiate by column failure, not by floor ("pancake") failure.


The pancake hypothesis of progression is almost certainly true, and acknowledged as true by NIST in their FAQ, even though NIST didn't bother to study collapse progression in much detail. It holds that once the top part of the towers - an assembly of connected floors, walls and core system - descended, all of its parts descending inside the perimeter would inevitably hit floors still intact and totally overwhelm their truss seats - that would result in a pancaking collapse progression all the way down, and this action is recorded on video and described by fire fighters on the scene.

The explanation is appreciated.

I was not aware it referred to the initiation stage as I first heard it explained or mentioned on the Nova program where they show the simulation of the floors sliding down the cores.

I had an understanding of the distinction but this explanation does make it even clearer.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 01:56 PM   #70
cantonear1968
Graduate Poster
 
cantonear1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,524
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
This is actually a question that was given to me while I was debating a truther on YouTube a while ago. The guy sent me a link to a government report that had conducted studies on the molten metal and discovered these metal compositions. I can't find the link to it but it was a report by the USGS released sometime around 2012
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
I'm a little confused here. To the hilited, that's just a highfalutin way of saying that samples were analyzed. Yet, your question (No. 3) states that nothing was analyzed. So which is it?

ETA: Ninja-ed by Oystein. Again.
I believe in this case, as opposed to the steel MrFliop was originally speaking about, he's referring to the USGS WTC Dust samples that were analyzed. I just went through this with a CTer who thought it showed evidence of a nuclear blast.

I could be mistaken because I believe these samples were collected in Jan/01 and released soon after. I don't know about them being released in 2012.
__________________
Can you people please stop not thinking? - Gorgonian

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
-Good luck America with President Trump

Last edited by cantonear1968; 8th January 2017 at 02:22 PM.
cantonear1968 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 8th January 2017, 02:11 PM   #71
Whip
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
In case the distinction isn't clear to you, or anyone lurking:

The [b]pancake hypothesis

Whip 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 8th January 2017, 02:55 PM   #72
Reactor drone
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,059
Quote:
Why does thermal imagery show low temps in the towers?
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
From NCSTAR 1-5A chapter 8

Quote:
There are several reasons why the infrared images reproduced here provide only a qualitative indication of relative temperature. The most important is the temperature range setting of the camera used to take the images. Prior to the aircraft impact it was being used to monitor objects near room temperature and had been adjusted to saturate at a maximum surface temperature of 120C. The temperature range was not adjusted before taking the WTC images. Since flame temperatures are much higher, the camera output was easily saturated by the heat coming from the fires.
Reactor drone 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 8th January 2017, 05:23 PM   #73
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,198
Originally Posted by Macgyver1968 View Post
It only took 10 seconds of google-fu to find this:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


It shows a trash truck owned by Demolition Inc. pass by on the street, blocks away from the WTC. It wasn't right outside WTC7.
Right. And the company appears to be Manhattan Demolition Co. Inc.

The truck seems to be this one or like this one:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6Hnfi6oKwT...Demolition.png

What was it doing? Well, it was a business day. The company is from Long Island.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 8th January 2017, 05:33 PM   #74
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,650
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Right. And the company appears to be Manhattan Demolition Co. Inc.

The truck seems to be this one or like this one:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6Hnfi6oKwT...Demolition.png

What was it doing? Well, it was a business day. The company is from Long Island.
Don't they specialize, in interior demolition?
Crazy Chainsaw 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 8th January 2017, 06:31 PM   #75
MrFliop
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Quote:
How did Al Qaeda capture the video of the second plane from underneath the bridge then give it to the FBI with no questions asked?
Ok let's just get this out of the way. In regards to the Video of second plane crash from across the river the claims made by truthers about it are: 1.) The FBI claimed al-Qaeda shot the tape. 2.) The FBI removed the audio from the tape to hide an eye-witness saying that it looked like a black military plane which was later discovered through a NIST FOIA video.
MrFliop 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 8th January 2017, 07:09 PM   #76
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,496
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I literally have Swiss cheese in my fridge, about 10 feet away from me as I post.

Should I be concerned.
I had Emmental on my sandwich at lunch, but I covered it up with Montreal Smoked Meat and spicy mustard.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok 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 8th January 2017, 07:38 PM   #77
Elind
Philosopher
 
Elind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: S.E. USA. Sometimes bible country
Posts: 7,777
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Ha-Ha. Dont you think that I would have searched these forums for answers as soon as I found out about them. I tried going trough them to get answers I really tried. But, I quit after 10 minutes because I could not take it anymore with like 90% of comments being generic insults.
At least you are honest about your inability to concentrate and understand anything; I'll give you that.
Elind 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 8th January 2017, 07:45 PM   #78
Norman Alexander
Master Poster
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,038
Quick question, dude: What DID happen on 9-Nov-2001?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander 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 8th January 2017, 09:02 PM   #79
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,003
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Ok let's just get this out of the way. In regards to the Video of second plane crash from across the river the claims made by truthers about it are: 1.) The FBI claimed al-Qaeda shot the tape. 2.) The FBI removed the audio from the tape to hide an eye-witness saying that it looked like a black military plane which was later discovered through a NIST FOIA video.
Are these the same Truthers who were pushing the "Demolition Inc. truck parked in front of 7 WTC while the twins burned" story?

Did they offer up the same amount of evidence to support this claim as they did that?

Are you starting to see a pattern?
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
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 8th January 2017, 09:41 PM   #80
Axxman300
Graduate Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 1,486
Originally Posted by MrFliop View Post
Ok let's just get this out of the way. In regards to the Video of second plane crash from across the river the claims made by truthers about it are: 1.) The FBI claimed al-Qaeda shot the tape. 2.) The FBI removed the audio from the tape to hide an eye-witness saying that it looked like a black military plane which was later discovered through a NIST FOIA video.
The video was posted on an Al Qaeda website.

In none of the videos does it look like a military plane, even the Al Qaeda one.

The FBI 9-11 investigation remains classified, but they raided a number of apartments in New Jersey in the weeks after the attack. They have never stated publicly what they found, or whom they were looking for on those raids. The point being that we still do not have a huge chunk of the story of 9-11 before or after the attacks as far as Al Qaeda in the US goes.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 11:12 PM.
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.