|
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. |
16th September 2013, 09:56 AM | #1 | ||
New Blood
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 16
|
"24 hard facts about 9/11 that cannot be debunked"
This list is being spammed all over social media, with the claim that their 24 "hard facts" can't be debunked.
The very first fact is an instant fail (Jones' paper has never been accepted in a peer-reviewed journal, as far as I'm aware Benthams is a vanity publisher that prints in exchange for payment), as is the second. How many more of these "hard facts that cannot be debunked" can you debunk? 24 Hard Facts About 9/11 That Cannot Be Debunked January 18, 2013 by Joe Martino
|
||
16th September 2013, 10:05 AM | #2 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
#7 - OBL was already wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya.
There was no need for the FBI to include the 9/11 charges prior to OBL's capture and/or death. |
16th September 2013, 10:08 AM | #3 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
16th September 2013, 10:08 AM | #4 |
Time Person of the Year, 2006
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
|
The list should be titled:
"Here's 24 things about 9/11 that we're going to pretend haven't already been addressed." |
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black. Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon |
|
16th September 2013, 10:09 AM | #5 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
Holy flashbacks. I swear it's 2006 again. This has been a banner year for complete rehashings of nonsense that was already debunked.
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
16th September 2013, 10:11 AM | #6 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The old Same place
Posts: 11,138
|
I've come to the sad conclusion that lying is pathological.
|
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie. |
|
16th September 2013, 10:13 AM | #7 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,830
|
Number 2 is not a fact about 9/11, it is a fact about people who have a strong opinion about 9/11.
Their opinion is also number 2. |
__________________
Facts are simple and facts are straight, facts are lazy and facts are late, facts don't come with points of view, facts don't do what I want them to. ************************** Apollo Hoax Debunked |
|
16th September 2013, 10:14 AM | #8 |
Ardent Formulist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
|
|
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens. |
|
16th September 2013, 10:15 AM | #9 |
Ardent Formulist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
|
|
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens. |
|
16th September 2013, 10:16 AM | #10 |
0.25 short of being half-witted
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
|
As you noted, the first one's an instant fail, and for many more reasons than just painfully poor peer review. Just look up Sunstealer's posts and you'll have all the stuff you'll need. Heck, just look up R.Mackey's posts, and all that by itself will give you all that you need, even before 9/10ths of the other posts on the topic here - from Oystein, from The Almond, from many others, including some by myself, etc., - are thrown in, many of which have info of excellent value (Chris Mohr's posts, for example).
The second is sort of an obvious statement: There are fools in the world who'll believe anything, and some of them have professional credentials. I guess you can go through and critique the list by pointing out the lack of relevant expertise, the inflated numbers, and so on, but really, that's one I wouldn't even address. When you establish that the party line is chock full of wrong, you then don't even have to address any list of believers. You've already addressed their argument. And that's all that matters. The rest of the list has stuff that's been on sites like 911Myths, Debunking 9/11, Gravy's site, etc. since 2006. That "set up to fail" quote is one I've personally refuted in the past; just look up my old posts in conjunction with Hamilton and Keane's names. Ditto for the FBI vidoes; we've discussed that ad nauseum in this forum. Yeah, this is nothing more than just old claims packaged in a nice, simple list. All of which have been addressed (my God, I can't believe the resurrected the "Put Options", the incorrect "free fall" time, etc., all of which again has been addressed. Evangelization. Not information. Par for the course. |
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once." |
|
16th September 2013, 10:17 AM | #11 |
0.25 short of being half-witted
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
|
|
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once." |
|
16th September 2013, 10:20 AM | #12 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Time to first lie:
#1 - nanothermite in the dust has been debunked. Those making the declaration that it is thermitic failed to show the basic property of such materials, that they are self oxidizing and can thus burn in a no oxygen environment. In fact each of these 24 points either is not a hard fact and has been debunked already, or has little actual relevance to the subject in the first place. |
16th September 2013, 10:25 AM | #13 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
|
16th September 2013, 10:27 AM | #14 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Correction: "24 delusions about 911 that make 911 truth followers dumber than dirt"
For 911 truth followers who can't count, or work a watch, proof of gullibility.
Self debunking Only 911 truth followers can't debunk these insane claims. Love the ACARS one, a lie spread by idiots at p4t, Balsamo's club for failed pilots. |
16th September 2013, 10:29 AM | #15 |
Ardent Formulist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
|
|
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens. |
|
16th September 2013, 10:31 AM | #16 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
The lie that stands out the most for me is that 7WTC collapsed in 6.5 seconds. Its as if the internal collapse, illustrated only after it had begun by the in falling of the rooftop structures, is not part of the collapse. Its a most dishonest piece of sophistry. Then there are the details left out that are inconvenient to the TM, such as greater than free fall acceleration noted of 7WTC.
|
16th September 2013, 10:33 AM | #17 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
16th September 2013, 10:41 AM | #18 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Indeed.
I have yet to see any detailed scenario in which it is explained how ?therm?te was utilized. If the idea was to drop these structures in such a fashion as to limit collateral damage to neighboring complexes, then how was a ?therm?the demolition timed? Of course super-secret-duper nanothermite was only ever invoked because no where on any recording is there the sound of explosives large enough to sever large columns. Supposedly ssd-nanothermite not only severs columns as quickly as rdx cutters, it does so without causing the huge bang conventional cutting charges make. Yet there was enough 'leftover' of this substance, to heat the rubble underground (while never flaring up at the surfsce) and keep it hot enough to have liquid stage steel around for weeks and that is the only way molten steel coukd develop and remain. Pie in the sky, unsubstantiated, bald assertion put forth as if it were fact. |
16th September 2013, 10:53 AM | #19 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Quote:
The portland woo from April 2013 post if freely. Is this reflective of the IQ of the readers? http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/422646.shtml Source of the plagarized 24 nut case claims... by Joe Martino, January 18, 2013. http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/ Proud to spread woo, he does it to promote peace and love, by spreading lies based on nonsese. http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2013/...t-be-debunked/ Veterans news now gives a bad name to veterans. What an idiotic publication. Spammed all over, albeit slowly. No Pulitzer for recycled failure? Is the level of woo reflective of the readers of http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2013/...t-be-debunked/ http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/422646.shtml http://beforeitsnews.com/9-11-and-gr...d-2439522.html Feb 2013 http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/
Quote:
Ignorance personified on 911. 12 years of ignonrace on 911, an unknowing puppet in Gage's propaganda wing of woo. Don't forget, "Feel free to email me (him) at http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/. Dear Joe, ... |
16th September 2013, 11:19 AM | #20 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
|
What thermite pushers didn't know from the begining that they should have known is that thermite goes molten after ignition, and trying to hold thermite on a surface (as you would using thermite as a welding tool) is almost impossible absent some structure to hold the reaction - and no such structures were discovered post-collapse.
I went to Joe Martino's website - he's seriously into the realm of 9/11 Hollywood fantasy. |
16th September 2013, 11:22 AM | #21 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
|
This is why the super-duper-nano-banana-thermite is now being touted as an ignition device for high explosives. Except, oh wait, explosives are triggered by shock, not by heat, and the disposal method for most explosive compounds is burning... Boy, this nanner-termite theory really wasn't thought through all the way, was it.
|
16th September 2013, 11:30 AM | #22 |
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 224
|
The biggest lie with this list is the claim of "24 hard facts". Indeed some points multiple claim like
This point consists of four claims: "The total collapse of WTC 7 in 6.5 seconds at free fall acceleration (NIST admits 2.25 seconds)." As mentioned by some others, this claim is wrong. "Larry Silverstein used the term “Pull it”." This claim has been debunked long ago. "Steel framed high rise buildings have NEVER totally collapsed from fire or structural damage." This is a strawman argument as it wasn't that the three towers collapsed due to fires or structural damage but fires AND structural damage. "Builidng 7 was not hit by a plane." Although this claim is true, it leaves out that 7 WTC was hit by debris from the North Tower. This scheme continues until the end of the list. This end itself is priceless: "24) At least 7 of the 19 listed highjackers are still alive (BBC)." This claim was debunked in 2001. |
16th September 2013, 11:36 AM | #23 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Just Southeast of Hell
Posts: 694
|
Wow...hot tub time machine...is it 2006?
Question...will ArchStanton return? Or was this a one shot troll post? MHM |
__________________
Conspiracy theories are for morons, who like to feel they are smarter than everyone else… |
|
16th September 2013, 11:44 AM | #24 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,050
|
|
16th September 2013, 11:51 AM | #25 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 877
|
|
__________________
Ergo beedunked here. #FalseFlagCluelessAtPhysics. Skeptical Inquirer July/August 2011 issue on 9/11 Truth |
|
16th September 2013, 11:59 AM | #26 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,726
|
Quote:
USS Liberty incident: Not a false flag - the aircraft and torpedo boats that misidentified and attacked the USS Liberty were clearly marked as Israeli. No war occurred, and within hours of the incident Israel was apologizing. Gulf of Tonkin Incident: Not a false flag - On August 2 the North Vietnamese Navy and the USN did have a brief altercation, and on August 4, the USN did fire on more NVN vessels. The initial incident was the result of misinformation and bad target identification by the USN (a sonar operator mistaking the sound of the ships propeller for a torpedo, etc.). Op Northwoods: Had it actually been carried out this would have been a false flag event (or rather events). The plan was rejected and never implemented. The Murrah bombing(OKC Bombing): McVeigh and Nicols have claimed to have acted in concert to do the deed, and the damage was consist with their stated means (fertilizer bomb). There is no evidence that would suggest that the two were compelled to do so. Not a False flag. the 93 WTC Bombing: AQ's first kick at the cat - straight up terrorist attack. Patrick Clawson: An economist with no connection to government policy making says something stupid (ie that America provoke Iran into a war). Other than the fact that this guy got some press, how is it different from the drunk guy at the end of the bar muttering about those [insert category of persons here]? PNAC Report: recommended that the US miltary be reformatted to be able to fight and win a two theatre war (among other recommendations). Having the capability to do something is not the same thing as doing the thing. Sort of like critical thinking and the person who created this list - they have the capability of doing so, but chose not to in favour of writing a list of 24 point that can be debunked.... |
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks? |
|
16th September 2013, 12:06 PM | #27 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 654
|
|
16th September 2013, 12:07 PM | #28 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
16th September 2013, 12:12 PM | #29 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
|
16th September 2013, 12:17 PM | #30 |
New Blood
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 16
|
|
16th September 2013, 12:28 PM | #31 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Looks like Joe M. started this wave of zombie bites at the beginning of the year in his quest to save the world, http://www.collective-evolution.com/...ge-3/#comments
by "inspiring others to find joy and make changes in their lives. Hands down the only other thing I am this passionate about is baseball." Baseball and spreading woo. Poor Joe, 12 years and can't figure out 911, but able to spread woo and have people repost his failure. Has anyone emailed Joe? |
16th September 2013, 03:23 PM | #32 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
|
Welcome to the forum Arch. I can debunk every one of the 24. Every single one of those 24 fails the "So what?" test.
They are all claims without demonstrated "relevance" - unless they are shown to be both true and relevant they are pointless speculation. By relevance I mean "If the fact is true what does it change about 9/11 explanations and how does it effect those explanations." Now most members here will enjoy responding to "Is the claim true" at a technical level of detail. Let me illustrate by reference to #1 "Nano Thermite was found in the dust at Ground Zero." Let's take the two aspects - and "Is it relevant?" first. The only relevance to 9/11 explanations is if nano-thermite was used in CD of the WTC buildings. There was no CD. So even if there were 100 tonne stockpiles of thermXte in any form on ground zero at each corner of the twin towers - there was no CD. So it wasn't used for CD. So it is irrelevant. And that is valid logic despite the facetious way I express it. Put slightly more rigorously. There is no plausible hypothesis in favour of CD. Even if presence of thermXte is proven that is only one link in a causal chain of CD. The finding of thermXte does not of itself prove CD. The big challenge of "proving CD" remains and it has never been demonstrated, not even a plausible hypothesis to prima facie standard. So #1 is defeated on grounds of relevance. BUT sadly from my perspective most members here wont accept that simple fact. They enjoy the detailed technical arguments and don't like simple facts which pre-empt the need for technical discussion. "They" (both sides ) want to be convinced whether the claim for thermXte in dust is true or false. No matter how many times we point out that it is irrelevant most people won't get the message and will merrily go pursuing the truth in the details which is precisely where the truthers want to keep the debate. And going round in circles. Is it true? (even though it is irrelevant! )We have several threads related to dust. And an extensive lot of research into the scientific analyses. All of it pursuing the path that the truthers want us on. Chasing details round in circles. No doubt good science. No doubt to me that there was no thermXte in the dust. But irrelevant to WTC 9/11 collapses. Folk have lost sight of the fact that the only reason we are discussing thermXte is that one S Jones was losing "market prominence" to one R Gage and he needed a "rebranding" to raise his "market presence". He partly succeeded,. He is still way behind Gage in "exploiting the market" So I'll >>> [/endpersonalrant] You will see where I am coming from. And everyone of the 24 fails the relevance test independent of whether the single item of the claim is true or false. |
16th September 2013, 03:32 PM | #33 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
|
#24 has been debunked since about the end of September 2001.
|
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence." |
|
16th September 2013, 03:33 PM | #34 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
|
|
16th September 2013, 03:48 PM | #35 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
|
#13 Leslie Robertson did say the towers were built to withstand plane impacts (which they did) but he also has said the towers were NOT designed to withstand intense fires from the burning jet fuel etc. Oops.
|
__________________
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 |
|
16th September 2013, 04:20 PM | #36 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
|
|
16th September 2013, 05:52 PM | #37 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,570
|
It's a lie on the other side as well. The $60 million spent by Ken Starr covered Whitewater, the firing of the White House travel office staff and the suicide death of Vincent Foster as well; I suspect the money spent investigating Monica was a small percentage of the total.
|
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog. |
|
16th September 2013, 07:56 PM | #38 |
AI-EE-YAH!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
|
What a complete *********** disaster of a list.
|
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken |
|
16th September 2013, 08:55 PM | #39 |
persona non grata
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,950
|
The truth is never inconvenient to a genuine truth-seeker.
Do you have a link to where this evidence that the 7WTC tower collapse exhibited "greater than free fall speed acceleration " is noted and documented ? Why exactly would you feel this fact would be inconvenient to the "truth movement" ? |
__________________
Truth, like the sun, allows itself to be obscured; but, like the sun, only for a time. __Bovee Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains taken to bring it to light. __George Washington All great truths begin as blasphemies __Shaw Last edited by Fonebone; 16th September 2013 at 09:00 PM. Reason: add missing punctuation and bold text |
|
16th September 2013, 09:09 PM | #40 |
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,899
|
Here you go Fonebone.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com....php?tag=wtc+7 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...s.php?tag=wtc7 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...g=wtc+7+report http://www.internationalskeptics.com...=wtc7+collapse http://www.internationalskeptics.com...tag=WTC7+fires Your answers are there, ad nauseam. |
__________________
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|