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 wtc collapse , wtc , 911 conspiracy theory , wtc1 , wtc2

Reply
Old 23rd December 2005, 07:29 AM   #201
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,052
thesyntaxera = love = rouser2

This has got to be the dumbest thread ever.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 23rd December 2005, 07:31 AM   #202
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Oh for Ed's sake: http://wtc.nist.gov/ or http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/

Are you freaking blind?

For the budget itself:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/f...gation_911.htm

From which I quote:

"NIST redirected $3.4 million in fiscal year 2002 to begin a three-part plan in response to the WTC disaster. The agency received $16 million for the investigation in September from the FY 2002 supplemental appropriation. The FY 2003 appropriation includes an increase of $3 million.

The President's FY 2004 budget request of $4 million focuses on using the results of the World Trade Center investigation to develop cost-effective solutions to strengthen existing and future buildings against attacks and natural disasters."



It takes stuff that is not garbage going in. What are the basis for the calculations?



You're not very good at this, are you?
So where does it say how much of all that budget money they actually spent?

You could have posted the results if you have bothered to read them.

You know 87 billion was alotted for iraq, and a year after like 10% or less had actually been spent.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 07:32 AM   #203
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
thesyntaxera = love = rouser2

This has got to be the dumbest thread ever.

Have a mod investigate the ip if you think we are the same.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 07:35 AM   #204
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Here's an idea. Why don't you do your own homework.

Bring what you've got instead of claiming something magic invalidates all our arguements.

My own homework is having a working knowledge of formal logic, in regards to the available evidence, I have been pretty well aware of the claims from both sides for awhile just as you claim to be.

Using guess work, and induction, does not make fact, if it's magic to point that out to you right brainers then maybe I should try doing something different for a living.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 07:35 AM   #205
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
So where does it say how much of all that budget money they actually spent?
That is probably the weakest arguement yet.

Quote:
You could have posted the results if you have bothered to read them.
Did you even look at the links with test results? You sure as heck didn't read them since it has only been like ten minutes since I posted them.

Quote:
You know 87 billion was alotted for iraq, and a year after like 10% or less had actually been spent.
Excuse me? But you better back this statement up!

The only thing worse than a conspiracy crank is a lazy conspiracy crank. That's you, in case you are too dense to figure it out.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 07:37 AM   #206
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
My own homework is having a working knowledge of formal logic, in regards to the available evidence, I have been pretty well aware of the claims from both sides for awhile just as you claim to be.

Using guess work, and induction, does not make fact, if it's magic to point that out to you right brainers then maybe I should try doing something different for a living.
When you get to actually doing all these things you claim to be doing, let us know, OK?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 07:38 AM   #207
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
thesyntaxera = love = rouser2

This has got to be the dumbest thread ever.
It started OK, its not Year Zero's fault that Rouser2's drooling idiot cousins dropped by.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 07:40 AM   #208
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
That is probably the weakest arguement yet.



Did you even look at the links with test results? You sure as heck didn't read them since it has only been like ten minutes since I posted them.



Excuse me? But you better back this statement up!

The only thing worse than a conspiracy crank is a lazy conspiracy crank. That's you, in case you are too dense to figure it out.
really, your whole argument is weak, so whats that say?

I am looking at them now, you still could have posted them.

Back up this statement? this is a public fact that was all over the news, do your own research...or get off the debunk sites for awhile and read some actual news.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 07:42 AM   #209
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
really, your whole aregument is weak, so whats that say?

I am looking at them now, you still could have posted them.
Google is your friend. You can't blame me for your earlier lies.

Quote:
Back up this statement? this is a public fact that was all over the news, do your own research...or get off the debunk sites for awhile and read some actual news.
Evasion noted.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 07:46 AM   #210
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
As far as I could see on the NIST site there is no results listed, this is just a description of the planned investigation that is predicted to take 24 months...

so when did it begin?

Who are the people doing it...do not just say the NIST organization...who are the actual people?

any results you could link to?
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 07:59 AM   #211
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
As far as I could see on the NIST site there is no results listed, this is just a description of the planned investigation that is predicted to take 24 months...

so when did it begin?

Who are the people doing it...do not just say the NIST organization...who are the actual people?

any results you could link to?
You really are going out of your way to avoid seeing anything that might upset your worldview, aren't you.

The first link on this page: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/

Goes to this page: http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

Which holds the final report, as well as eight companion reports.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 08:11 AM   #212
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,770
And I know I said buh bye but I can't pass up two things:

1. Regarding who the investigators actually were (not just NIST): The lead investigator was Shyam Sunder who obtained a Masters of Science in Civil Engineering and a Doctorate of Science in Structural Engineering from MIT. In his spare time he is the Deputy Director of the Building and Fire Research Laboratory.

2. The $87 Billion allotted for Iraq is simply wrong, I suspect intentionally so, though possibly only negligently so. The real amount of $87.5 Billion was split with about $51 Billion going to Iraq and $10 Billion to Afghanistan and the remainder on sundries. The majority of the $51 Billion was spent as it was meant for salaries for Reservists and National Guardsmen along with new equipment.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette 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 23rd December 2005, 08:14 AM   #213
CurtC
Illuminator
 
CurtC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,785
thesyntaxera, you've used the words "deductive" and "inductive" so much that when I read your posts they've lost all meaning. "Why wasn't a blah blah investigation done instead of a yada yada one?" You haven't properly defined what you mean by them, and I'm not at all convinced that they mean to other people what you think they mean.

So instead of asserting that a proper whatever kind of investigation wasn't done, why don't you tell us what would be a self-consistent explanation of the events of 9/11, and a few ways that the facts back it up? I'm not going to read some book that you refer to for the purposes of having this discussion. Tell us what it says, and strong points that it makes.
CurtC 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 23rd December 2005, 08:15 AM   #214
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,052
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
Have a mod investigate the ip if you think we are the same.
I would, but I have to sort my sock drawer.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 23rd December 2005, 08:16 AM   #215
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,052
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
It started OK, its not Year Zero's fault that Rouser2's drooling idiot cousins dropped by.
Agreed. It's funny that a thread about debunking conspiracy theories would bring out conspiracy loonies!
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 23rd December 2005, 08:36 AM   #216
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
You really are going out of your way to avoid seeing anything that might upset your worldview, aren't you.

The first link on this page: http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/

Goes to this page: http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

Which holds the final report, as well as eight companion reports.

"The analysis focused on the WTC 1 and WTC 2. Although no steel was recovered from WTC 7, a 47-story building that also collapsed on September 11, properties for steel used in its construction were estimated based on literature and contemporaneous documents."

thats interesting. only 200 peices of steel were saved from wtc1/2. this doesn't dispell anything.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 08:47 AM   #217
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
"The analysis focused on the WTC 1 and WTC 2. Although no steel was recovered from WTC 7, a 47-story building that also collapsed on September 11, properties for steel used in its construction were estimated based on literature and contemporaneous documents."

thats interesting. only 200 peices of steel were saved from wtc1/2. this doesn't dispell anything.
What were you expecting?

NIST has said for some time that they could not recover much of the steel that had a known location and was exposed to fire.

Your arguement was that steel tests were not done. Are you now sashaying into another arguement hoping we won't notice?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 08:48 AM   #218
richardm
Philosopher
 
richardm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,245
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
thats interesting. only 200 peices of steel were saved from wtc1/2. this doesn't dispell anything.
You are correct, unless a detailed chemical analysis is done on every piece of steel that was used in the WTC it is worthless. I for one refuse to accept any more government cant until full DNA matching is done on the Pentagon, too.

Edited to add: Concrete does have DNA, right guys? I appreciate that I could look this up on Google but that might take a moment out of my busy and important life, so if you wouldn't mind looking it up for me that would be great.
__________________
Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously.

Last edited by richardm; 23rd December 2005 at 08:50 AM.
richardm 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 23rd December 2005, 08:51 AM   #219
Hutch
A broken man on a Halifax pier, the last of Barrett's Privateers
 
Hutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: About 7 Miles from the Saturn 5B
Posts: 6,785
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
ed..
600,000 dollars were spent on the 911 investigation...
The was a claim made as a testable fact.

Kookbreaker then posted:

Quote:
For the budget itself:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/f...gation_911.htm

From which I quote:

"NIST redirected $3.4 million in fiscal year 2002 to begin a three-part plan in response to the WTC disaster. The agency received $16 million for the investigation in September from the FY 2002 supplemental appropriation. The FY 2003 appropriation includes an increase of $3 million.

The President's FY 2004 budget request of $4 million focuses on using the results of the World Trade Center investigation to develop cost-effective solutions to strengthen existing and future buildings against attacks and natural disasters."

Which provided factual information and links for rebutting your 'fact'


Your response, thesyntaxera, was:

Quote:
So where does it say how much of all that budget money they actually spent?
Now, I am curious, syntexera. Is that an example of deductive or inductive reasoning? Just for clairification, mind you.

Press on.
__________________
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here! Boom. Sooner or later. BOOM! -LT. Cmdr. Susan Ivanova, Babylon 5
Hutch 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 23rd December 2005, 09:08 AM   #220
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,813
A simple question for thesyntaxera/love:

The investigations conducted by the experts that have been referenced in this thread have come up with reasonable answers to the following questions surrounding the events of 911:
- Who was involved?
- What happened?
- Why did things happen?
- When did the events take place?
- Where were the locations of the significant events?
- How were the various activities leading up to these events acted on?

Please summarize your "theories" by answering each of the questions above.
All you have done so far is point to unsubstantiated reasons as to why you think the recognized experts are "wrong". Please tell us in your own words what you think actually happened. Start with when the idea was concocted 35 years ago to put explosives in the concrete.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 23rd December 2005, 09:10 AM   #221
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
What were you expecting?

NIST has said for some time that they could not recover much of the steel that had a known location and was exposed to fire.

Your arguement was that steel tests were not done. Are you now sashaying into another arguement hoping we won't notice?

no, my arguments was that a deductive investigation wasn't conducted, as you have just admitted.


[/quote]1. Regarding who the investigators actually were (not just NIST): The lead investigator was Shyam Sunder who obtained a Masters of Science in Civil Engineering and a Doctorate of Science in Structural Engineering from MIT. In his spare time he is the Deputy Director of the Building and Fire Research Laboratory.?[/quote]

In confronting the evidence, another MIT alum speaks to the audience about all of the flaws in the research...too bad I can't recall his name....you should really watch it before you try and debunk any of it, their case is pretty solid.


[/quote]thesyntaxera, you've used the words "deductive" and "inductive" so much that when I read your posts they've lost all meaning. "Why wasn't a blah blah investigation done instead of a yada yada one?" You haven't properly defined what you mean by them, and I'm not at all convinced that they mean to other people what you think they mean.

So instead of asserting that a proper whatever kind of investigation wasn't done, why don't you tell us what would be a self-consistent explanation of the events of 9/11, and a few ways that the facts back it up? I'm not going to read some book that you refer to for the purposes of having this discussion. Tell us what it says, and strong points that it makes.[/quote]

If you don't understand what induction and deduction are then you have no clue about the method of scientific inquiry. It's also a good clue as to why you don't seem to comprehend the flaws in skepticism in this case.

Are you asking me to make up my own conspiracy theory for you to debunk? That wouldn't be very scientific would it!
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 09:26 AM   #222
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
no, my arguments was that a deductive investigation wasn't conducted, as you have just admitted.
No, your claim was in post #186

Quote:
600,000 dollars were spent on the 911 investigation
40,000,000 dollars were spent proving that clinton was having sexual relations.
When I pointed out that was wrong, you waffled, then complained that there were no conclusions. Now you are back to your 'deductive' smokescreen, which is a poor covering for your intellectual dishonesty. I note that you have not backed off the 'only 600,000' claim.

What steel would you have NIST test, if you were running the tests?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 09:34 AM   #223
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
In confronting the evidence, another MIT alum speaks to the audience about all of the flaws in the research...too bad I can't recall his name....you should really watch it before you try and debunk any of it, their case is pretty solid.
If your are talking about Jeff King, I am not impressed.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 09:47 AM   #224
thesyntaxera
Muse
 
thesyntaxera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 882
"In this case if I were to make any claims, it would be that the administration was just watching it's back in light of the event and don't want any links between them and any one middle easterner made."

Thats hardly a claim...it's merely a logical guess. I was asked to make a guess...so I did...I am not claiming anything.


"When I pointed out that was wrong, you waffled, then complained that there were no conclusions. Now you are back to your 'deductive' smokescreen, which is a poor covering for your intellectual dishonesty. I note that you have not backed off the 'only 600,000' claim.

What steel would you have NIST test, if you were running the tests?"

You didn't point out that I was wrong, you disagreed, because you saw the budget for an investigation that was several years afterward.

the investigation budget for the 911 comission was approximately 600,000 dollars.

deduction isn't a smoke screen, and I feel this is just a way for you to avoid having to explain how it is okay for you to make inductive guesses and it's not okay for anyone else to.

If I were going to run tests on steel, it would be on building 7 as well as a more thorough look at wtc fragments. Too bad building 7 is gone without ever being tested.

Also, what about the environmental cover up following the attack...there was 500,000 tons of environmentally hazardous debris that was never cleaned up, some of it is still there, and many people are feeling the effects, more and more is being written about this as more people get sick from all the particulates.

Quit using your Red Herring tactics of taking the spot light off of the fact that the whole investigation sucked, as well as your pathetic responses. You haven't answered any of my questions in any serious way either.
thesyntaxera 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 23rd December 2005, 09:51 AM   #225
Hutch
A broken man on a Halifax pier, the last of Barrett's Privateers
 
Hutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: About 7 Miles from the Saturn 5B
Posts: 6,785
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
You didn't point out that I was wrong, you disagreed, because you saw the budget for an investigation that was several years afterward.

the investigation budget for the 911 comission was approximately 600,000 dollars.
Kookbreaker presented his evidence clearly and with references regarding the amount. Request that you provide the same.
__________________
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here! Boom. Sooner or later. BOOM! -LT. Cmdr. Susan Ivanova, Babylon 5
Hutch 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 23rd December 2005, 10:00 AM   #226
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,052
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
No, your claim was in post #186



When I pointed out that was wrong, you waffled, then complained that there were no conclusions. Now you are back to your 'deductive' smokescreen, which is a poor covering for your intellectual dishonesty. I note that you have not backed off the 'only 600,000' claim.

What steel would you have NIST test, if you were running the tests?
If your Internet connection goes down, just bang your head against a brick wall. You'll get the same result.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 23rd December 2005, 10:19 AM   #227
Starthinker
Philosopher
 
Starthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,011
I skipped over a page or two so forgive me if this has been answered. But whether it was a bomb or a plane how could the speed at which the buildings fell be different? If you blow up the 30th floor or a plane hits the 30th floor how does one or the other make the building fall faster? How does a faster falling building support the theory that bombs were built in back in the 70s?

Also, don't confuse living terrorists that helped the 9/11 hijackers with the hijackers themselves. Yes, people helped them that are still alive, but I garauntee that none of the hijackers survived.

People, such as this Love person, just don't get get how BIG the twin towers were. When I first saw the first plane hit, then the second, I turned towards my wife and said it's only a matter of minutes before they collapse. They didn't just collapse into their footprint, they collapsed all over Manhattan. The debri field was massive, not just a block or two but miles when you count the dust and debri that were blown by winds. Love and others just don't get that when you build a huge building it's made to support it's weight under normal conditions, not when three or more floors have been blown out. And when tons of building start moving there is nothing that will stop it, the upper floors were more than enough to crush what was under them once the structure was comprimised.

No, they just won't get it. You can argue with them but they are basing their assumptions on a few pictures which don't even begin to tell the story. So you've seen houses burn that didn't collapse? Did those houses have thirty more floors above them? Picture that, picture the burned out house not just supporting the roof, but tons of houses above it. It will certainly collapse crushing the whole stack.

Love, go out and buy some rice cakes. Stack about thirty of them. Put some weight on them. Nothing happens? Stand on the stack. Still supporting you? Then while still standing on the stack hit the middle cake with a hammer. Did the stack collapse? The whole stack? Imagine that. It once held your weight and when the structure was comprimised it collapsed. Same thing happened to the towers.
__________________
|| ||||||||||||||||||||||||| ||
He who doubts victory has already lost the battle.
Below the navel there is neither religion nor truth.
Starthinker 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 23rd December 2005, 10:23 AM   #228
Ed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,658
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
ed..

the chances that so many catastrophic errors in the system could have taken place simultaneously by mere coincidence are 54,000,000:1

Post hoc probabilities are problematic.

The probability of the order of cards in a shuffled deck is 52!:1 yet the deck exists.

BTW, 52!>54,000,000
Ed 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 23rd December 2005, 01:20 PM   #229
CurtC
Illuminator
 
CurtC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,785
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
If you don't understand what induction and deduction are then you have no clue about the method of scientific inquiry. It's also a good clue as to why you don't seem to comprehend the flaws in skepticism in this case.
I understand what inductive and deductive reasoning are. What I don't understand is what you mean when you use the terms, and I'm not sure you think they mean what they mean to everyone else. So instead of complaining that the investigation was inductive, not deductive, why don't you spell out exactly what you're talking about?

And what you have not done is give us a top-down explanation that would fit the facts we know. What really happened in your opinion? Let's go from the general to the specific - first start off with the big-picture explanation, then we can get into how the known facts fit in.
CurtC 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 23rd December 2005, 01:30 PM   #230
patchbunny
Graduate Poster
 
patchbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Right about... here.
Posts: 1,854
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
What steel would you have NIST test, if you were running the tests?
Why, the steel located next to the explosive charges, of course.
__________________
"So, they laugh at my boner, will they? I'll show them! I'll show them how many boners the Joker can make!" -- The Joker, Batman #66
patchbunny 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 23rd December 2005, 01:35 PM   #231
delphi_ote
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
Have a mod investigate the ip if you think we are the same.
Why would you insist on that if you weren't a sock? How could you be so sure your IP addresses are different?

You're going to have to do better than that to fool people here, love.
delphi_ote 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 23rd December 2005, 03:14 PM   #232
Year Zero
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 330
Incredibly Inconvenient Question for 9-11 Conspiracy theorists #12:

"If the government planned 9-11 as a pretense to justify a war in Iraq, why couldn't they arrange some IRAQIS to be on the plane or construct a believable Iraq connection?"

Don't you think Bush wishes every night that there had been an Iraqi on at least one of those planes?
__________________
Year Zero Banned from Sean Hannity's forum in less than 24 hours!
Year Zero 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 23rd December 2005, 04:30 PM   #233
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by thesyntaxera View Post
"In this case if I were to make any claims, it would be that the administration was just watching it's back in light of the event and don't want any links between them and any one middle easterner made."

Thats hardly a claim...it's merely a logical guess. I was asked to make a guess...so I did...I am not claiming anything.
Care for another stack of waffles?

Quote:
"When I pointed out that was wrong, you waffled, then complained that there were no conclusions. Now you are back to your 'deductive' smokescreen, which is a poor covering for your intellectual dishonesty. I note that you have not backed off the 'only 600,000' claim.

What steel would you have NIST test, if you were running the tests?"

You didn't point out that I was wrong, you disagreed, because you saw the budget for an investigation that was several years afterward.
The figure you gave was wrong.

Quote:
the investigation budget for the 911 comission was approximately 600,000 dollars.
Which obviosuly was wrong. Or is deliberately avoiding the use of budgets from other services. Either way, deception to make a point is the goal.

Quote:
deduction isn't a smoke screen, and I feel this is just a way for you to avoid having to explain how it is okay for you to make inductive guesses and it's not okay for anyone else to.
You still misuse words to avoid your blatant errors and decptions.

Quote:
If I were going to run tests on steel, it would be on building 7 as well as a more thorough look at wtc fragments. Too bad building 7 is gone without ever being tested.
What would expect to find?

Quote:
Also, what about the environmental cover up following the attack...there was 500,000 tons of environmentally hazardous debris that was never cleaned up, some of it is still there, and many people are feeling the effects, more and more is being written about this as more people get sick from all the particulates.
Seperate issue, bozo. Poor cleanup does not equate to a conspiracy. It can mean local, state or federal government agency sloppiness (if true!), but it does not denote a federal plot to destroy the buildings.

Quote:
Quit using your Red Herring tactics of taking the spot light off of the fact that the whole investigation sucked, as well as your pathetic responses. You haven't answered any of my questions in any serious way either.
Your questions have been answered, you just decided that you don't like the answers. That does not mean the investigation sucks. The fact that you had to lie about it says volumes.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 23rd December 2005, 04:32 PM   #234
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,634
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
If your Internet connection goes down, just bang your head against a brick wall. You'll get the same result.
And prettier colors too!
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker 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 24th December 2005, 05:56 PM   #235
Year Zero
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 330
Well the thread asked if there are any conspiracy busters here and it looks like we have come out in force. Thank you comrades, for your excellent research.
__________________
Year Zero Banned from Sean Hannity's forum in less than 24 hours!
Year Zero 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 December 2005, 06:17 PM   #236
Ed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,658
What about the Presidential Blow Job?
Ed 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 December 2005, 06:21 PM   #237
Year Zero
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 330
Originally Posted by Ed View Post
What about the Presidential Blow Job?

That's all the evidence you need right there. The conspiracy-theorists preaches a world with an omnipotent government that can get away with virtually anything- right in front of our eyes. But they don't have logical answers to questions about all the REAL conspiracies that were busted, Watergate, Lewinsky, etc. We're supposed to believe the government was able to pull of the WTC attack as a pretense to invade Iraq- so WHY not plant an Iraqi on there? CTs can tell us every conspiracy that is going right but can't explain those going wrong. Why not plant some chemical missiles in Iraq? Oh no wait, maybe the US government WANTED to destroy its credibility for some nefarious plan to be revealed in the future.
__________________
Year Zero Banned from Sean Hannity's forum in less than 24 hours!
Year Zero 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 December 2005, 07:19 PM   #238
Ed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,658
The PBJ is a godsend to rational people everywhere.

Thank you Bill and Monica.
Ed 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 December 2005, 06:30 AM   #239
Morrison's Lament
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 271
PBJ???



It's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time, it's Presidential Blowjob Time!!

I'll get my coat...

--- G.
Morrison's Lament 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 December 2005, 08:01 AM   #240
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,052
Originally Posted by Ed View Post
What about the Presidential Blow Job?
I'd like to order one. Is it better than the Ambassador?
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 12:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.