Interesting 9/11 video

[Schmelzer]

Yes, I believe in the official version.
Your dishonest methodology in trying to say that I believe in a conspiracy is stupid.
Al Qaida created no conspiracy per se. They simply conducted a terrorist operation that involved hijacking four planes and attacking prime centers of US governement.
Of course this sort of nonsense conspiracy by you illustrates entirely your weird concept of not only politics but also science.
Do better.

Thank you, you made my day. LOL.

Al Qaida did, of course, no conspiracy at all, they probably made a public opinion poll which planes they should hijack.

But the observation that young scientists without permanent position, in a world where the possibility to get a new position depends on "publish or perish", have to choice but to follow fashionable mainstream directions, because it is much easier to publish there (much more interested journals) and much more probable one will be cited (because much more readers), and much more jobs and grants to be offered, is not a simple economic consideration, but a conspiracy theory. It is beyond me who conspires in this case, but it doesn't matter.

Thus, as I have said: Orwellian Newspeak. The word "conspiracy theory" no longer describes theories which explain something by some conspiracy, but a bad word for any non-mainstream or non-official theory.

 

[Aemilius]

What about WTC7....

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest
MORE AT....
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

Right, I read it....

"The final report describes how debris from the collapse of WTC 1 ignited fires on at least 10 floors of WTC 7 at the western half of the south face. Fires on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 burned out of control, because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system had failed. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply. Those water lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. These uncontrolled fires in WTC 7 eventually spread to the northeast part of the building, where the collapse began.

After 7 hours of uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to one of the 81 columns supporting the building. Floor 13 collapsed, beginning a cascade of floor failures to Floor 5. Column 79, no longer supported by a girder, buckled, triggering a rapid succession of structural failures that moved from east to west. All 23 central columns, followed by the exterior columns, failed in what's known as a "progressive collapse"--that is, local damage that spreads from one structural element to another, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire structure."

Does that about sum it up?

 

[paddoboy]

Thank you, you made my day. LOL.

And you certainly have made mine believing in such rubbish.
Although on second thought and considering your general maverick stance on just about everything, quite understandable.

 

[Schmelzer]

And you certainly have made mine believing in such rubbish.

Which rubbish? I have not given any information about something which I believe in relation to 9/11.

I have simply clarified the meaning of "conspiracy theory" to those who do not use Orwellian Newspeak but normal language. And for these people the official version, which clearly contains a conspiracy by Al Qaida, is a conspiracy theory.

 

[paddoboy]

Which rubbish? I have not given any information about something which I believe in relation to 9/11.

I have simply clarified the meaning of "conspiracy theory" to those who do not use Orwellian Newspeak but normal language. And for these people the official version, which clearly contains a conspiracy by Al Qaida, is a conspiracy theory.

Stop squirming Smelzer.
I'm not interested in your semantics and silly pedant.
The 9/11 official version of events, is that which is supported by the overwhelming evidence.
If you believe there was a government conspiracy, than spell it out.
And of course your own typical additional conspiracy theory re "fashionable mainstream" and associated "blah, blah, blah" is just more unsupported contrived fabricated bullshit.
Of course like your "scientific agenda" this diatribe by yourself confirms your already known political agenda also.

 

[Schmelzer]

Stop squirming Smelzer.
I'm not interested in your semantics and silly pedant.

Yes, I know, you prefer to use "conspiracy theory" as namecalling normal economic explanations, but believe yourself in 9/11 Al Qaida conspiracy theories. It is just funny.

The 9/11 official version of events, is that which is supported by the overwhelming evidence.

Of course, nobody has any doubt about this. The overwhelming evidence, which is decisive for paddoboy, is, in fact, a simple, unquestionable and obvious fact: It is the official version.

And those who don't believe into an Al Qaida conspiracy, are, you guess it, conspiracy theorists.

And of course your own typical additional conspiracy theory re "fashionable mainstream" and associated "blah, blah, blah" is just more unsupported contrived fabricated bullshit.

Whatever it is - it is not a conspiracy theory, because it does not contain even a single person which conspires with somebody else. It contains only simple rational scientists, which have a quite natural goal - to earn their money doing science, physics, in the actual situation. It also contains nothing hidden - only simple facts about typical job contract conditions for young scientists in modern physics.

And, as usual, you have not given a single counterargument, except completely unbased namecalling as "conspiracy theory".

 

[paddoboy]

Yes, I know, you prefer to use "conspiracy theory" as namecalling normal economic explanations, but believe yourself in 9/11 Al Qaida conspiracy theories. It is just funny.

I use conspiracy theory in the same vane as most normal everyday people regarding the 9/11 nonsense and others also.

Of course, nobody has any doubt about this. The overwhelming evidence, which is decisive for paddoboy, is, in fact, a simple, unquestionable and obvious fact: It is the official version.

The overwhelming evidence is as is. That's why the official version is accepted.

Whatever it is - it is not a conspiracy theory, because it does not contain even a single person which conspires with somebody else. It contains only simple rational scientists, which have a quite natural goal - to earn their money doing science, physics, in the actual situation. It also contains nothing hidden - only simple facts about typical job contract conditions for young scientists in modern physics.

The idiots that believe in a government cover up type of conspiracy, including the few scientists, are far out weighed by the evidence of the official version and the overwhelming support that receives.
And I wonder how many of these maverick type scientists you speak of that support some conspiracy cover up are being paid to be purposely controversial.

And, as usual, you have not given a single counterargument, except completely unbased namecalling as "conspiracy theory".

Having a cry Schmezer? [gee that may be another ad hominem according to Schmezer ]
On that score you are either a liar or totally oblivious to the posts I have posted on this nonsense conspiracy throughout this and other conspiracy threads.Post 340 being the most recent of mine, and of course the many other refutations by most here on this and other conspiracy nonsense.
My posts though are somewhat rare in the conspiracy section, probably because I find the need to refute such nonsense as rather mundane and not totally necessary, as the truth is in most cases obvious.
It's only the gullible few, or those with political agendas that push such nonsense.


In essence what most conspiracy pushers claim or propose is not truth but unmitigated nonsense, manufactured for the gullible, and secondly those that do manufacture such nonsense, do so because the common goal of conspiracy loonies is that it makes them feel rather special, in their own eyes and the eyes of other gullible like minded nuts......They see themselves as knowing a secret, and having inside info nobody else has.
And of course there is money to be made.
Generally speaking, conspiracy pushers due to their need to be noticed and other shortcomings, have nothing but non falsifiable hypothesis. They are the refuge for those without proof and nuts in general.





Since it seems [unlike most scientists] that you have plenty of time to haunt science forums such as this for whatever agenda you chose, you may want to watch this hour long video
Enjoy!

 

[paddoboy]

http://www.news.com.au/world/six-re...bout-six-seconds/story-fndir2ev-1226717737311

PSYCHOLOGISTS will tell you that even perfectly sane people have the ability to accept wild conspiracy theories. The more powerless or alone we feel, the more likely we are to develop such theories.

It's all linked to self-esteem. If you're the sort of person who feels isolated or disenfranchised, you're much more likely to develop wild theories as a way of making you seem more knowledgeable, more powerful, more special.

That might help explain why many Americans are into conspiracies. The irony of our technologically over-connected age is that there are scores of socially disconnected people sitting in dark rooms extrapolating all sorts of crap from factoids they find online. Here are six of the worst:

STUPID THEORY 1: The US government did it

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: People who say it was an inside job are split into two camps. There are those who say the US government cooked up and enacted the whole crazy plot, and those who say they let it happen without intervention. In both cases, conspiracists generally claim that the aim was to give the Bush government an excuse to wage war on the Islamic world.

So here's your simple rebuttal. US governments have shown for decades that they will intervene when and where it suits them. The last thing they need to do to justify any foreign policy is kill 3000 of their own citizens.

STUPID THEORY 2: The twin towers did not collapse. They were demolished.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: 9/11 "truthers", who would perhaps be more accurately described as 9/11 "liars", like to rope in an expert to tell you that no office fire ever made a building topple. Well, that'd be because no office fire was ever as big as these two, with as much jet fuel to help it along.

But the real reason the twin towers collapsed was structural. Most buildings have their core structural supports at the centre. The towers had some major central steel columns, but that elegant exterior steel shell was also crucial in providing perimeter support. Also, the perimeter columns supported massive steel trusses which supported each floor.

So basically, when the exterior of the building was penetrated so devastatingly by the planes, the structure's ability to hold itself up was threatened. So when one floor went, the combined weight meant they all went.

Pretend the towers were a conspiracy theory. Then pretend they were subjected to the force of logic. Here’s your result. 11/09/2001. Source: AFP



STUPID THEORY 3: World Trade Center 7 did not collapse. It was demolished.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: Riiiight, so the world's tallest tower collapses on its neighbour less than 200m across the road. You've got 110 storeys of rubble pummelling a 47-storey building, setting it on fire, covering it in untold extra weight and inflicted untold stresses. And later that day, when the smaller building collapses, it's obvious the CIA did it with explosives. And Elvis left the building right before it happened.

Oh, and if you want a secondary explanation of why the building really wasn't toppled by mysterious people with explosives, try googling any of the so-called architects or engineers in the wacky YouTube vids. Almost none of them appear to be either a) currently employed or b) affiliated with any group other than 9/11 conspiracy groups.

STUPID THEORY 4: FLIGHT 93 was shot down in Pennsylvania and the people who were supposedly on it were murdered or relocated.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: The small jet flying low in the area, which some believe shot down Flight 93, was in fact a business jet which had been instructed to fly low to inspect the wreckage. Also, the log of calls made from Flight 93 is pretty compelling evidence that those were real people aboard a hijacked jet. If these people are actors who are actually still alive somewhere, the real mystery is why they haven't made squillions in Hollywood. Because they were seriously convincing.

And they’re fake trees and that’s a fake wall and Gilligan is still stuck on Gilligan’s Island. Picture: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images/AFP Source: AFP



STUPID THEORY 5: There was no "stand down" order, which proves the US government dunnit.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: A stand down order is an order from the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) to scramble fighter jets. This didn't happen until too late on September 11, prompting conspiracists to say the government deliberately held off to let the carnage unfold.

But NORAD didn't actually track flights within America prior to 9/11. Also, the hijackers turned off the transponders on their planes, which meant Air Traffic Control couldn't track them. And NORAD needed an alert from Air Traffic Control to act. So basically, you had a system which ensured bureaucratic bungles, but that's a far cry from complicit officials.

STUPID THEORY 6: They weren't planes, they were missiles.

SIMPLE REBUTTAL: Some of the worst nutters claim that the original planes which struck the twin towers weren't planes but missiles. This was fuelled by an early eyewitness account broadcast on live TV from a journalist who said he thought the first plane had no windows. But the journalist saw the plane in a blink of his eye - a fact ignored by conspiracists who have seized on this statement.

The obvious plane-sized holes in the buildings are a bit of a giveaway too. But you know, maybe they were just caused by Batman or something.

Believe the conspiracies? Continue the conversation on Twitter via@newscomauHQ | @antsharwood

 

[paddoboy]

Yes, I know, you prefer to use "conspiracy theory" as namecalling normal economic explanations, but believe yourself in 9/11 Al Qaida conspiracy theories. It is just funny.

You may enjoy this Schmezer.....a short video of a exchange between a 9.11 conspiracy nut and an Al Qaeda representative saying such claims are demeaning to Al Qaeda.
http://www.theonion.com/video/911-conspiracy-theories-ridiculous-al-qaeda-says-14222

 

[Schmelzer]

On that score you are either a liar or totally oblivious to the posts I have posted on this nonsense conspiracy throughout this and other conspiracy threads.Post 340 being the most recent of mine, and of course the many other refutations by most here on this and other conspiracy nonsense.
My posts though are somewhat rare in the conspiracy section, probably because I find the need to refute such nonsense as rather mundane and not totally necessary, as the truth is in most cases obvious.
It's only the gullible few, or those with political agendas that push such nonsense.

Learn to read - I was talking not about your postings in support of the official Al Qaida conspiracy theory in this thread, but about your reaction to my theory that, in the current situation, young scientists are forced to follow a few fashionable mainstream directions if they want to survive in science.

For this theory, which is (contrary to the Al Qaida conspiracy 9/11) certainly not a conspiracy theory, once there is nobody who conspires in it, your only reaction up to now was naming it a conspiracy theory, combined with personal attacks.

 

[paddoboy]

Learn to read - I was talking not about your postings in support of the official Al Qaida conspiracy theory in this thread, but about your reaction to my theory that, in the current situation, young scientists are forced to follow a few fashionable mainstream directions if they want to survive in science.

Perhaps you need to be clearer then. And on the second issue, bullshit.

For this theory, which is (contrary to the Al Qaida conspiracy 9/11) certainly not a conspiracy theory, once there is nobody who conspires in it, your only reaction up to now was naming it a conspiracy theory, combined with personal attacks.

Schmelzer, I'm not interested in your semantics and twists and turns etc.
Let me make it quite clear in bold.......
The inane conspiracy theories on 9/11, in opposition to the official version are adhered to in my opinion, by silly gullible and foolish people, along with a smattering of others with political agendas.

 

[paddoboy]

How long do these inane conspiracy theories continue to do the rounds?
The faked Apollo Moon landing conspiracy appears to be dwindling away in recent times. Don't here too much of our nutty friend Bart Sibrel, the recipient of one of the greatest most deserved right hook one could imagine.

Not to sure if the JFK conspiracy is still doing the rounds.
So how long will this current 9/11 conspiracy crap continue?.

 

[Schmelzer]

And on the second issue, bullshit.

You have forgotten to name it "conspiracy theory". (And, as well, to support your claim even with the slightest thing which could be interpreted as an argument.)

Schmelzer, I'm not interested in your semantics and twists and turns etc

Of course, you have decided to speak Newspeak, and no longer usual language where words have some well-defined meaning.

The inane conspiracy theories on 9/11, in opposition to the official version are adhered to in my opinion, by silly gullible and foolish people, along with a smattering of others with political agendas.

Wow, something really new - paddoboy does not like people who do not support the official version.

How long do these inane conspiracy theories continue to do the rounds?

Usually as long as the official versions continue to do the rounds. If nobody cares, they will be forgotten.

Not to sure if the JFK conspiracy is still doing the rounds.

As long as there are people who think it makes a difference who is president of the US. The number of people who recognize that the US president is a puppet of the 1%, and who performs as this puppet is not really an issue, increases. Then, of course, time goes, and the number of people really interested in history is anyway small enough and, together with the overall education, decreasing even more. The other important point, namely the distrust of the media who obediently supported the official version, becomes less important too, because anyway only sheeple trust the media today. So, I would bet the JFK theories become more and more uninportant.

So how long will this current 9/11 conspiracy crap continue?.

As long as the official crap continues.

 

[paddoboy]

You have forgotten to name it "conspiracy theory". (And, as well, to support your claim even with the slightest thing which could be interpreted as an argument.)

You are confused. This thread concerns itself with the conspiracies that have been dreamed up by nuts and other troubled individuals, that question the accepted mainstream logical evidenced based version of the attack.
Not your fabricated nonsense.

Of course, you have decided to speak Newspeak, and no longer usual language where words have some well-defined meaning.

I do no more than rubbish and deride [along with the vast majority] the stupidity and gullibility, of those pushing conspiracy theories in opposition to the plain obvious official version. Many glimpses have also been tabled as to what drives these people and theeir mental stability.

Wow, something really new - paddoboy does not like people who do not support the official version.

I nether like them nor dislike them. I am simply refuting such nonsense and giving well supported reasons that medical poeple have given, as to why sometimes even professional and otherwise intelligent people fall for such garbage.

Usually as long as the official versions continue to do the rounds. If nobody cares, they will be forgotten.
As long as the official crap continues.

The official versions will continue because they are based on overwhelming evidence and facts.
It is appreciative though to hear your thoughts on conspiracies, as it gives the other members watching your antics, a picture into someone who really appears to be open and receptive to all way out views, no matter how crazy or unlikely, in each and every facet of living.

 

[Schmelzer]

It is appreciative though to hear your thoughts on conspiracies, as it gives the other members watching your antics, a picture into someone who really appears to be open and receptive to all way out views, no matter how crazy or unlikely, in each and every facet of living.

Regarding 9/11 I have no theory which I find sufficiently plausible to believe it, or even more to defend it.

Or do you have a plausible theory

about the remains which become visible at 3.40 and then collapse around 3.53 into dust? The same needle visible from 4.40 to 4.59 collapsing. Right of it a much greater piece visible from 4.37 to 4.40. All these pieces seem to crumble into dust, without something heavy falling down on them. For me, this is simply very very strange, and I have no explanation for this which I find sufficiently plausible.

 

[Aemilius]

Yes, I believe in the official version.

Hah!

 

[paddoboy]

Regarding 9/11 I have no theory which I find sufficiently plausible to believe it, or even more to defend it. . For me, this is simply very very strange, and I have no explanation for this which I find sufficiently plausible.

I actually have no explanation to explain your thinking of no explanation, other than your political agenda.
The fact though that two fuel laden jets, flown at top speed into each tower, seems quite plausible to me...taking into account the structural methodology of both buildings and the fact that something like this had never happened before. No government cover up, no government involvement, no government conspiracy to kill 3000 people for any imagined scenario, just simply an attack by a fanatical religious inspired organisation, that we are still experiencing today to lesser extents.

 

[Schmelzer]

I actually have no explanation to explain your thinking of no explanation, other than your political agenda.

The explanation of your acceptance of the official explanation is, of course, something which does not even need further explanation - it would require explanation if your would, in at least one case, question an official explanation. (I would guess that the only possibility for this would be a more actual official explanation which rejects the previous official explanation.)

In other countries the phrase "official explanation" is used as a synonym for a lie. (For example, in the Soviet time in Russia the "docile" Russians have used "official explanation" only in this meaning - including communists BTW.)

That you imagine "agendas" in the arguments of other people looks like a projection. I do not care about agendas at all. Else, I would certainly not start to participate, as a libertarian (and, therefore, as an enemy of slavery, of real slavery as well as the mild form of tax slavery) to question some mainstream claims about the Civil War, which allow some ... to defame me as well as the whole libertarian movement as supporters of slavery.

 

[paddoboy]

stuff up

 

[paddoboy]

The explanation of your acceptance of the official explanation is, of course, something which does not even need further explanation - to question some mainstream claims about the Civil War, which allow some ... to defame me as well as the whole libertarian movement as supporters of slavery.

Oh FFS, give it a rest will you. We all know your fanatical political agenda