Conspiracy theories

ICBM

joeyowen said:

Fair points, it was only a musing

Not having a go at you, but half the problem with the conspiracy theorists is that they have this sort of musing, but don't bother to follow it up by actually working out why it should be so, when really the answer is quite straightforward.

There is ample evidence from the damage to the building, debris at the site and many eyewitnesses who actually saw it happen that an airliner hit the Pentagon, without theories about missiles or other nonsense.

Unlike the Twin Towers, the Pentagon is a solidly-built low-rise building made mostly of stone and concrete. It's not surprising that an airliner hitting it at several hundred miles an hour effectively disappeared.

stickyfiddle

ICBM said:

 Unlike the Twin Towers, the Pentagon is a solidly-built low-rise building made mostly of stone and concrete. It's not surprising that an airliner hitting it at several hundred miles an hour effectively disappeared.

Yup 

Chalky

Drew_fx;1068128" said:

Chalky said:

ICBM;1067840" said:Chalky said:



The nature of the collapse of WTC7 is extremely difficult to explain. Unless it was the most badly built steel structured 47 storey building that the world has ever known.











It *looks* somewhat like a controlled demolition, yes. But unless you can work out how a team of demolition experts got in after the workers left without anyone seeing them, and had enough time to rig the whole building with explosives, then it's far simpler and more logical to assume that it did collapse due to an uncontrolled fire weakening the lower floor structure badly enough that it collapsed as a single unit once it reached a critical point.



The WTC *was* built badly, anyway - the reason the Twin Towers collapsed is fundamentally because the floor beams weren't actually tied to the uprights, if I remember correctly. I'm not a structural engineer, but I've seen a good explanation of how the fire weakened the beams and one after another fell away until the framework was essentially a house of cards. The slightest sideways wobble and the whole thing came down. If WTC7 was built the same way, it would have collapsed the same way.



The problem with all the theories other than the obvious one is that they're vastly more complicated and require a chain of logistics and organisation that couldn't be guaranteed to even be possible to carry out, or work. The same is true of almost every other major conspiracy theory.



Other than really simple ones like bumping off a troublesome old man who was about to cause very serious political damage to the government...

I didn't say it was demolished. I just said it was extremely difficult to explain. The idea that a fire in a typical office building could generate enough heat to weaken the size of steel supports in the lower floor of a 47 storey building is, well, er, extremely difficult to explain - the physics of converting the small amount of office materials into the necessary amount of heat just doesn't add up.





It's not that it doesn't add up, it's that you don't science very well.

Aw. You see, now I know you're going to be a Dad, I can't argue with you. It would be like fighting with a kitten. More likely to give you a ball of string...

scrumhalf

There was a decent debunking documentary on one of Sky's 520+ documentary channels a while ago.

Among the things they did was to get a professiional demolition company to film the demolition of a (from memory) four-storey building. After the explosion they scanned the area and their was evidenc eof the means of causing the explosion all over the place.

When this was shown to one of the leading sceptics he said, with no hint of anything other than dead-eyed earnestness, "well, obvisouly they were using some form of explosive we don't know about".

ICBM

scrumhalf said:

Among the things they did was to get a professiional demolition company to film the demolition of a (from memory) four-storey building. After the explosion they scanned the area and their was evidenc eof the means of causing the explosion all over the place.

Not to mention that it typically takes a team of professionals, not being inconvenienced by an unprecedentedly massive building collapse next door, dust clouds so thick you literally can't see your hand in front of your face, and the building they're working in on fire, several days to rig a building for demolition.

Drew_TNBD

"Hey Jane... did you see all those dudes in the parking garage? Yeah they were sticking these red sticks into the support beams... kinda looked like dynamite from a cartoon or something..."
"Nevermind that Gareth. Did you know Vanessa was fucking Tom? I can't believe it!! Here, lets go scan our genitals with the office photocopier, it is my birthday after all!"

Phil_aka_Pip

Sambostar said:

The popular one circling within some scientific circles that the world is just a higher level computer programme akin to the matrix gets me.  It's almost as bad as the popular thinking that the world was flat in 10,000BC because no one had much travelled and planes hadn't been invented.  People so wrapped up in modern philosophy, man made tech and popularist introverted thinking that they don't even see the irony of their theories.

The Mice paid for it. Deep Thought designed it, the Magratheans built it, and we're living on it. Wait till the Vogons get here ...

fields5069

The thing about conspiracy theorists, is that they believe that they are just smart enough to reach escape velocity from the mass belief in published fact.

Don't they realise that if any of that shit is true, then they're being allowed to believe it, since it makes sense that you need some outliers for other people to point at and feel comforted that they're not as stupid. This then reinforces the masses' belief in published fact, hence the theorists are all part of the plan.

Drew_TNBD

fields5069 said:

The thing about conspiracy theorists, is that they believe that they are just smart enough to reach escape velocity from the mass belief in published fact.

Don't they realise that if any of that shit is true, then they're being allowed to believe it, since it makes sense that you need some outliers for other people to point at and feel comforted that they're not as stupid. This then reinforces the masses' belief in published fact, hence the theorists are all part of the plan.

You are Jeff Noon and ICM£5

Garthy

TheMarlin said:

Nope. I didn't mention phones or furniture. I should have been specific. Im referring to steel, concrete, building rubble.

I grew up in the Midlands, and witnessed several demolitions of high rise buildings. The building debris usually reaches 20% (or thereabouts) the original height of the building.

The twin towers should have had huge piles of debris, and it just wasn't there. There was some debris, but it didn't reach higher than the third floor.

There were 16 firefighters trapped in basement stairwell B of the north tower. They were at the absolute base of the tower. When the towers started to fall, they expected to perish, but looked up to see blue skies. They walked out of the stairwell to safety. There should have been 110 stories worth of steel and concrete rubble overhead, but they walked out. There was nothing there.

Lots to think about. I'm not going to convince any of you that I'm right, and you're wrong (& vice-versa). That's not really the point.

But, do look into the work of Dr Judy Wood, and The Hutchinsom Effect.

Richard D. Hall's research on the published radar flight data for the two jets also raise interesting questions.

Marlin

Sorry, I don't understand what point you're trying to make. It was an event captured on 25,000 cameras with half a million eye witnesses and a billion people watching it on live tv. Everyone saw the towers standing & collapsing, the dust cloud and the piles of debris afterwards, in real time.

Myranda

So, ok, to the conspiracy nutters... where did the concrete and steel (which the rest of us saw as dust coating a large amount of Manhattan, but you didn't) go?

Explosions - even control demolitions don't get rid of material. Break it, move it maybe... but it's still there. So even in a conspiracy there would be the same amount of material to get rid of. Unless you're proposing that ghosts stole the material or aliens beemed it up it has to be the sort of point that clearly you didn't understand... however the buildings came down, there was x amount of material... asserting that y amount is missing therefore conspiracy suggests you didn't pay attention because no one took any material away BEFORE the collapse... so where the f*** do you think it went? 

Myranda

ICBM said:

scrumhalf said:

Among the things they did was to get a professiional demolition company to film the demolition of a (from memory) four-storey building. After the explosion they scanned the area and their was evidenc eof the means of causing the explosion all over the place.

Not to mention that it typically takes a team of professionals, not being inconvenienced by an unprecedentedly massive building collapse next door, dust clouds so thick you literally can't see your hand in front of your face, and the building they're working in on fire, several days to rig a building for demolition.

More than that - demolition crews need to expose some of the steel reinforcing material because concrete can absorb a lot of explosive energy...

So it's not just place a dynamite on the building in a few key points... it's take a pneumatic drill to large chunks of the building, wrap all supporting columns in shaped charges (in very specifically calculated arrangements)... wrap those in material designed to prevent debris being ejected at high speed... there would have been several floors of the WTC that were constant construction work type areas - the central column of the building housed the lifts and was the supporting structure... so EVERYONE using the building on the floors above would have heard the maintainence work EVEN if you cleared out a floor or two in order to sneakily do it.

In and empty 10 story building scheduled for demolition it can take a couple of weeks to prep it... working mostly from the ground floor. For a building the size of the WTC buildings, 90 storeys up, while surrounded by a constant workforce? I'd be surprised if you could do it in a month - while being constantly observed... to do so without being observed? I'd not think it possible - but certainly months, in the hope that not one person got off the wrong floor if you emptied the floor and completely impossible if you didn't empty it... 

And you'd STILL have the entire WTC building in rubble... unless they invented some sort of concrete and steel eating termite... those termites ate the entire building (pooing off site so as to reduce the rubble)... at some point they stopped using the building because it was structurally unsound... while holograms and ghosts kept up the charade for months... until by luck terrorists flew planes into the massively hollow shells that were the WTC towers... none of the termite inventors, hologram operators, organisers have spoken out because in the history of the world no one has ever told someone they shouldn't a secret they were entrusted to keep... it's literally impossible to reveal secrets. Then aliens stole all the remaining building material because their spaceship - made entirely from fragments of steel and concrete was in need of repair and they'd enlisted the US government to help 

Or, you know, perhaps thousands of gallons of jet fuel aluminium and steel hit buildings at 500mph+ and the impact+fire weakened a couple of floors enough to start them falling and momentum did the rest... nope. Your alien/ghost/magic termite/super secret makes much more sense

Col_Decker

Pyramids is another good one, especially that hill in Bosnia or wherever it is. That hill is really a space ship you know

stickyfiddle

http://e.lvme.me/5o4mnkx.jpg

Neil

I honestly think conspiracy theorists are unable to accept that stuff sometimes just happens.

They believe there is always some sort of back story nobody knows but them.

Perhaps it makes them feel smart?

menamestom

TheMarlin;1068327" said:

It's demonstrable, and has been studies intensely by government and military forces world wide.

You're not going to get impartial information on a debunker site.

From your own link:- 'There’s nothing remotely convincing about Judy Wood’s theory – it’s based on a flawed premise that the towers “went away”, with poorly interpreted data, which she claims was caused by a weapon she cannot cite, nor explain or replicate on a smaller scale.' Not exactly convincing. Are there any actual studies you can link to?

menamestom

Neil;1068852" said:

I honestly think conspiracy theorists are unable to accept that stuff sometimes just happens.

From what I've seen it's often the inability to see all the things that don't appear significant, more than the things that do. Any major even has an incredible amount of data produced and you can always look at small clusters to draw conclusions. Coincidences happen and some will appear almost too incredible to happen by chance. But that's really just the texas sharp shooter at play, masses if randomness causes patterns and some people just don't get the lack if significance of some of these patterns.

Reverend

Aren't planes made mostly of aluminium?

Burning aluminium cuts through steel.

FX_Munkee

Re the rubble. People have seen low rise reinforced concrete or brick buildings demolished by controlled explosions.
There's quite a bit of rubble, because, well, there was quite a lot of material.
A skyscraper is not made of millions of tonnes of reinforced concrete, it's made of steel frames. You can't make a skyscraper from reinforced concrete it would collapse under it's own weight.
The whole idea is to use far less material, that's the reason you can build them!


but chemtrails are real obviously.

Reverend

Haarp is another good one.


1.2 billion combustion engines and billions of fires cannot possible alter the chemical make up of the atmostphere enough to affect the weather. But one radar dish can.