1 of 7
1
9/11 Conspiracy Theories are bullshit.
Posted: 18 June 2007 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  26
Joined  2006-11-29

From Wikipedia: “In July 2006, a Scripps Howard and Ohio University poll concluded that “Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them”, “sixteen percent said it’s “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings” and “twelve percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a military cruise missile in 2001 rather than by an airliner captured by terrorists.”[8]”
Ref: ^ Third of Americans suspect 9-11 government conspiracy. Scripps News (2006).
http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

Here are some resources that debunk this rather disturbingly popular pseudo-science:

1. Screw Loose Change
This is the Counter video showing all the inaccurate information in film Loose Change (which is the most popular 9/11 Conspiracy Theory video).

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561

Articles:

2. Debunking The 9/11 Myths:
PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech…w/1227842.html
3. 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective (This appeared in Skeptic Magazine)
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html
4. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions:

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Audio:

5. Podcast: Debunking 9/11 Myths:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog…s/3705191.html

6. Skeptical Sunday: 9/11 Conspiracy
http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=2268977

7. The Skeptics’ Guide:
http://theskepticsguide.org

Books:
8. Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts
http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/158816635X

Websites:

9. Loose Change Guide
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/

10. 9/11 Myths
http://www.911myths.com/

11. http://www.debunking911.com/

12. Screw Loose Change Blog
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

Skeptical Inquirer is set to write up an article as well in a few months.

[ Edited: 18 June 2007 03:15 PM by Havermayer ]
 Signature 

Skeptics’ Guide Podcast

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2007 11:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15305
Joined  2006-02-14

Agreed. This stuff appears to be pernicious nonsense. How are you aware of an upcoming article in SI?

FYI we had a related thread to this HERE.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2007 11:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  26
Joined  2006-11-29
dougsmith - 19 June 2007 11:46 AM

Agreed. This stuff appears to be pernicious nonsense. How are you aware of an upcoming article in SI?

FYI we had a related thread to this HERE.

I asked Barry Karr at a recent CFI Student Leadership Conference if they had anything planned in regards to the 9/11 Truth movement, and he said that they’re trying to get a structural engineer to write one up.

 Signature 

Skeptics’ Guide Podcast

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 June 2007 11:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15305
Joined  2006-02-14

That would be excellent, particularly if it expanded on the sort of research undertaken by Michael Shermer’s Skeptic magazine, that you cited.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2007 12:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  65
Joined  2007-06-19

I find it curious that this has not been settled. If thermate, thermite, and explosives were used, tiny droplets of molten steel, 1000 down to 50 microns, would have blown out the windows like shotgun pellets, hardening in the air as they went, to then land across the street, or from the upper floors, blocks away.

If it was controlled demolition, all you need is a jewler’s loup, a dental pick, and a magnet to pluck out a little dirt from some sheltered spot, window sill, crack in a facade, or maybe even in the gutters and seams of the sidewalks. If little balls of steel stick to the magnet, then it was controlled demolition. If not, then not.

I have not seen a scientific report which delved into this simple test. Its not the kind of thing that can be faked by a politically motivated laboratory.

So why has it not been done?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2007 12:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  26
Joined  2006-11-29
daybrown - 21 June 2007 12:38 AM

So why has it not been done?

They also didn’t perform simple tests that would dispute that it wasn’t Godzilla’s firebreath that took it down. 

Basically the simple straightforward hypothesis that they had explained everything quite well.  Under any other circumstance that would be fine.  But a public controversy has erupted.  Maybe such tests are needed now.  Although they wouldn’t convince the true believers.

 Signature 

Skeptics’ Guide Podcast

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2007 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  65
Joined  2007-06-19

Do we have innumerable rants posted that Godzilla cause it? I mean if so, then perform the test.
The notion seems unresponsive to the point. and my point is not so much the test, but that none of all those thousands who live in New York, can get off their fat asses to stop ranting long enough to go down to the WTC neighborhood to do the test and tell us what they found, rather than what they think.

I dont care what they think. I dont care what you think, nor do I care what the power elite thinks. I do not have a realistic assessment of the data I’ve seen so far.

For me, it hardly matters. Either the government was so inept and corrupt as to let the 911 plot go forward, or they had a hand in it. Either way security in this nation is like it is at the Mexican border. Smoke and mirrors. I live about as far back in the Ozark woods, so nobody is gonna blow my ass away with WMD. i have long thot New Yorkers were stupid and crazy, and the fact that none of them have gone down to the 911 site to satisfy their curiosity about this proves it.

And please, save your rant, I’m not a liberal. I voted for Goldwater, and distinctly remember the distortions of mass media used to destroy him. They have not forgotten how to do that, so I take whatever they have had to say about 911 with a grain of salt. I’ve seen them suck up to presidents before.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2007 06:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  27
Joined  2007-04-14

It disturbs me to no end that far too many of the questions raised by 911 Truth movement have not been satisfactorily answered. Furthermore, it upsets me that at a site like this one, those of us, like myself, who do believe that the “9/11” events were an inside job are made to feel foolish. I have studied both sides, for the past 5 years now and the 911 Truth Movement’s arguments remain much more plausible.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2007 07:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  26
Joined  2006-11-29
fragen - 21 June 2007 06:25 PM

It disturbs me to no end that far too many of the questions raised by 911 Truth movement have not been satisfactorily answered. Furthermore, it upsets me that at a site like this one, those of us, like myself, who do believe that the “9/11” events were an inside job are made to feel foolish. I have studied both sides, for the past 5 years now and the 911 Truth Movement’s arguments remain much more plausible.

Give me unanswered questions that the Truth Movement has raised, and I’ll check it out. 

I’ve been debating creationists who say the exact same thing, but in regards to evolution.  They say that they’ve studied both sides for years, and that the creationist side is simpliy stronger and that there are all these holes in evolutionism.  What is occuring here is confirmation bias, and it may be what is occuring with you as well.  I have also investigated many of their claims, and have come to a different conclusion.  Check out the links that I posted above for the skeptical side.

Also, I don’t know what you mean by “it upsets me that at a site like this one”.  As I said before, Skeptical Inquirer plan on running an article critical of the 9/11 Truth movement’s claims by a structural engineer, and they have hosted lectures by him.  Also, when it comes to the opinion of the skeptical movement as a whole, they’re uniformly against the 9/11 Truth Movement.  It’s not just CFI and Skeptical Inquirer.  Skeptic Magazine ran an article last year (see above), and technical magazines and journals have been against them too.  Also, all the relevent experts completely disagree with them when asked.  Not one has come forward in support of them.  Not a single structural engineer in the entire world.  (Steve Jones is also not really a relevent expert at all: he’s no structural egineer.  And it’s not that far fetched that one physicist would embrace incorrect claims.)

The skeptics have checked out the Truth Movement’s claims.  And they weren’t too impressed.

[ Edited: 21 June 2007 07:08 PM by Havermayer ]
 Signature 

Skeptics’ Guide Podcast

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 04:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  27
Joined  2007-04-14

since you asked so nicely…. grin

Questions of the Family Steering Committee which remain unanswered (such as the question “Why did [WTC 7] fall”),
http://www.911independentcommission.org/giuliani31804.html

The Destruction of the World Trade Center:Why the Official Account Cannot Be True by David Ray Griffin
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

http://cooperativeresearch.org/
and there http://cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

http://911truth.org/

and http://patriotsquestion911.com/
....and there http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html
moreover many of the above cited sites belong to the discussions going on and rebutted at
http://911review.com/infowars.html

was there an inside job motive? Why yes! http://oilempire.us/


I think these are a good start for everybody to get more balanced information than what is provided above.

I would be very pleased if you were to read all of the information at these sites i have included with an open mind, yes even a skeptical mind and eventually you and many others would come to the same conclusion i have.

Let me add a personal note: When my dad first told me what he had discussed with his friends, re 9/11 events, all retired engineers (dutch, belgian, french and british) i simply could not, did not want to believe him. I too pointed him to websites that countered what he told me. But i thought, “ok let’s review the situation” and read what he had sent me in the meantime, some of it was even in german, some in french) and sure enough, i began to question the same way the families did and other researchers have. At times i even “fell” for some of the weirdest stories for a week or two, only to make me do more research…trying to come up with proof my dad was wrong afterall, that it was all too far-fetched..but now after 5 years, i believe my dad and his friends and many thousands of people are right when they say it was an inside job. The conspiracy is what the cronies did to gain more power = money. It is a shame, a real shame.
The biggest problem facing everyone when they come to realize this is: what to do about it, and can anything be done about it?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 05:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  459
Joined  2007-06-19

Fragen, I’ve red some of the links you provide.

What this text shows, IMHO, is that there could have been some irresponsabilities in some persons, some mistaken decision (particulary clear now, when whe know how the things finally evolved), confusion and things like that, but this collection of mistakes doesn’t prove any conspiration. I think that a catastrophe like this almost allways will overcome the emergency teams capacity. Please dont understand this as an offense against the emergency team members, I try to mean that there is almost no way to manage such thing in order.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 05:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  65
Joined  2007-06-19
Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 07:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  27
Joined  2007-04-14
Havermayer - 21 June 2007 07:01 PM

Also, I don’t know what you mean by “it upsets me that at a site like this one”. 

I forgot to reply to this point. I hope i can phrase this so as not to offend anyone, not the founder nor the people who work so diligently at providing a wonderful forum, podcasts etc.

My thinking is as follows: on several podcasts i thought to have heard much criticism expressed at how the government handles many issues especially, how science is taught, ( evolution), separation of church and state, equal rights, minority issues and so on. I expected that many of the people at this site, i.e. who are in charge would be much more skeptical about anything that the current admins of the usamerica is putting forth, in this case their explanation (smirk, guffaw) of how the events of 9/11 came to be. Moreover that they, the people writing the articles of the magazine skeptical enquirer would scrutinize what the connections are between those doing the “debunking” have with aforesaid administration.
Someone said this once before, but for something else, yet it applies here aswell: Follow the money lead! Inform yourselves.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 10:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  65
Joined  2007-06-19

You mite look into the studies on group think, and consider how the craft of manipulating the reality of the masses has come since the days of Augustus and Machiavelli. If whatever group you are a part of, has for whatever reason, explained to itself what it thot happened, you will be very hard put to arrive at an independent rational conclusion. That is just the way hominid minds work.

Recent work with neurology, brain scans, the biochemistry of the mind, and social factors like group think demonstrate that hominids are not nearly as rational as they think they are. And when you have to deal with irrationality on a daily basis, you upset people if you dont go along with their illusions. This has something to do with why so often the ancient sages withdrew from humanity for a time, to empower themselves to think their own thots, and thereby come up with new constructs that are out of the box of the conventional lack of wisdom.

As I have said several times to deafening silence, if thermite, thermate, and explosives were used, then the explosion would have blown out tiny droplets of molten steel along with all the other debris we see coming out of the windows that has been blamed on the ‘pancake effect’. Those droplets, 1000 down to 50 microns, would have immediately hardened, and flown out like shotgun pellets to land across the street, or even blocks away from the upper floors of the twin towers. If it was controlled demolition, they are still there.

All someone in Manhattan has to do is go down to that area with a dental pick, magnet, and jeweler’s loup, pluck out some dirt from some sheltered niche, window sill, crack in a facade, whatever, and see if anything sticks to the magnet. Yet… nobody has posted a report despite the fact that there are thousands in Manhattan who say they want the truth. Why not?

Cause they dont really want the truth, they want the issue to rant about. From the standpoint of group think, this makes perfect sense.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 10:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  65
Joined  2007-06-19
Barto - 22 June 2007 05:02 PM

Fragen, I’ve red some of the links you provide.

What this text shows, IMHO, is that there could have been some irresponsabilities in some persons, some mistaken decision (particulary clear now, when whe know how the things finally evolved), confusion and things like that, but this collection of mistakes doesn’t prove any conspiration. I think that a catastrophe like this almost allways will overcome the emergency teams capacity. Please dont understand this as an offense against the emergency team members, I try to mean that there is almost no way to manage such thing in order.

That is evidence of incompetence. I dont *care* whether it was incompetence or conspiracy, either way “national security” is an oxymoron.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 11:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4052
Joined  2006-11-28

I don’t have the energy or motivation to answer all the specifics (though HERE is one place to start if you’re interested in such answers), but I’ll say this.This simplest explanation isn’t always bets, but it usally is. So try this one:

1. Lots of people hate the U.S. for good and bad reasons.
2. Some of them are smart, brave, well-financed, and evil.
3. Airport security is run by people, and people make mistakes. Especially in repetitive, low-paying, low-prestige jobs in which nothing happening is the rule and something happening is the exception.
4. There’s some pretty convincing footage of airplanes crashing into buildings and big fires, and given the number of eyewitness and cell-phone shots it probably isn’t faked (you know, like the Moon landings were; I’m mean, NOBODY was there watching it happen)

Put is all together and you get a relatively straightforward story of a bunch of guys who came up with a clever way to kill a lot of us and got lucky enough to do probably even better a job of it than they expected to. NOw before you start adding layers of mystery and intrigue to the story, you need to do a convincing job of showing that the simple and obvious explanation isn’t the right one. All the speculating about who benefitted and how the event led to the wholesale revocation of civil liberties (which is, sadly, quite true) is not evidence of either the inadequacy of the obvious explanatgion or even of the veracity of a different explanation. And saying “It just seems hard to believe” isn’t evidence either. Show that more is needed, that the simple story isn’t possible and then maybe I’ll listen to evidence (again, not murky innuendo) for alternative explanations.


Some people here don’t seem to understand what skepticism is. It is NOT automatically disbelieving the first and most obvious explanation for everything and looking for alternatives. It is not debunking something because you don’t like the person (or government) who says it. It is following the methods of science and the evidence o a reasonable but always provisional answer. There is no failure of skepticism in demanding sound arguments and real evidence before jettisoning the simple, obvious, and reasonable hypothesis above.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 7
1