I spent 3 months of my life responding to a seemingly endless trail of e-mails from my Brother on this subject.
My Brother is a self proclaimed Libertarian. He has aligned himself with the likes of Alex Jones & Co. A group of veteran conspiracy theorists, who are radical anti-government Libertarians that have consistently used fear of government, foreigners and even hate mongering to further their cause.
Here are some links I prepared along with one of many responses I drafted during that 3 months….
It is wise, however, to approach new utterances by a known loon with skepticism. That is merely common sense.
Do not underestimate a veteran skeptic’s ability to accurately and consistently detect bullshit on very little data. There are clearly many such veteran skeptics out there and if they fail to jump up and refute every claim presented, it lends zero credibility to said claims. The burden of proof is always upon the claimant.
Ok, it appears that you did not follow the links I sent. There are many sources that dispute almost every basis for the conspiracy theory. I seem to be able to find them easily and the authors of a couple of the links I sent have spent the time to consolidate and present the point by point rebuttals to individual claims.
Here is one from popular mechanics
And unlike much of the information quoted by the conspiracy theorists, all the sources are clearly identified.
Another thing that bothers me. If you were to accept these claims as stated by the 9/11 truth organization at face value without attempting to debunk them, there are many things that just don’t make sense.
For example. Assuming there were incindiary devices planted in the WTC and “building 7”, and they were cleverly designed to go off on command at times coinciding with the plane crashes, what evidence leads you to the government as the instigator?
From what I heard in the discussion, we are asked to not only believe the depictions of the events in accordance with the conspiracy theory, but we are also being asked to swallow the idea of a “shadow government”.
And from other Alex Jones & Co. broadcasts and writings I know that this ultimately leads to Illuminate and Reptilian Aliens from outer space!
And you want me to leap into that pool?!!!
And here is another interesting contradiction/observation:
“I currently work on boiler control systems.
I also worked in the steel industry for 5 years. Most of that was at a hot rolling mill. The steel slabs were heated for the rolling process to make the steel easier to process.
Before that I worked for a company that built industrial furnaces. Mostly for heat-treating engine and transmission parts. I also commissioned an aluminum-melting furnace.
I do have a background in military demolitions. I was a combat engineer. Not quite the same thing as the folks that bring down buildings, but I understand the concept well enough.
But I am not a structural engineer. I have a BS in electrical engineering technology. (Not an EE. Less math in my degree.)
During basic training, we “watched” a demonstration where a thermite grenade was used to destroy some old radio equipment. I put watched in quotes because we had to turn our heads away from the flash. The Flash went on for over a minute. The stands we were in were only about 20 yards from where the grenade was set off. Thermite is NOT and explosive. It is an incendiary chemical combination that produces great amounts of heat. But it takes a short time to heat up and does not act instantaneously. Real explosives are consumed in a fraction of a second.
The whole idea behind controlled demolition is to use limited amounts of fast acting explosives with precise timing on already weakened structures. Thermite is not what they use. IIRC, the explosives used for such things are the same ones NASA used in explosive bolts on spacecraft. Very fast acting. Much faster than traditional military explosives. Arguments claiming that the WTC were brought down by a controlled demolition and involved the use of thermite are contradictory right from the start. “
Guy Noir - on skepticforum.com
Bottom line, it seems that the techniques being used by these organizations is to develop theories that are complex and woven together using many mis-conceptions, mis-quotes and factually incorrect depictions of events. So many that it would take real dedication to dispute them all.
Not to mention that once refuted, they simply invent new theories that implicate the “devils” they are after and ask that you spend more time debunking those.
However, in my mind enough has already been refuted to disway me from the task.
Not to mention the credibility of the people at the forefront of these theories have already made statements that damage their credibility.
Each of the panelists in the discussion is either trying to sell movies, books or pursue political ambitions that would benefit greatly from leagues of followers.
Most of the people in the audience that had “questions” were selling something themselves. Sounds a lot like the peddlers you find selling UFO and Big Foot stuff.
There was a 22 year old kid that got a terrific round of applause during the question and answer period. He was a high school student when 9/11 happened and by his own admission, knew little of what the government did or how it worked at the time. But now, I guess he is an expert, and renowned among his peers at this conference. I think this says a lot.
One guy got up and listed more than 40 liberal/left wing “Gate Keepers” (news sources) that need to be shut down or turned around to thier way of thinking. Is this the kind of “research” technique that was used to come up with these theories? Sounds all too familiar, ignore the contradictions, kill the messenger, full speed ahead.
There was no one at the conference with a contrary opinion ready to refute anything they said. This is no surpirise, I suspect if there was one they would have been swiftly lead away, just like a protester at a Bush speach. Perhaps those with contrary opinions had a forum 15 miles away in a protest area?
I honestly think you would be better off looking for truth elsewhere.