Here watching CNN... the Republicans say the Democrats want to cut & run from the Middle East. Yet why are they not disputeing the lies?
The Democrats are saying there needs to be a change in strategy in the Middle East as it is not working. They are right about that but why are they not disputeing the lies?
Ask yourself why are the 911 Movies not getting airplay on CNN? What about Fox? Why are they not disputeing them? Why are they not explaining how those towers could possibly fall when weight cannot bring them down faster than Physics will allow & the Planes could not do that either?
That is the biggest Conspiracy going on that I can see. Discussing the issues raised here in these Movies. Watch them before you vote.
9/11 Mysteries (video)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003
Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Recut)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501
9/11: A Conversation with Jim Fetzer (video)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=590053292130233240
Then when your done... watch this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4757274759497686216
Then go Vote.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 73
By JAMES B. MEIGS
September 12, 2006 -- ON Feb. 7, 2005, I became a member of the Bush/Halliburton/Zionist/CIA/New World Order/Illuminati conspiracy for world domination. That day, Popular Mechanics, the magazine I edit, hit newsstands with a story debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories. Within hours, the online community of 9/11 conspiracy buffs - which calls itself the "9/11 Truth Movement" - was aflame with wild fantasies about me, my staff and the article we had published. Conspiracy Web sites labeled Popular Mechanics a "CIA front organization" and compared us to Nazis and war criminals.
For a 104-year-old magazine about science, technology, home improvement and car maintenance, this was pretty extreme stuff. What had we done to provoke such outrage?
Research.
Conspiracy theories alleging that 9/11 was a U.S. government operation are rapidly infiltrating the mainstream. These notions are advanced by hundreds of books, over a million Web pages and even in some college classrooms. The movie "Loose Change," a slick roundup of popular conspiracy claims, has become an Internet sensation.
Worse, these fantasies are gaining influence on the international stage. French author Thierry Meyssan's "The Big Lie," which argues that the U.S. military orchestrated the attacks, was a bestseller in France, and his claims have been widely repeated in European and Middle Eastern media. And recent surveys reveal that, even in moderate Muslim countries such as Turkey and Jordan, majorities of the public believe that no Arab terrorists were involved in the attacks.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion," Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was fond of saying. "He is not entitled to his own facts." Yet conspiracy theorists want to pick and choose which facts to believe.
Rather than grapple with the huge preponderance of evidence in support of the mainstream view of 9/11, they tend to focus on a handful of small anomalies that they believe cast doubt on the conventional account. These anomalies include the claim that the hole in the Pentagon was too small to have been made by a commercial jet (but just right for a cruise missile); that the Twin Towers were too robustly built to have been destroyed by the jet impacts and fires (so they must have been felled by explosives), and more. If true, these and similar assertions would cast serious doubt on the mainstream account of 9/11.
But they're not true. Popular Mechanics has been fact-checking such claims since late 2004, and recently published a book on the topic. We've pored over transcripts, flight logs and blueprints, and interviewed more than 300 sources - including engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses and members of investigative teams.
In every single case, we found that the very facts used by conspiracy theorists to support their fantasies are mistaken, misunderstood or deliberately falsified.
Here's one example: Meyssan and hundreds of Web sites cite an eyewitness who said the craft that hit the Pentagon looked "like a cruise missile with wings." Here's what that witness, a Washington, D.C., broadcaster named Mike Walter, actually told CNN: "I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, 'This doesn't add up. It's really low.' And I saw it. I mean, it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon."
We talked to Walter and, like so many of the experts and witnesses widely quoted by conspiracy theorists, he told us he is heartsick to see the way his words have been twisted: "I struggle with the fact that my comments will forever be taken out of context."
Here's another: An article in the American Free Press claims that a seismograph at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory picked up signals indicating that large bombs were detonated in the towers. The article quotes Columbia geologist Won-Young Kim and certainly looks authoritative. Yet the truth on this issue is not hard to find. A published Lamont-Doherty report on the seismic record of 9/11 says no such thing. Kim told Popular Mechanics that the publication's interpretation of his research was "categorically incorrect." Yet the claim is repeated verbatim on more than 50 Web sites as well as in the film "Loose Change."
Every 9/11 conspiracy theory we investigated was based on similarly shoddy evidence. Most of these falsehoods are easy to refute simply by checking the original source material or talking to experts in the relevant fields. And yet even the flimsiest claims are repeated constantly in conspiracy circles, passed from Web site to book to Web site in an endless daisy chain. And any witness, expert - or publication - that tries to set the record straight is immediately vilified as being part of the conspiracy.
The American public has every right to ask hard questions about 9/11. And informed skepticism about government and media can be healthy. But skepticism needs to be based on facts, not fallacies. Unfortunately, for all too many, conspiratorial fantasies offer a seductive alternative to grappling with the hard realities of a post-9/11 world.
James B. Meigs is editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics. The magazine's new book, "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand up to the Facts," is just out.
Now The Chronic;
This is proof or evidence? Ok so tell me then how all the windows were blown out in the lobby? Tell me how a building can call faster than physics allows without controlled demolition. Tell me how planes can be hijacked & fly off course cannot be intercepted within an hour. Start with explaining any of those things. Or you can just watch the movies & see the truth.
And for the record, most of the information you refer to as absolute fact is on Fox and people just don't buy it. Because it doesn't make any sense!
Don't you think that if there was a shred of uncontrovertible evidence that the anti-Bush liberals and main stream media would be trumpeting this from the rooftops? For God's sake, this is an election year - an election year where it appears that most people want Bush to go down in flames. If there were some provable facts, the left would be using them. Every University in the country (trust me - there are few conservative universities in this country) would be teaching this crap. There would be demonstrations all over the place.
Instead you have a dozen people - few with any serious credibility - who are the only ones going around screaming about this. Surely they could have convinced a few politicians by now. The only one who appears even remotely credible is Stephen Jones formerly of Brigham Young University, and even he isn't convincing.
So - NOBODY CARES!
We talked to Walter and, like so many of the experts and witnesses widely quoted by conspiracy theorists, he told us he is heartsick to see the way his words have been twisted: "I struggle with the fact that my comments will forever be taken out of context."
Gee that's a slam dunk! Where are the planes engines? What happened to the anti aircraft defense at the Pentagon? Hmm lets go on...
Here's another: An article in the American Free Press claims that a seismograph at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory picked up signals indicating that large bombs were detonated in the towers. The article quotes Columbia geologist Won-Young Kim and certainly looks authoritative. Yet the truth on this issue is not hard to find. A published Lamont-Doherty report on the seismic record of 9/11 says no such thing. Kim told Popular Mechanics that the publication's interpretation of his research was "categorically incorrect." Yet the claim is repeated verbatim on more than 50 Web sites as well as in the film "Loose Change."
Gee... how am I ever going to take this one on? Ok let's try. How do buildings fall faster than from controlled demolition... faster than Physics allow? There is more than one source for evidence of explosions. Hell you can clearly see them in the movies, never mind the numerous people who have documented that there were secondary explosions, along with video & audio of the other explosions. So I really don't care if one thing in loose change was incorrect about who said what! There is plenty of other evidence of secondary explosions.
No, he's wanted in connection with prior occurrences, NOT 911 !
Not really that odd when you consider that Robert Mueller, head man at the FBI, has on more than one occasion publicly stated that there is NO legal proof that Osama, nor the 19 men named as perpetrators by the Administration are actually guilty of doing it.
Now why do you suppose we settled on a "theory" about what happened that day which has No solid evidence to back it up?
There are plenty of protests & one at Ground Zero during every anniversary. There are plenty of Professors teaching about "Stolen Elections & 911 being an inside job". You will find one professors tape on YouTube.
When I started writing about 911... I only found a few Movies... on the subject... now there are more & more & more every day! All with experts backing up everything said. So Nanci... it is being done. Why don't Democrats jump all over this? That's what i would like to know. Before you vote... ask them.
Let me tell you about a little poor man's Hot Rod trick to get a little better ET out of your car. You take a blow torch and heat up a couple of the coils in the front springs of your car. The heat will soften the metal and it will do two things; 1. It will make the cars stance lower allowing less air to get under the car at speed thus creating less turbulence under the car and a greater top speed. The reason this happens is because as the metal heats up it looses it's memory and allows it to collapse. 2. The metal becomes more flexible so on acceleration it will allow more of the cars weight to be transferred to the rear wheels. If you control wheel hop and allow for weight transfer your car will get better traction "hook up" and help your ET. What does that have to do with the trade towers. Well jet fuel burns very hot, I'm sure it burns hot enough to change the characteristics of metal. So why isn't it possible for the collapse of a building with a metal skeleton to be a result of the heat produced by burning jet fuel? I don't understand.
Bin Ladin not wanted for 9/11? That explains why we bombed the hell out of Afghanistan.
Thanks for the laugh this morning. You weren't on the grassy knoll by any chance were you?
Yet he was not aggressively pursued when we had him cornered, and there isn't ANY EVIDENCE he actually did 911. And the FBI dropped all investigations of that crime without any closure at all. Curious set of realities.
Shelly;
Nothing has been disputed & no one has been able to explain how the towers could fall faster than physics will allow without controlled demolition. Watch the movies & see. The last two are really recent. You had better do some checking on that FBI list too because Bin Laden is not on it!
It doesn't seem to occur to them as they attempt to shout down all that try to draw attention to evidence that points in that direction, that there is a great resistance to "going there", and that resistance would be shared by a great many. In fact, more than enough evidence exists to reopen an investigation of all that happened that day, but there's that stubborn resistance keeping officials from getting near this question. Political suicide you know.
I'll bey that makes those shouting the evidence down real proud, to know they are making it impossible to have 911 looked into by anyone other than folks hand picked by the Administration. And I bet this resistance is not overlooked by any powerful people that might consider something like this in the future...Handy thing if you wish to frighten the populace into submission.
9/11 Mysteries (video)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003
Watch it.
Christina;
No if you talk to anyone who worked in the towers they will tell you that the first elevator took you 1/3rd of the way up & then you would walk over to another elevator which would take you another 3rd & then walk over to another to get to the top. Just as all high rise buildings are built now. It was impossible for any Jet fuel or air to get from the planes to the basement except from the outside of the buildings.
By the way about beating the dead horse. I don't agree with him but I feel this is his article and it seems to be an important subject to him. I would like to give him the opportunity to articulate what I don't understand or agree with in his discussion. I can't say he's wrong or right without him explaining himself fully.
If you watch the movies... they show the towers coming down. You can see the explosions with your naked eye very clearly going on below the fall of each building. Building #7 was not even hit by a plane. Strong enough built that it housed a bomb shelter in it for the Mayor of New York. Yet when you watch it come down, it was obviously a controlled demolition.
The facts are there that there is no way the planes could bring down the buildings. They are the only 3 steel structures in history (claimed) to fall because of fire. The design of the Towers was an Engineering Masterpiece & they were designed to withstand multiple plane crashes.
The Government simply lied to you & now it is your turn to vote.
We know it is an amazing concept. We know it is a disturbing concept. We know you and many others will call any that propose something fishy went on that day lunatic. But what would YOU do if you studied something like this and realized there was a charade going on? Would you hush up to avoid being mocked? Would you say never mind, they got away with it, hopefully no one will ever do something like that again?
Or would you do what you see us doing?
I know something about the WTC from an inside perspective, since my own father, P. Robert Young designed and built the Radio Spar Structure, at the very top. (I don't know how many of you noticed that this Spar of my father's was the Very Last thing standing, just as the top and the bottom met! This image has been quite poignant in my family, especially in that I spoke about it at my father's funeral, a very few months later.) Anyway, I had more than a passing interest in the topic, as you might imagine—even though I personally lost no loved ones.
I saw Meigs' and his Publishers' debate with the Loose Change Guys. That was the FIRST thing I saw, so I decided to try to check things out without appealing to anything but physics (Which I also know something about.) Of course, experiments are difficult to conduct here. So I appealed to sources of a non-political nature, such as the Melting Point tables of various construction materials, and the burn temperature of hydrocarbons such as Jet fuel. Now, mind you, all I'd seen thus far was this one debate between the "debunkers" and the "Loose Change" guys.
I won't give the results here--since everyone here has already made up his mind. I am realistic enough to know that no one of contrary view would believe the results I got, since I have no 'credentials', any more than I would believe my results! In fact, I don't even believe my results! I just will say that there are unanswered questions, and everyone who thinks they know what happened here will have to squeeze their so-called "facts" really, really hard to create any theory that remotely resembles the Government line. Or else, they can blindly accept the "Flat world" theory, as 99.99 % of humanity did for almost 2000 years. In spite of the fact that no new research was required… No picture from space, nothing but a decent view of the Horizon on the ocean, a ship or two, and a Brain. One other thing… The will to learn! THAT'S what's sorely missing from the normal human mind that restricts us from being in the .01% that actually thinks things out a little bit.
I suggest that this contention (the Inside Job theory), if true, would have dire ramifications—so much so that people's political investments and self-images would be destroyed, were they to suffer the required paradigm shift to encompass such realities. Thus, for them, no such reality can be considered—it fails the 'plausibility' test! No one can alter what is 'plausible' to another person. It's like trying to tell someone how to ride a bicycle, and then expecting them not to fall down! The only way to alter such a thing is for them to do it themselves.
Another quite evident anomaly that requires further explanation is how you get cell phones to work at 500+ miles an hour, especially vintage 2001 cell phones. Anyone who explains THIS one will get the Nobel prize, and deserve it! My cell phone hardly works in my car, and it's 5 years newer! ( I mention this because anybody can easily do this experiment for themselves. Do you dare? Or is your mind made up?)
So, Nanci B. and others… The next time you're on an airplane at a mere 400 miles an hour, take your chances and call your mom (or your daughter). Try it 10 times. Try it a hundred times. Maybe you don't even have to dial. Just look at your Cingular Bars! Let me know if you have anything but "no service". I didn't. I never got one single bar in my flight from JFK to OAK. Nor from SFO to JFK. I have attempted 522 phone calls. Out of 522 tries I was successful once, and that was while we were taxiing at JFK!
Anyway, don't listen to anybody but yourself. Do your own test. Get your own data. That is what a Scientist does. Everyone who doesn't is just a sheep, or a pawn in somebody else's game. This is what the Evildoers—whoever they are—insiders OR outsiders are hoping: That Americans are just Sheep.
To our shame, this is way to True for my comfort.
Don't you ever do something because it is right? Is that such an alien concept that the very fact that James has nothing obvious to gain, by speaking out about this, makes you suspect him?
BTW, Hannity & Colmes has Colmes... I guess "some animals are MORE equal than others..."
It cannot be debunked. It just cant, because it is not possible for those towers to fall from a plane or the weight of the upper floors. The towers were built to handle 10 times the possible weight inside of them. The Jet fuel could not melt the steel & the floors could not possibly pancake without controlled demolition.
If I told you that I had proof that the terrorists somehow got inside of those buildings before hand & wired them for controlled demolition, you would be happy & accept that as being obvious as to why the towers fell.
Yet the reason why you do not accept that, is that for that to happen, you know it would have to have been an "inside job" & that really is what you don't want to accept, isn't it?
Yet it still makes a lot more sense that it was an "inside job" because the towers were shut down & wired beforehand. To do this wiring they had to have all the power shut off for some reason. When was the last time you heard of a building having its power turned off so wiring could be done vickey?
Those hijacked planes flew off their designated course for close to an hour & there was no way they could be intercepted? I don't know what you think can be debunked, but these are the only 3 steel buildings to ever fall from fire in HISTORY! There was opportunity & motive. Anyone seriously looking at the Movies I provided can see the controlled demolition for what it is. The evidence is all there for you to see. The reasons for motives are outlined as well.
It is no big revelation that Bin Laden has been on the US payroll for years. Bush has money in business with Bin Laden. Bin Laden was in hospital in Pakistan guarded by the CIA previous to 911. This is all documented fact! I seriously doubt Bin Laden had anything to do with 911 unless he was under orders of the CIA at the time. Yet is also no secret that your Government has been involved in & wanted control of the Middle East for years!
I did the research on the net. The information is all there for you to find. I have only given you little pieces of the entire truth, as that in itself is obviously hard for you to swallow.
Yet I can assure you of one thing. 911 was an inside job! Your Government "both Democrat & Republican" lied to you. Today... make your vote count!
The issue is not "Should we stay the course in Iraq, or should we pull out". The issue is that your Government is criminal & has lied to you "BIG TIME". It's time to throw these bastards out!
Rice lied to you right after 911 saying "who would have thought terrorists would use planes"? When she knew very well that they were doing a Military exercise on the same day involving exactly that scenario. Rumsfeld lied... Bush lied & the 911 Commission was nothing but a high priced cover up.
Yet you have the power to do the research yourself & when you finally see the obvious... vote the bums out! Cut off their money supply... force a proper investigation because this is YOUR COUNTRY & it is up to you to protect it from outright fraud!
A more Scientific Cell Phone test
A.K. Dewdney used to write the Mathematical Games column over at Scientific American. He's both Scientific AND American! See?
(Note: The pedigree of this column is that it was written for many years by a certain Martin Gardner, noted author and Skeptical Inquirer --who he also writes for!)
(So far as I know, this rag is NOT in the clutches of Rupert Murdoch, yet. Ironically, it is in the hands of Germany's Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, which bought the publication in 1986.)
What did Meigs & Popular Mechanics say about THIS "fraud"?
Now I can breathe. I hope the press will not step on the flowers out front when they come.
While we're questioning peoples' motives... Perhaps Meigs & company want to sell magazines. That seems like a distinct possibility! Is such a motive altruistic? Is it guaranteed to produce Truth? And I note that the Owner of the publication is... You guessed it! Rupert Murdoch! Hmmm... curiouser in curiouser! Same as FOX news! I feel compelled to point out (to you and other potential xenophobes) that BOTH Popular Mechanics and FOX "news" Channel are owned by a NON-American--lock, stock and barrel! Does this fact send up any red flags for you, vickey? Like the Red, White & Blue Flag you are raising when you point out that James S. is "not even from the US".
Is this a "proof" of bias? Surely not, but having all your eggs in one basket is generally not considered to be a good strategy, if your looking for diversity of opinion--or breakfast—unless you like your eggs scrambled, and crunchy! Of course, who would ever think such a thing about Roger "Fair & Balanced" Ailes? Biased? Surely not Roger! Oh, my, my paradigm is cracking like an egg!
News Corp Press Release
Roger Ailes Resume (partial)
What exactly was this "seasoned news and television veteran" doing during the Gap between '73 & '92? Anybody know?
Oh, I know, I know!!! He was over at the Reagan/Bush and Bush/Quaile. campaign headquarters, undoubtedly pushing for more fairness and balance!
J. Alter, Senior editor of Newsweek: "Those of us who hoped it would end differently knew we were in trouble when former Nixon media adviser Roger Ailes banned the word 'Watergate' from Fox's coverage and went with the logo 'Assault on the Presidency' instead."
Fair is Fair! It's just that SOME animals are MORE fair than others…
By the exit polls I am watching "Corruption" being the main issue to Americans. People are beginning to watch the Movies & to ask the important questions to themselves.
Just as shown here, as in my previous blogs, there is very little "if anything" anyone can dispute in any of the Movies.
Yet I won't be happy until they try to dispute 911 Mysteries on CNN. Then we can begin the trials for those responsible for the Cover Up! Then people who have seen these Movies will really demand answers!
Yet so far nothing has been presented to me as a dispute for what is covered in 911 Mysteries.
I have gotten... the weight of the upper floors drove the buildings down faster. Impossible. A brick & a pebble dropped from the same height hit the ground at exactly the same time. Weight cannot make the buildings fall faster than free fall.
I have gotten... Jet Fuel burned hot enough to weaken the steel. Yet the steel is rated & well documented as per it's melting point, being more than double the temperature that could come from the burning fuel.
I have gotten... absolute denial that people can see the explosions in the towers as they hurdle to earth & eye witness testimony of people who saw a plane hit the Pentagon... but they cannot explain why the Govt. will not release the other video tapes fixed on the Pentagon. Simply if there is nothing on those tapes... then show them! Not one person has come up with any kind of reasonable dispute for Building #7 yet.
The Movies are basically indisputable. 911 Mysteries & Terror Storm anyway.
For those of you who clearly see the truth... Expose this! Write in to Newspapers, call into radio talk shows... keep on asking people to dispute these two Movies until finally the Movies get shown on CNN!
There is a laser-reflecting mirror that was left there for the purpose of monitoring the distance between it and us. There is a team of scientists whose sole job is to keep their laser ruler aimed precisely at this spot, because if they let it drift away, then the beam doesn't bounce back! These men have the distinct impression that their job would not even exist, were it not for the existence of said mirror. Of course, they could all be government stooges!
But they aren't the only ones who can point their laser beams! Across the world, in Australia and Japan, there are more guys with lasers! And Russia! It seems hard to imagine that our demonstrably inept government would be able to carry off the sort of program (and garner the international cooperation) that would be required to perpetuate such a ruse.
My suggestion would be to get your own Laser, and see for yourself! The wattage required is surprisingly low, if you keep the frequency within the appropriate range. But since I haven't done as much myself, I can't tell anyone what to believe. But the structure of the reflector is such that the beam reflects back out in the same direction it came in, mostly. So, it works from anywhere on the Planet! (If I had a pencil and paper, I could draw a diagram.)
Alas, SOME experiments are more difficult to perform than others...
But, just THINK of the rewards! If you could prove the non-existence of this mirror, you could SUE NASA for mail fraud, and they have pretty deep pockets! That is, provided you have the courage of your convictions…
The road to Knowledge is frequently long and hard--and always twisty! There are potholes everywhere.
For instance, here's a hole: If you were to pre-plan the destruction of your buildings, as is posited, why would it be necessary to hire or blackmail pilots to fly expensive jet liners into the buildings? It would be so much easier to just make your thermate bombs have a paper trail that leads somewhere other than to the owner of the building. That is, wouldn't the bombs themselves be "evidence enough" of a terrorist plot? Why add airplanes? And the airplane part of the plot seems to be very risky, all by itself! As it is, at least one of the 4 or 5 planes involved failed to hit its target! What if one of those happened to have the WTC as its target? Then the perpetrator wouldn't be able to push the thermate button, thus leaving the other tower standing, cutting his winnings in half—and leaving the bombs unexploded in the tower! Surely, the danger of discovery would be quite high, at that point! It's just too risky!
Also, if it was me, I'd have waited longer than six weeks after I bought those insurance policies! Such a coincidence might draw suspicion where I didn't want it!
See? There's always more we don't know.
But, what DO we do with our doubts? Chuck everything? No, the BEST use of doubt and skepticism is to allow it to impel us to further tests and refinements of our knowledge as it stands. Doubt and verify, test and fail, observe, and learn.
I know of no one saying humans did not land on the moon. I believe the question is whether it was done as we were told and shown. The radiation belts are lethal, that has not changed, and spacecraft are still kept carefully within the range that keeps them out of that radiation. Check it out and you will see.
Don't blame you, one is about pride, the other, vast destruction.
"...The most dangerous part of the journey to the moon for radiation exposure was during the passage of the spacecraft through the Van Allen belts. This is a zone from aobut 1000 kilometers up to about 20000 kilometers. The Apollo missions flew through this zone at very high speed - outbound starting around 40,000 kph and inbound at about the same speed. They spent a few hours within the Van Allen belts and estimates of the total exposure during their entire flights were about 2 rems (the equivalent of about 100 chest x-rays or about 40% of the maximum permissible dose of radiation according to OSHA standards). Doses of 100-200 rems cause a person to experience nausea several hours after exposure and fatal doses occure above about 300 rem.
..."
What kind of figures do you get, John?
You are correct, I went and did some research and there is no truly dangerous level of radiation normally present . I apologize for restating something I read without verifying it.
But Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence. So far, there are fuzzy pictures, and some gas chromatigraphs from a guy whose name is linked to cold fusion (although he was on the right side of that one, I think.) If grandiose claims are made, then the natural tendency is for people to reject the claims out of hand, since they lack plausibilty. This is REASONABLE! What seems plausible to people are the sorts of things that aren't too far from their personal experience. But, if there's substance to the little inconsistencies, then they snowball, like how the 43 arc second error in Mercury's orbital precession from Newtonion physics drove the acceptance of General Relativity.
If the trail fizzles out... well, then maybe we ARE all crazy! Stranger things have happened!
Isn't it possible that shortcuts were taken in construction, or that safety criteria were ignored or falsified?
It would not be the first time that a contractor defrauded a customer.
The reason that is relevant is because its chemical footprint was found to be mixed into some samples of the steel slag at the bottom. This is apparently very difficult to square with the gov't line-- While it may be the case that substandard building materials were used, most times even Mob-controlled projects generally stop short of using high explosives as building materials! The Mob is trying to do it on the cheap, and thermate is quite costly, on a pound-for-pound basis. Plus, they're hard to work with... too damn touchy!)
The guy who ran these spectra, BTW, was very soon let go by his University... And there's another fish story about the circumstances of his dismissal. He had tenure! But in his case, it was "Publish, AND perish"!
"...
Thermate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
...
This article has been tagged since november-2006.
Thermate, or Thermate-TH3, is an incendiary compound primarily used for military applications. Because of the similarity in names, thermate is sometimes confused with one of its components, thermite.
Thermate is a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives which have been found to be superior to standard thermite for incendiary purposes. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulphur 2.0% and binder 0.3%. Addition of barium nitrate to thermite increases its thermal effect, creates flame in burning and significantly reduces the ignition temperature.
Thermate is used in incendiary hand grenades. ..."
Military uses
Thermite grenades are used as incendiary devices to quickly destroy items or equipment when there is imminent danger of them being captured by enemy forces. Because of the difficulty in igniting standard iron-thermite, plus the fact that it burns with practically no flame and has a small radius of action, standard thermite is rarely used on its own as an incendiary composition. It is more usually employed with other ingredients added to enhance its incendiary effects. Thermate-TH3 is a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives which have been found to be superior to standard thermite for incendiary purposes. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulphur 2.0% and binder 0.3%. Addition of barium nitrate to thermite increases its thermal effect, creates flame in burning and significantly reduces the ignition temperature. Although the primary purpose of Thermate-TH3 is as an incendiary, it will also weld metal surfaces together. ..."
Note that to weld steel, you have to melt it!
"I will not be some weak frigging jerk off..."
You are certainly giving maximum effort to appear to be just that.
====================================
To everyone reading this thread. The movie is demonstrably false as these two sites prove. I'll be providing more refutuation shortly.
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
The article answers completely the false claim that Flight 77 didn't actually crash into the Pentagon.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
To counter his upcoming claim that the air defense batteries protecting the Pentagon being shut down:
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_missile_batteries.html
To summarize the article for those not wanting to spend the time to read the entire thing, prior to 9-11--1 there was NOT any form of anti-aircraft system protecting the Pentagon, manned or automated, but especially NOT automated. You see, the Pentagon is immediately adjacent to the short final approach for Reagan National's Runway 19. Due to the prevailing winds, approxiamtely 90% of arriving flights at Reagan National use this runway, passing by the Pentagon between 800 and 1,000 feet, less than a quarter-mile away. (Pictures on the above link demonstrate this quite clearly.)
Other Gatheites support my claim that this article and its author are pure "bovine scatology", after revewing the movie and the other OBJECTIVE evidence;
James....? I watched the whole movie(took me 4 trys to get done) made notes...then checked out Davids posts and links and looked up quite a few of my own and guess what? David killed your conspiracy....killed it, all of it, even your precious air defense....James do you know what OCD is? you need help some help bro, you say that we Americans should be looking over our shoulders? why I'm just as white as You and im probably just as white as most of europe....the only place I would have to look over my shoulder is in an Arab country, but if I looked over my shoulder there who would be watching your french back?LOL......ohhhh....sorry I mean Canadian
Josh J. commented Oct 25, 2006
Yes, yes, yes, already! The Movie is sensationalist and "produced" and revels in controversy. Also, it contains numerous demonstrable falsehoods and distortions—perhaps even most of them. It's most decidedly one-sided. It doesn't even claim objectivity! This is the very nature of the Movies, after all!
The problem is, SO DOES THE GOVERNMENT LINE! Just as certainly!
What we have here is a highly charged, highly emotional, highly political issue. None of these properties is likely to lend much in the way of objectivity or Truth to the proceedings. I should think that everyone here would be able to see that the stakes are so high that there is little point to citing this or that source, and claiming those as somehow immune from bias! The forces at work here are just too great!
Let me suggest, David, that even were the government to be totally convinced of its squeaky clean behavior on that day, would this government willfully allow itself to be scrutinized at the level and intensity that seems to be suggested—if it was the case that even ONE of the claims made in loose change were well-founded? Maybe you think so, but I can tell you that in New York, where we have lots of anecdotal evidence floating around, the PR battle is being lost! I think the numbers are like 60/40 in favor of congressional investigations into some of the contentions of the "Loose Change" guys.
And even though I have fallen victim, myself, to this temptation, I want to recommend to you, David--and to all who care about this issue one way or another—that we stop the infinite regress of citing this or that source, back & forth! It's pointless in the extreme. There are no sources left that have not been "politicized". Everyone on the OTHER side will simply discount YOUR source, and impute nefarious purposes to said source. It cannot be otherwise, given the climate, given the political axes to grind, given the 'ecology' of this debate! No objective source can withstand the onslaught of data, inconsistencies, and misinformation that abounds here! And even if it could, no one would recognize it!
SO, how can we settle this? Probably, there is no way! You can only make up your own mind by the process of going to your favorite Arbiter of Truth, your chosen Oracle. You can't choose these for everyone else! You can't ever get to the Truth here by such methods, only to a point where you have an opinion. (Sources are like Opinions, everybody's got one! And we all know what Opinions are like!)
When I confronted these issues at first, like you, I set about trying to debunk them. I read many of the things you point to. Unlike you, I am predisposed to take a more skeptical approach to pretty much everything—both what I believe and what I doubt. Since I very quickly realized that for every "bunk" there was a de-bunk, and for every debunk there was a de-debunk, I eventually gave up on this process, at least as a measure of Truth.
However, one thing was suggested by my attempts to sort all this out. One thing I could actually test for myself! I wouldn't have to appeal to any source at all, except my own eyes and ears. (Not that I consider MY eyes and ears to be any more 'objective' than all the others… They are only good at convincing ME.)
That one thing was the Cell phone test. This test was very narrow in its scope. Certainly, I can't use it to conclude much about the broader claims that have been made all around. However, as far as I am concerned, I have pretty well convinced myself that at least ONE claim of the government line is demonstrably false. I will not give my results here. What would be the point? (Actually, I guess I gave them out a bit in an earlier post-- but I'm saying that already KNOW that my results are irrelevant to you, and everyone else! They are only mine, and I will not try to put them on you.)
What I wish is that everyone would just try this for themselves, and see what results they get, and then go from there! Is this so hard? All you need is airfare and an extra battery or two! On the extreme off chance that my experiment is repeatable, wouldn't you like to know it for yourself?
Why the HELL didn't they confiscate it? They confiscated my frigging fold-up knife/fork/spoon combo! (I wanted to use it on my camping trip!)
I can see the headlines, now... "911 CONSPIRACY THEORIST CUM TERRORIST DOWNS JUMBO-JET WITH CELLPHONE"
Would they have confiscated it, if it was a RAZR?
As for everybody else I dont get it, what do you take the time to get any information before you come to a decision. Then again you could just be completely brainwashed by our government and believe everything you are told......
Common sense tells me a building shouldnt collapse due to fire....and I dont care what plane hit it.....720 or a 757 it dosent really matter for the simple fact that, if it was to collapse it would have took more then 1o seconds...........Oh and since when can you find a passport of a hijacker but you cant find any wing sections, tail sections, or blackboxes?