It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Future Conspiracy

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 05:35 PM
link   
We all know it's a matter of WHEN, not IF. Terrorists will smuggle in a radiological bomb or a nuke and set it off in America. A group of people will say on tape for the whole world to see and hear that they are the ones who did it. Evidence will back step confirming this. The U.S. Government will respond. During this, one or two people who desperately hate our government will happen to say some "conspiracy" PROOF that the Republican Wing or the President or CIA or FBI were the ones who secrectly did it for any reason they can think up.

This is ALL it will take. Conspiracy buffs will flood out of the woodwork and start their own blogs and cut/paste links to each other. Suddenly EVERYONE will have the same "facts" and it will appear that indeed their is a conspiracy out there. Why else would everyone be saying the same thing?

I'm really curious as to how many people who post in here, would hop onto this band wagon?




posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Does that even count as a hypothetical question?



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   
ROFLAO! Funny, a similar thought was brewing in my mind after reading the boards today (mainly the Olson garbage). I got into a discussion today with some colleagues about how, as a people, some people just a most happy in turmoil, whether it be conspiracy (of any kind), trust “issues” (both professionally & personally) and general lying (to themselves & others). More often then not, these issues are so deeply seeded in their psyche that the person is unaware of why they tend to lean that way. Why can two people witness the same thing, yet have vastly different opinions, versions or “takes”?

Before anyone takes it wrong, I am speaking of nobody on this board. I have had a few instances with colleagues & friends the past week that sparked this conversation just today.

We can chalk it up to the never ending questions of life.

Unfortunately, it will be too late to do anything about it by the time we realize it.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
First off, congrats of creating a thread that does nothing but attack conspirators rather than conspiracy theories. Very admirable to attack others in such a way, without really considering their views (which don't event exist at this point because nothing has even happened yet).


Secondly, realize that a crude nuclear detonation, which the CIA has told us is coming, and FEMA has been rehearsing a lot lately, will only cause a relatively small explosion and make those nearby sick, and possibly give them cancer later. These types of nukes don't really spawn massive nuclear winds or destroy large areas. Crude nukes are far removed from what we dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, for example.


Originally posted by Faust
I'm really curious as to how many people who post in here, would hop onto this band wagon?


I can tell you right now that, because of the nature of such an event, there would very little, if any direct evidence linking anyone to the attacks, and considering at least two faked Bin Laden tapes from recent years, you can't be too certain of those "admissions," either. Osama's probably dead anyway, if the blame is even placed on him this time. But the fact that physics points to a demolition job at WTC on 9/11, stinking of an inside job, would lead me to assume that the next major attack is just a continuation of fear-mongering. If more war is needed, such as with Iran, why wouldn't they do it if they did 9/11?



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   
bsbray wrote: "But the fact that physics points to a demolition job at WTC on 9/11, stinking of an inside job, would lead me to assume that the next major attack is just a continuation of fear-mongering. "

I dont know if I would call the assumption that conspiracy buffs will come out with a conspiracy after a dirty bomb attack in the U.S. an attack on conspirators just becuase it hasnt happened yet. I would say its more of a fair assumption, much like what you say in the quote above. In your quote above, you make the fair assumption that the dirty bomb would be an inside job becuase 9/11 supposedly was. Likewise with conspiracy theories; after just about every majore tragic event in U.S. history it seems, a conspiracy theory always seems to appear. JFK assasination, MLK assasination, OKC bombing, Pearl Harbor, 911 etc. the list goes on. So, then its just a fair continuation that a conspiracy theory will follow the possible tragic event of a dirty bomb. This is not an attack, just a fair assumption based on the pattern conspiracy buffs display, just like what you say in your quote



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 02:17 AM
link   
I believe Bob feels the same way i do. No matter what future disaster, catastrophe or event happens, it WILL be converted into some "conspiracy". The U.S. Government and the U.S. Government alone is solely responsible for every evil thing that happens on the planet in some form or another.

This is precisely why the U.S. Government ignores or avoids statements/questions involving ridiculous accusations. They can't win. Even if they provide evidence proving it, the conspiracy buffs won't buy it. So, the Government avoids them just "proving" that they have something to hide. The conspiracy buffs see this as evidence to their theories.

One track mind.



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   
Faust,

What makes you think most conspiracy researchers blame the US government for anything at all? What about the legitimate mafia or cabal (should they exist)? Would you consider them to be US government?

I thought most conspiracy theorist's love defending America's founded Constitution against terrorists who would try and strip it away; whether threatened from a foreign or domestic enemy.

You should thank people like Edward Griffin or the Alex Jones type - believe it.



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Bob,

Then perhaps it is a fair assumption that there were more to all of those events than we are commonly told. You make no mention of the events that are exposed, more or less, in full, such as Iran Contra, Waco, the Reichstag Fire, Watergate, Teapot Dome, etc. I guess those events would've been on your list, too, though, if it they weren't so obvious.

Faust,

I can hardly wait for the day the government tells us that diving head-first off of tall buildings promotes immortality and shows us evidence in support of this claim. What a wonderful world that would create!



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

I can hardly wait for the day the government tells us that diving head-first off of tall buildings promotes immortality and shows us evidence in support of this claim. What a wonderful world that would create!


With the routine misquotes, outlandish claims & common flawed physics on this board, you can bet these boards would be awful quiet! I’ll wait for that day too… I will miss you.

RR- I’m certain all conspiracies do not involve the government, but I would be hard pressed to think of many who have gained much notoriety with out that aspect. I think it is because the government is all encompassing, all knowing, etc. It is also someone who you can hurl accusations & rumors towards that normally won’t refute or sue for liable! LOL! Seriously though, people have distrusted governments (ours, others & all) for ions. I guess human nature wants to divide the population by have/have not, them/us, black/white to be able to deal with certain issues in their own minds. A sort of picking teams…



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Please point out any faulty cites of physics I have used and explain my faults to me.

It's one thing to claim I am wrong simply because you do not like to face the facts I have presented. It's quite another for me to actually be wrong.



Originally posted by Jake the Dog Man

Originally posted by bsbray11

I can hardly wait for the day the government tells us that diving head-first off of tall buildings promotes immortality and shows us evidence in support of this claim. What a wonderful world that would create!


With the routine misquotes, outlandish claims & common flawed physics on this board, you can bet these boards would be awful quiet! I’ll wait for that day too… I will miss you.


I'm not just trying to be a butthead, but the extreme use of faulty logic here honestly has me wondering as to how thoroughly you think about what people are saying before you respond to them. I was suggesting you will blindly follow whatever the government says, and you somehow come up with a comment suggesting I blindly follow whatever the government says, even as I argue that our government lies and cannot be trusted.



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   
…again, you missed my point. I don’t follow what the government says. I just don’t find a Nazi behind every sofa & a conspiracy behind every story. I follow what science, logic, common sense * proof (there is that word you still won’t define…) shows me. You appear to be the gullible one, therefore you would be the one making that jump. You again seem to be taking a thread off course.

If I didn’t believe in some of these conspiracies, I wouldn’t be here… now would I? The popular theories you waste your time on only over shadow the real ones. As I have said before, I just require more then a whim to send me off down the conspiracy highway. You repeatedly disregard 10 facts to state your claims as a fact. Please, just stop responding, you have proven you just don’t require the same evidence (look it up) that I do. Your type was the catalyst (look that word up too while you are at the other two) for this thread. Why must your views always be the focus on any thread? Please, get over yourself.



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   

RR- I’m certain all conspiracies do not involve the government, but I would be hard pressed to think of many who have gained much notoriety with out that aspect. I think it is because the government is all encompassing, all knowing, etc. It is also someone who you can hurl accusations & rumors towards that normally won’t refute or sue for liable! LOL! Seriously though, people have distrusted governments (ours, others & all) for ions. I guess human nature wants to divide the population by have/have not, them/us, black/white to be able to deal with certain issues in their own minds. A sort of picking teams…


A cartel type government would be more like it, and we are no where near being a true Republic! Who prints the Federal Reserve notes? The hand (international bankers) that gives money is higher than the hand that takes it (government). I agree with you that too many conspiracy theories and too much paranoia can hinder overall progress. It may even play into very the hands of those same individuals who could or may wish to conspire by focussing on the wrong issues etc.

But the topic as stated did not mention clearly this objective. Moreover, the day there is not a peep from those conspiracy theorists is the day that we are either truly free, or in a full dictatorship. Just think about it - would you be worried if there was nothing being said other than what’s shown on Fox news or CNN, or the local rag etc


[edit on 24-9-2005 by realrepublican]



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   
I will accept "proof" as scientific fact, or some conclusion reached soundly via scientific fact. By scientific fact, I mean something that has been widely tested and repeated by multiple people and has been found to be scientifically accuarate. For example, the law of conservation of angular momentum is accurate. It has been tested, and these tests can be repeated, and it will turn out the same every time because it's accurate. This is the sort of proof that scientists acknowledge.

You do a lot of talking about 'evidence' and 'proof', but what real evidence or proof are you posting? Seriously, dude. What facts are you presenting here? Or anywhere?

I asked you quite simply to point out any physics that I am misusing and explain to me how I have errored. You apparently can't do that. So... I would shut up with the "you have to be wrong but I can't tell you how" stuff.


Why must your views always be the focus on any thread? Please, get over yourself.


Wtf? Am I supposed to post other people's views or something?



Let me outline some of my evidence (as taken, almost verbatim, for you, from page 1 of the convoluted thread, and excluding the squibs):

The Fires

· The fires, even combined with the structural damage received from aircraft impacts (only a minority of support columns on these floors were compromised, ie less than 15% of the perimeter columns of either building as even FEMA will tell you in their report) were neither hot enough nor widespread enough to cause global collapse in either WTC1, 2, or especially 7. Hydrocarbon fires of this type usually hover around 600 degrees Celsius. There is no evidence of the fires in WTC 1, 2, or 7 sustaining any more than 600 degree fires.



Here you see a chart of what colors steel/iron will glow when heated to certain temperatures. Proponents of the official story claim that the steel was heated to at least 800 degrees Celsius. Do you see what color steel would glow at that temperature? Yet no steel was ever recorded on 9/11 as being any color than a cool, dark color indicative of no major heating.

Similarly, the fires in the WTC buildings did not spread to floors that were unaffected by the initial impacts and fireballs. The fires stayed on the floors they started on, which indicates no raging office fires. Major office fires in steel skyscrapers have been recorded plenty of times, and they will spread to other floors, feeding off of hydrocarbon materials that will burn at higher temperatures (that apparently were never reached in the WTC fires).

Disappearance of Angular Momentum

· Upon the initiation of collapse in either building, the tops of the buildings began tilting as if they were going to fall off sideways (as one would expect), but then, for no apparent reason, the angular momentum of the top floors of both buildings vanished. Angular momentum does not vanish unless the object that is falling is no longer acting as a single solid object. That is to say, the top floors of those buildings (still connected) should have continued to fall at an angle off the sides of the buildings, but stopped suddenly because their frames had been shattered.

Here you can see the tilt in the South Tower as it began to collapse:

911research.wtc7.net...

Continuing in that direction, it would have fallen like falling timber (fact), as per the law of conservation of angular momentum. Objects falling like this keep going; they don't just stop for no reason!

I'm sure you've heard 'an object in motion stays in motion until acted upon by an equal and opposite force.' Well, this is sort of the case here. The top floors should have continued falling in those same directions. Why did they stop falling in those directions? Well, there was nothing pushing back to compromise the angular momentum, obviously. There was no giant troll standing in the middle of NYC pushing the building back up straight. So the only conclusion we can come to is that the frames of the tops of the buildings were shattered. They were no longer acting as single objects, connected to each other and acting in relation to each other.

Also notice that this shattering of the upper floors happens before anything comes in contact with the tilting floors to destroy them. Something independent, located within those top floors, destroyed the frames of the top sections.

Click here to watch a video of the angular momentum of the South Tower's top disappear, while the same section continues to fall straight downwards towards it footprint.

The disappearance of the angular momentum, like the squibs and lack of evidence for strong fires, flies right up in the face of the official story.

Concrete Dust

· Even early on in either building's collapse, a fine powder of concrete dust was being spewed from the collapsing building. The squibs even show debris of the consistency of the concrete powder being ejected from the buildings. After the buildings had totally collapsed, the amount of concrete dust raining down on NYC was enough to coat the area in enough powder to make it look as though a dirty December snow had struck New York.







As a researcher going by the name 'plaguepuppy' details (emphasis added):


In trying to come to terms with what actually happened during the collapse of the World Trade Towers, the biggest and most obvious problem that I see is the source of the enormous amount of very fine dust that was generated during the collapses. Even early on, when the tops of the buildings have barely started to move, we see this characteristic fine dust (mixed with larger chunks of debris) being shot out very energetically from the building. During the first few seconds of a gravitational fall nothing is moving very fast, and yet from the outset what appears to be powdered concrete can be seem blowing out to the sides, growing to an immense dust cloud as the collapse progresses.

The floors themselves are quite robust. Each one is 39" thick; the top 4" is a poured concrete slab, with interlocking vertical steel trusses (or spandrel members) underneath. This steel would absorb a lot of kinetic energy by crumpling as one floor fell onto another, at most pulverizing a small amount of concrete where the narrow edges of the trusses strike the floor below. And yet we see a very fine dust being blown very energetically out to the sides as if the entire mass of concrete (about 400,000 cubic yards for the whole building) were being converted to dust. Remember too that the tower fell at almost the speed of a gravitational free-fall, meaning that little energy was expended doing anything other than accelerating the floor slabs.

Considering the amount of concrete in a single floor (~1 acre x 4") and the chemical bond energy to be overcome in order to reduce it to a fine powder, it appears that a very large energy input would be needed. The only source for this, excluding for now external inputs or explosives, is the gravitational potential energy of the building. Any extraction of this energy for the disaggregation of the concrete would decrease the amount available for conversion to kinetic energy, slowing the speed of the falls. Yet we know that the buildings actually fell in about 9 seconds, only slightly less than an unimpeded free-fall from the same height. This means that very little of the gravitational energy can have gone toward pulverizing the concrete.

Even beyond the question of the energy needed, what possible mechanism exists for pulverizing these vast sheets of concrete? Remember that dust begins to appear in quantity in the very earliest stages of the collapses, when nothing is moving fast relative to anything else in the structure. How then is reinforced concrete turned into dust and ejected laterally from the building at high speed?


...which brings us to the next point:

Collapse Speed, Lack of Retardation, and Symmetry

· Pretty much, these buildings, which were made of steel and concrete, and were, as all skysrcapers, over-engineered and designed to redistribute weight loads in the event of structural damage, fell at rates comparable to free-fall and without either retardation or lopsiding. They fell perfectly vertically and symmetrically in a manner that would require blowing out all the columns of each 12-foot-high floor within simultaneously and within a 0.16-second (see below) time frame. This also means that the speed of collapse was consistent across each floor even at such small time intervals, as any resistance here or there on any of the floors as a building fell would cause the building to tilt and lopside, just as they began to do at the starts of their collapses but soon (and mysteriously) ceased. But there was no lopsiding after the collapses were underway. They both fell exactly as a controlled demolition would: straight down onto their footprints, perfectly vertically, symmetrically, and at ridiculous speed. At to that the mysterious squibs that were coming out of the buildings as they collapsed and this point alone would paint you a very vivid picture of what actually happened to those buildings.

The 0.16-second-per-floor figure is derived from this NBC footage of the South Tower collapse, as detailed here by the 9/11 Research Site.


As you can see on the video, after a period of about 2.5 seconds in which the building begins to fall, the collapse covers 32 stories (384 feet) in about 5 seconds. This is determined by the time it takes for the roof of the falling building to reach where the 78th floor previously was.

32 stories (384 ft.) in 5 seconds is 6.4 floors (78.6 ft.) a second. 6.4 floors a second is 1 floor every 0.15625 seconds. And again, all perfectly symmetrical, meaning all columns on each floors being blown out simultaneously within that 0.16-second time frame. No lopsiding. All symmetrical.

Further, the collapses defied physics yet again when they failed to slow their rapid speeds as the mass allegedly driving the collapses disintegrated, even as the collapse began reaching thicker and thicker core columns as it neared the bases of the towers.

Those are some of the more objective points, but not nearly exhaustive. You have things like Larry Silverstein saying on a documentary that he decided to give the order to "pull it" on Building 7 in order to save lives, for example. That raises the question of when the explosives would've been planted, as it would've obviously been beforehand. And this leads to the witness testimony of sections of the WTC buildings being sectioned off and closed to the public for days at a time, security cameras also shut off to the areas, while "cable upgrades" were made in the buildings and so-called engineers came and went constantly. This further leads you to the information that all bomb-sniffing dogs were pulled from the complex the Thursday before the attacks by WTC security (GW Bush's brother, Marvin Bush's security company, no less), and were apparently back in the building by the day of the attacks. And then the embarrassing response from NORAD, as well as the scheduling of potentially confusing wargames on the very morning of 9/11, as well as an NRO excercise scenario of a plane being flown into their HQ.

There's a wealth of information, and if we don't have "proof," then certainly neither does the official story, because our story makes a hell of a lot more sense than theirs. They don't account for the squibs; they don't account for the ridiculous rates of fall or perfect symmetry, etc.; they don't account for the weak fires that should never have resulted in global collapse and were in fact dying by the time of collapse; and they utterly fail to compromise the multitudes of contradictory witness testimonies. The demo theory not only explains those problems, but makes perfect, unifying sense of them as squibs are common in demolitions, the speed and symmetry of the collapses are certainly demo-like in their neatness and uniformity, and the fires, in light of our proposal, are simply irrelevant. It wouldn't make a rat's ass of difference how hot they were, because they buildings would come down from the explosive charges regardless.

If you have so much proof of your side that you can so easily debunk these points, then put the matters to rest now and do so now.

Edit: Incorrectly identified this thread as the 'Convoluted' thread.

[edit on 24-9-2005 by bsbray11]



posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by realrepublican

Moreover, the day there is not a peep from those conspiracy theorists is the day that we are either truly free, or in a full dictatorship.
[edit on 24-9-2005 by realrepublican]


Very true, but I believe there is also a 3rd possibility. That would be the day that so many people believe so many different conspiracy theories that nothing gets accomplished and the American people would be ripe for the picking. We continue to get riper every day.

Even today, there are so many theories about how & why something happens that it often over shadows some real facts that could lead to the truth. Don’t get me wrong, this certainly isn’t a recent effect, because I feel a deep seeded anti government mind set has been permeating the country for 60/80 years. I feel with the prevalence of the information age comes critical thinking, but only if education accompanies it. For example, why must there be a significance to the date 9-11-01? Why must people always read something in to such things? No claim, no circumstantial evidence, no proof, nothing. Yet claims abound by people with dozens of different “theories”. In fact, more proof shows that it had been being planned for years, it was not even the 1st or second choice for dates or that such obscure claims can be made about almost any day of our calendar. As time goes on, almost anything can happen in a 365 day year, it just doesn’t “mean” anything.

Sometimes a date is just a date… a plane is a plane… an attack is just an attack… a collapse is a collapse… yet, a plane “accident” gets over looked by many citizens as just an accident instead of an “official” denial of increased terrorist activity…

You see why some critical thinking should be applied & expected of each claim, no matter how much anyone “feels” it to be so?



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 06:07 AM
link   
How many more circle-jerk threads like this one do we have to endure from the Three Trollketeers? All you guys ever do is attack everybody else and state over and over how we're all just stupid conspiracy wackos, that we haven't the capability for critical thinking, and that we just don't know what we're talking about. It's getting pretty damn repetitive. Seriously, how many more threads can you create based on the same old personal attacks without actually addressing the issue or providing any evidence to back up your claims? If you're so damn sure in your accusations that we're all looneys and off our rockers and believe every little conspiracy theory that rears its head, then why the frik are you still here? Don't you have anything better to do with your time than to hang out in this little corner of the web and expend all your energy trying to browbeat those who you think are in la-la land and whom you consider to be your lessers? There's plenty of "psychic vampires abducted my cat" threads around that I'm sure you lot will enjoy pooping all over too. Spread yourselves around a bit guys, there are lots of wackos who haven't yet tasted your love and affection.

But if we wanted to, we could also create a hundred threads attacking you, and using the same amateur psychology that you try to apply to us to explain why you have completely swallowed the official story. But we don't. You know why? Because it's immature and completely irrelevant to the facts of the issue. If you want to debate the facts, then for Pete's sake do so. Tell us why we're wrong. Explain why our physics is flawed. Show us your proof. But if you just want to keep making ad hominem attacks and insulting us at every chance you get, then just get it out of your systems and then piss off.

[edit on 2005-9-25 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 07:06 PM
link   
This thread has been taken off topic & taken over by BSBray... yet again. She posts the same links & graphics, yet this thread was a broader topic. Can you people not understand that you can not steamroll through any thread topic that you choose?



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Jake,

Still waiting for you to address the posted evidence (post no. 1707445, four posts above this one), and explain to me any faulty references to physics, etc that I use. I suppose it's a real shame that we're not still on the topic, which was only an ad hominem attack on 9/11 conpsiracy "theorists" in the first place.

PS - I'm a guy.



posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I feel I should apologize for the tone of my last post. I realize these debates can be frustrating for all, regardless of your take on the issue. Put it down to a bad day and an argument with my GF (and no, the argument wasn't about the WTC towers
).

Sorry folks.



posted on Sep, 27 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by wecomeinpeace
I feel I should apologize for the tone of my last post. I realize these debates can be frustrating for all, regardless of your take on the issue. Put it down to a bad day and an argument with my GF (and no, the argument wasn't about the WTC towers
).

Sorry folks.



Hey without some sparks now and again ats would be a boring hangout


The three trollketeers



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join