posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 11:26 AM
I want to address one of the most invalid arguments concerning 9/11
I want to put it to bed once and for all and have at least one thread someone can point to as "proof" (or as close as we can get to proof
I am not an expert, far from it. I do not subscribe to the general conspiracy theory that George W Bush was behind the attacks or there were no
planes only holograms. I also have stopped reading most 9/11 threads because they turn into disrespectful bitch fests about whose theory is correct.
Not to mention the fury I experience by the blatant disrespect given to the victims and allowed by the mods.
However, over the last year or so there have been countless threads that generally start with:
"can someone please explain..."
and then they go on to ask a general question that has usually already been proven to be right or wrong and the entire process gets started all over
again. Most of the time the poster seems to be new to the subject (young and impressionable as well) and usually argues with anyone who does not
support his or her already solidified view.
As the post goes from civil to nasty, more and more "evidence" gets brought up to "prove" that it was a government cover-up. The one shining star
of "evidence" many "truthers" eventually put out there is this:
How can a passport possibly survive an explosion and 1800 degrees of fire?"
This is the supposed smoking gun.
That’s why I started this topic...I get so damn annoyed when I see this put forth as proof, I just want to shake the ignoramus who holds this as his
single proof that everything is a lie.
Again, as I said I am no expert, but I do have some common sense and some real world experience. I have participated in and watched MANY explosions in
my lifetime, in person and on TV (not Hollywood type explosions.. think "Mythbuster" type explosions)
Anyway, the point is:
Regardless of container, regardless of content, regardless of heat, speed or direction there are always pieces of container, surrounding artifacts or
other debris that seems untouched. Shockwaves PUSH objects away from explosions. There is no somewhat similar explosion on record anywhere at anytime
that completely obliterated everything in it’s wake, there is always debris. In the case of the towers, lighter fare.. paper, folders, tags,
pictures and yes.. passports could have conceivably be ejected from the building before getting burned. The building and plane were full of
If you actually think for a minute about how an explosion actually releases energy, the volume of space in a plane, the volume of space in the
building, the time it takes for an engulfing fireball, the force generated by the impact, is it really that much of a leap to believe that articles
were expelled before they had a chance to become puffs of smoke?
Note.. I say it is conceivable; I am not saying one way or another that they were planted or not planted.
I am saying that I am sick and tired of reading this argument like it was gospel and written in stone. If something is conceivable, however improbable
you believe it to be a logical person MUST conclude that this is NOT proof and never bring it up again EVER!
Once that gets out in the open, we then have the guys who say that a passport cannot survive a "fall" of 1800 feet and I won't even go into the
ignorance of that statement except to say that a passport is not a meat sack of blood, water and bones.
The point of this post is not to prove or disprove your overall theory of 9/11. I could care less at this point; I already think many of you are
seriously unbalanced. Further arguing will just cause stress all around.
The point of this post is to dispel this one shinning point of "evidence" some people are constantly putting forth.
It’s crap and it ought to be treated as such.
I make no claims on the other “evidence”