9/11 Truth Movement Gaining Scientific Credibility

reply to post by dereks


Who claims that?!?!

Why dozens of ATS members in almost every 9/11 thread.

Hey guys will someone dickishly tell him about the free fall mess the same way you do any OSers when they ask?

Originally posted by ipsedixit
There is a video clip of people in the street being interviewed on 9/11/01 in which an old granny says words to the effect of "anyone who doesn't think our government was involved in this is an idiot."

Right here:


How can anyone watch a video like this -- which is nothing but 10 minutes of TV news clips from 9/11 -- and STILL believe the official story?

It's mind-blowing that people can spend hours and hours defending the indefensible.

To the poster who said, "all I need is my own eyes and ears to know that the Official Fairy Tale is a crock", I say right on. It's amazing how many people have lost the ability to think for themselves.

Here is another point I've not heard made -- and it was so obvious to me, I just ASSUME people with a sense of physics would know it;

When a building is collapsing -- the supports below it USED TO hold up the building. When I talked about Pancake collapses that allow a suspension frame to get overwhelmed --- it doesn't mean the MAIN SUPPORTS can be overwhelmed that way. The POINT about the TIME it takes to pancake collapse has a lot to do with the very basic fact that the falling debris is NOT the entire weight or force of the building IMMEDIATELY.

The floors were so much falling dust when they first strike the floors below. No kerosene fire had weakened this steel. Sure, something falling has more force than something at rest -- but the entire mass has NOT YET struck any floors below. The WTC that I saw collapse, had about 40 stories of debris still falling, while the floors below simply folded inward and crumbled. You SHOULD have seen a momentary stall -- a JOLT, as a few stories would need to pile up and overwhelm the lower structure -- and this would have show up as "waves" of dust, that billowed out, and then a "whomp" and another floor gone.

EDIT TO ADD THIS POINT: Look at any buildings with ACTUAL pancake collapses, and you see whole floors, laid out, flat on top of each other. They don't turn to dust, and you see LAYERS -- LIKE A STAKE OF PANCAKES. Though I don't know of any outside of some earthquakes affecting concrete buildings. Maybe some of the Believers, can point to a whole bunch of pancake collapses that show a pile of dust and snapped steel beams -- but I've missed these PROOFS for 8 years somehow.

What we SAW on video, was a continuous flow that was even -- it looked like a sandcastle being blow over by an approaching wave -- straight down into it's core.

And of course, with a pancake collapse -- the CORE should be still standing, because it has to rip free of the Pinions to collapse in the first place.

>> The hardest part of debating this with people, is my mind only works by modeling REAL forces -- you know, like a monkey judges a tree branch will hold them. I can't understand these lateral forces pulling a building straight down symmetrically, while it's STRONGER vertical supports are failing. It's like a cartoon character running off a cliff and staying in midair until they notice there isn't ground under them -- I just don't know how to debate someone who sees the world by making things fit their Beliefs, rather than having beliefs that fit what they see in the world.

I can't argue with someone who believes in Bugs Bunny, Magic Bullets, or throws in Big Foot into the argument, and so since they've found some nonsense in theories that go against the Flat Earth model they cherish -- they don't need to PROVE that the earth is Flat in order to demand everyone accept it.

[edit on 28-2-2010 by VitriolAndAngst]

Maybe "seethelight" can explain what caused 1500 degree fires to burn for months under the World Trade Center rubble (the WTC sub-levels.) Remember, the black smoke, oxygen-starved fires 80 floors higher had almost burned themselves out when the towers collapsed.

One FDNY firefighter is quoted as saying, "it took a lake's worth of water to extinguish these fires."

All I have to say is that this whole thread is ridiculous. I will tell you why I normally avoid this topic all together is people just cannot discuss this like rational adults. It always comes down to insults and all manners being disregarded. This couldn't even make it a page before people are being called stupid and liars. Call me naive but I like to think it is possible to be polite even on the internet where you don't have to be. You all might as well be yhelling at each other about how you hate/love christians/Jews/Muslims. I think a majority of you need to take a step back and re-evaulate yourselves.

reply to post by _BoneZ_

Thanks for the thread, it got me off the bench and in the game.

I know I'm on a conspiracy site, so I'll admit it, I'm paranoid. I can't shake the feeling some of these people that champion the os work for the government.

Do you think there are funds available in the Pentagon budget for such endeavours? They have a workman like ethic to their misinforming. I bet there's a thread on it.

I would like to share a video that may enlighten those unemployed hardcore believers in the os. I can see this video being shown to the jury, a Professor in Physics explaining how a 4-ton girder cannot be ejected 2 football fields away using the os narrative.


www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by CRASHPROJECT
Do you think there are funds available in the Pentagon budget for such endeavours? They have a workman like ethic to their misinforming. I bet there's a thread on it.

There is, because I wrote it! www.abovetopsecret.com...

118 flags and 740 replies before being shut down for no good reason by an ATS mod.



[edit on 2/28/2010 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
My source is all available images of the Pentagon and the witnesses that were there.

So you have no source for your claim, you ignore the physical evidence like other "truthers".

This is why the "truth" movement will not get anywhere, the "truthers" have no actual physical evidence of any sort of explosive or thermite being used at the WTC, and totally ignore the physical evidence of the 757 that hit the Pentagon.

The one attempt to prove thermite was used at the WTC turned up paint, and they had to resort to a vanity press without peer review to get that published, a vanity press that has been shown would publish anything if you paid them $800!

Really, this whole point of "evidence" is backward. The GOVERNMENT, that had the war criminals Bush and Cheney who invaded two of the wrong countries and approved torture, and put a UNOCAL executive in charge in Afghanistan, and private mercenary forces with a track record of fraud in charge of Afghanistan CLAIM that a two jets were sufficient to pull down three steel buildings.

The problem is, they sold off all the "EVIDENCE" -- i.e., the STEEL to China for less than a New Jersey scrap yard was offering. They did some tests themselves -- but since they are the major suspects in the crime -- it's kind of a "he said -- she said" argument.

So you want to go with the word of a couple dozen war criminals and the NIST which at first DENIED that WTC 7 collapsed at near free-fall speeds, and then admitted that they were lying, when a video came out and nobody in the press noticed that we had a NEW theory.

WE are told that Al Qaeda flew the planes -- but none of the suspects were on a PROVEN flight manifest. There was a FAX sent in of a flight manifest to one of the terror suspects on trial -- but it was not accepted by the courts as an official document.

>> Seems might suspicious to me.

Here's what would happen, in a clear-cut case of the WTC falling from a plane striking it -- first, God would have to help, because it was designed for a strike from three large planes. But it one section of it might collapse, and the curtain wall would peel away, breaking their vertical support, and they main floors MIGHT collapse down, but it would look more like an umbrella flattening against it's metal pole. Eventually, the core MIGHT break at some point when there is enough collapsed flooring pulling it off-center -- but it would bend, and then about 20 or 40 floors would lean the building over, and it would lean on and crush at least a building or two. It would take over 60 seconds if not a few minutes to collapse this way.

There would be massive amounts of steel available for anyone to test. LOOK -- no aluminum and iron amalgams -- no molten steel anywhere.

There would not have been steel beams flying 600 feet. There would not be a huge plume above the building, but there would be a lot of dust -- just not PYROCLASTIC dust -- the kind that's almost as fine as smoke from EXPLOSIONS.

The aluminum aircraft could NOT POSSIBLY cut the core of the building -- it would shred on impact with a steel support and MAYBE knock out an I-beam or two.

There wouldn't be firemen reporting explosions in the basement, or security cameras that failed ON JUST ONE DAY -- EVERYWHERE. You know, like all the cameras that got tape confiscated at the Pentagon -- where are those tapes, by the way?

>> We would not have had the head of the FAA destroy the radar records.

We would not have had someone talk about "pulling the building" -- unless you've set charges -- nobody can pull down a building that is on fire, and nobody ever has, so you are trying to explain a term that means "demolish" with a term that Nobody in their right mind would do nor think of doing in that situation.

You wouldn't have the engine of a plane miles away, if it slapped into the ground.

The transponders, which have a homing signal, would have been found quickly -- while the passports would not be found. But you would have a flight manifest for EACH PLANE, that had SOMEONE on it that COULD have been the suspects -- where are those, I wonder?

The FBI would have followed the credit cards of the ALLEGED hijackers -- but they were not allowed to.

The Flight Recorders WOULD EITHER BE DESTROYED, or have the last few minutes. They ar NOT designed to lose the last two minutes -- the FIRST two minutes MIGHT get ruined -- but not the last because that is how they are designed.

The 911 commission, would have started less than a month after the incident and it would not have said; "This was a whitewash from beginning to end and we were misled."

>> I mean, if we create a MODEL of what SHOULD have happened on 911 and what EVIDENCE would look like -- I can't really think of very many things that would resemble the MESS and the confusion, or WHY the Bush Government stalled at every turn.

The problem with NOT having a conspiracy for 9/11, is that there isn't much about it tha makes sense in the REAL WORLD. No building fell like any building EVER has that did NOT have explosive charges in it. Nobody in the administration acted like they weren't involved in a cover up. I could go on and on with all the things that SHOULD have happened if it were an attack, but this is getting old.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by CRASHPROJECT
Do you think there are funds available in the Pentagon budget for such endeavours? They have a workman like ethic to their misinforming. I bet there's a thread on it.

There is, because I wrote it! www.abovetopsecret.com...

118 flags and 740 replies before being shut down for no good reason by an ATS mod.



[edit on 2/28/2010 by GoldenFleece]

On 9/10, Rumsfeld said "the Pentagon cannot account for $2 Trillion." The next day the towers fell. Abramoff also seemed to have raised a lot of funds through some cruise line gambling operations operating off the coast of Florida. There seem to be all SORTS of funds available -- just like the $11 Billion that went missing in Iraq without ONE receipt.

Everybody keeps talking about this as if the Military thugs and the Bush administration would be trying to convict themselves by GIVING us the evidence. That's a weirder concept than their 911 theories.

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
On 9/10, Rumsfeld said "the Pentagon cannot account for $2 Trillion." The next day the towers fell.

Yep, $2.3 TRILLION!

And you'll never guess where the "missile" (to quote Rumsfeld) impacted the Pentagon.

The same Army accounting office that compiled those figures.

Damn, those Arab "hijackers" who couldn't fly a Cessna...

[Flight Academy] Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "He could not fly at all." [New York Times]

...but who managed to pilot a 757 three feet off the ground into a second story Pentagon window (and survive!) were good!


[edit on 2/28/2010 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by sputniksteve
All I have to say is that this whole thread is ridiculous. I will tell you why I normally avoid this topic all together is people just cannot discuss this like rational adults. It always comes down to insults and all manners being disregarded. This couldn't even make it a page before people are being called stupid and liars. Call me naive but I like to think it is possible to be polite even on the internet where you don't have to be. You all might as well be yhelling at each other about how you hate/love christians/Jews/Muslims. I think a majority of you need to take a step back and re-evaulate yourselves.

I'm not calling names. HOWEVER -- if there is a government conspiracy, and we KNOW that EXXON has spent over a billion people to lie about Global Warming -- is it TOO farfetched to think that some here are trying to DERAIL the discussion -- and if they can't make a solid point, they'll do whatever they can to find SOMEONE they can make angry?

The gov is infiltrating peace activists groups. This is on the FBI record.

The ONLY time you can have a civil debate, is if there is some MEANS of coming to a solution and agreed upon terms. You cannot DEBATE something like Intelligent Design, because it cannot be proven or disproven. You CAN debate TYPES of Evolution -- they can all be proven and disproven. There are so many examples and you cannot be a biologist or a doctor without depending on evolution of organisms.

We have to debate a theory WITHOUT EVIDENCE, that three planes were hijacked, were not intercepted, and crashed into the Pentagon and 2 WTC buildings. Without any proof, we are told it was Al Qaeda. Without any proof we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

To rebut all these things, we have to come up with a PERFECT THEORY, but we don't have any evidence to base it on, other than the inconsistencies in WHAT WE WERE TOLD. And What we were told has changed many times. Dick Cheney and the gov liied about the anti-terror operations they were engaged in, until evidence forced them to admit that NORAD was actually occupied.

The Story from the Government has not even been consistent.

Then --- we are supposed to have a CIVIL debate, when there is no grounds to PROVE ANYTHING, and the importance of the discussion is; "Were we betrayed to get us into two wars, destroy the Constitution with the Patriot Act, and to collapse the economy with the Wall Street bail-out."

You see, the Bush administration has killed a lot of innocent people. They've got a lot of money that went missing. THOSE are the people who gave us the facts that we are "arguing about," along with the NIST -- which really, all we got was what a few people RUNNING it wanted to tell us -- the fine engineers there, only were tasked with compartmentalized details like proving that rocks fall down.

I think, that if we ever did make headway, leading websites would be bribed or shut down. People would disappear, and the judge trying the case would be found to have kitty porn on his computer. If that didn't work, another incident would come up and we'd have a news blackout. If that didn't work, we'd have Martial Law.

I don't think the CULPRITS in this little discussion we are having, are going to win by fighting fair -- they don't have a history of fighting fair. Everything BushCo did, since the stole the election in 2000, has been pretty suspicious, and I'm not aware of them ever telling the truth unless there were too many witnesses.

reply to post by seethelight
I originally believed the official story, but after I witnessed the squibs, and learned of the official standdown of defense, I changed my view. I contest your claim that all the unknown engineers etc. believe the official story. In fact, I would maintain that they all do NOT believe the story, unless you have proof that they do, and have reasonable proof. In fact, the criminal organization known as the US Government, has historically done these crimes, and that is their MO. Overall, they are simply incompetent. Some of them are actually good people, not aware of the criminality. However, as the most powerful and richest govt in the world, they have 'strains' of people that are incredibly good at being bad. They are attracted to this power. This 'operation' has all the trademarks of their previous MO.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

Agreed.

9/11 was a black op.

It's the long-term memory loss that shocks and awes me. The October Surprise and George H. W. Bush. And, his Iran Contra Affair. If everything was on the up-and-up, those two crimes should have been the end of Bush, senior and, by association, Junior.

But no. We get a revised history that credits Papa Bush w/ helping restore the CIA's morale after it had been rocked by a series of revelations, including those based on investigations by the Church Committee regarding illegal and unauthorized activities. - U-S-History.com. www.u-s-history.com...

Imagine that, the CIA involved in unauthorized and illegal activities.
Who founded the CIA? Oh, yeah. Bankers. The good guys. Trustworthy. Pillars of society. Everyday people.

Isn't it a foregone conclusion that they killed JFK? There was a Commission on that too.

If you look at the CIA's track record, you will likely not find good and honourable deeds.

More like unauthorized and illegal activities, that have absolutely zero to do w/the US Constitution or the Rights of the People...

When did some man in a cave on the other side of the world get the power to stand down NORAD.......


end of conversation.

Originally posted by seethelight
Russia Today is NOT a credible source.

So 1/10th of 1% of the worlds engineers think 9/11 was a demo, that isn't actually very impressive.

Statistically, that means NO engineers do, because most surveys/studies have a margin of error of AT LEAST 1%.

So less than a 10th of that is meaningless.

Russia Today = Fail
Statistically insignificant number of engineers = fail

And on and on...

Attacking the messenger is so cliche..

RT isn't the "source", RT is simply the vehicle allowing Jesse Richard to offer his opinion... and as I recall, a statistically insignificant number of greeks used to argue the govt was wrong, thunder was not caused by angry gods..

A pyroclastic flow only occurs as a result of "explosive energy", there were 3 on 9/11 that lacked explosives. 9/11 is also a murder case, with no statute of limitations on murder all new evidence is recorded and sometimes investigated... this is why people convicted of murder get released, and murderers are arrested 10, 20, 30 years after the crime... as a rule law enforcement never stop looking for murderers..well, except...

9/11 and JFK are two US murder cases that defy normal every-day "blind justice" good ole american police investigative procedure.. all because known liar politicians had meetings, then after solving their 1st ever murder cases, announced "cased closed" on television..

This happens by design, new evidence gets ignored by professional un-biased law enforcement and cast into "conspiracy land".. it's much easier to turn the propaganda machines on non law enforcement investigators and regular non elite people as biased loon amateurs, crazies who get lumped into a group.. divided.

If that was any other murder case, the Famous But Incompetent (FBI) et al would be still be involved in a savage man hunt aggressively seeking the most infamous mass murderers in US history while painstakingly investigating all new evidence.

People who believe the US, or any govt, tells the truth are gullible and need to read up on history... I dont know what exactly happened, but one witness I heard from, uncle sam, lacks credibility for epic historical lies.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


This is the way I see the truth movement. The truth movement has to get beyond trying to prove to some skeptics why the OS is a lie. Instead, and I think EarthCitizen is right here, we need to figure out how things went down applying scientific method, history, and other provable methods to see the truth.

I apologize to the OP, but you can show 500 vids of the buildings collapsing and explain the reasoning behind it; but some believers will never buy it. For them, they need Cheney coming on an ABC news conference admitting the deed before they believe anything. Until then they will twist your words, lead you off on different tangents, and just in general attempt to obfuscate what you're trying to say.

In other words,instead of trying to get the blind to see, we need to figure out EXACTLY how it happened.

the government in charge at 911 was a group of neocons who wrote in 2000 that the changes they wanted for country would require a new Pearl Harbor.
www.newamericancentury.org...

when 911 happened the millions of defences that had to fail is mindboggling, but nobody was fired after 911
Whistle Blower Anthony Shaffer said the intelligence group tracking Al Quada inside America was closed down
en.wikipedia.org...

before, after, and during 911 Bush and Cheney acted very suspicious, they did not want to investigate
edition.cnn.com...
and they did not want to go under oath, and Bush stayed at the school like he knew nothing was going on....

When Bush finally relented amid pressure from 9/11 widows, he appointed Phillip Zelikow, who served on the National Security Council under Bush 41, co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice, and served on the Bush 43 2000-2001 transition team
www.nytimes.com...

at least six of the 9/11 commissioners think their own report is flawed, or worse.

al-Qaeda originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies?

and THEN the demolitions on top of the cake......

Enough to build a case yet?


NSA admitted in 2005 that Gulf of Tonkin never happened
news.bbc.co.uk...

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false-flag plan that originated within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other operatives to commit genuine acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba
en.wikipedia.org...

Bush and Cheney refused to testify under oath and nothing allowed to made public about their testimony


Bush doing his sceduled TV speech at the elementary school at 9.29, a half hour before the towers fell, why did he stay there after the 2 attacks had happened?


and then the demolitions on top of it all!!!




"debunkers" will take one of these things out of context and copy/paste something from 911myths, but you really have to look at the big picture here.

What do you see?

[edit on 28-2-2010 by conar]

reply to post by seethelight


The very definition of circular logic..however what you failed to mention is that if Ron Paul (in your hypothetical election) got 30,000 votes AND ONLY 31,000 PEOPLE VOTED...he would win the election. DUH!

Originally posted by Gregarious
reply to post by seethelight

 

I originally believed the official story, but after I witnessed the squibs, and learned of the official standdown of defense, I changed my view. I contest your claim that all the unknown engineers etc. believe the official story. In fact, I would maintain that they all do NOT believe the story, unless you have proof that they do, and have reasonable proof. In fact, the criminal organization known as the US Government, has historically done these crimes, and that is their MO. Overall, they are simply incompetent. Some of them are actually good people, not aware of the criminality. However, as the most powerful and richest govt in the world, they have 'strains' of people that are incredibly good at being bad. They are attracted to this power. This 'operation' has all the trademarks of their previous MO.

Well done on keeping an open mind. I too now feel deeply embarrassed for having believed the OS for a year or two. What was i thinking??!!?! How are you with disclosing your discovery with your friends? Do you tell them? At least suggest they investigate with open minds?

Originally posted by seethelight
Russia Today is NOT a credible source.

So 1/10th of 1% of the worlds engineers think 9/11 was a demo, that isn't actually very impressive.

Statistically, that means NO engineers do, because most surveys/studies have a margin of error of AT LEAST 1%.

So less than a 10th of that is meaningless.

Russia Today = Fail
Statistically insignificant number of engineers = fail

And on and on...

This is a very interesting statistic and I'm sure it can all be backed up. Could you please cite a source for the 100,000 engineers who have proven 911 wasn't a hoax?

I'm really excited to see this! We'll finally be able to put this one behind us!!

.........