Originally posted by Alliance
Excuse me...I didn't know media hype being supplanted by a "we did tests and now we are confident" qualifies as a flip flop.The actual tests and official scientific report were published AFTER the 9-11 commission report. Should they have forgone conclusions? Yes...but you can't critique them for not including something that hadn't been completed yet.
That sig is amazing!
Originally posted by chithappens
I would agree with you except scienitific experts don't even say anything about that before checking it out themselves and being certain themselves (it could be wrong but they will report it if they think they are right; this would many a nice amount of scientists made the wrong calculations and deductions). Scientist disagree about stuff all the time.
Originally posted by chithappens
But if what you said was the case, everyone would be apologizing all the time for mistakes. No one reports stuff without certainty (individually).
Perhaps you should re-vist the modern media...people say stupid shit all the time...aliens, etc. People may be doing it honestly...but they THINK they saw something and thier mind creates a story around it.
Originally posted by chithappens
And to be clear as to why this is a little more fishy, no one was able to do tests on the parts of the frame that "melted down." The government took all the valuable fragments away that would have showed how exactly the frames of the towers started to bend in ways that have never happened ever in history.
No tower in history was strcutured like the trade center. Unique design caused unique collapse. The truss theory is viable. The scientific community has upheld it.
Originally posted by chithappensPeople do all the time...why do you think some scientists like Behe support intelligent design? There is always a scientist dumb enought ot support radical/unbased theories.
I see what you mean but no "expert" is going to just put his name out there, CERTAINLY not a tragedy like 9/11. It would ruin a career to have a story opposite of the "official" story.
Originally posted by chithappens
I don't blame you there. I browsed through the threads and there was no moderate discussion of any sort going on.I haven't seen the movie but have done enough research on my own to know that the "official" story handed to us by the government is complete bullshit and is disrespectful to a handful of scientific standards and even simple logic.
exactly.well said. 👆
Originally posted by inimalist
There are many misleading things about documentaries.The biggest thing to remember is that, as a film, it is subject to the freedom of speech. There is no review board aside from the production company, which in this case has a history of publishing highly biased films with regard to government conspiracy.
There is a fantastic film by this French documentary maker called "Dark Side of the Moon". It puts forward a VERY persuasive argument for how the moon landing was a hoax and implicated Stanley Kubrick in the plot.
The director of the film has no opinion on the moon landing. Everything in the film is a complete lie, however it is made to show how persuasive a documentary can be, even when the data is 100% false.
However, there are peer reviewed scientific journals that have looked at the 9-11 conspiracy claims. The best I have seen is from Popular Mechanics, found here:http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html.
My take home message would be "know who the source of your truth is".
Please.I wish people would stop using that propaganda government piece popular mechanics as a source to prove the official version correct.For one thing,the forward is written by John Mccain who is a corrupted politician in the first place.Second,there is a new book out that proves that piece by popular mechanics is a bunch of lies.Its called Debunking the 9-11 Debunking and it debunks all the lies mentioned in popular mechanics.Its written by David Ray Griffin.He has written a couple other books on the subject as well called The New Pearl harbour-disturbing questions about the Bush administration and 9-11 and another one called-The 9-11 Commission Report.Omissions and Distortions.If you want to learn the truth about 9-11,then start reading those books and stop listening to the propaganda by the government like that popular mechanics source.Geez.
Originally posted by inimalist
dude, wtf are you talking about?If any scientist could find factual evidence that supported the 9-11 conspiracy theory, they would be instantly famous and rich. They would most likely win the Nobel Peace Prize, hundreds of other awards, and would have the notoriety of being the only one smart enough to see through the government facade.
Also, popular mechanics, among others, have done independent research into the major claims of the conspiracy theorists and have found them to hold no scientific grounds. All the evidence is suppositional or deductive at best, and for the most part, it focuses on irrelevant facts to try and mislead people to focus on the trees to miss the forest. The greatest example of this is the idea that "fire can't melt steel". Without getting too in depth, the factuality of that statement is irrelevant. Nobody would claim that fire alone brought down the towers, and it is intellectually dishonest to make this straw man.
And seriously, this isn't quantum physics. What happened on 9-11 is not on any scale as complex as the idea of punctuated equilibrium or universal inflation. At the VERY least, to believe that this was a US inside job is to pretty much dismiss the entire field of Middle Eastern Studies.
How many scientists do you know?
Oh please,give me a break.The scientists that HAVE spoken out that it was an inside job by the government have been told to shup up or have lost jobs.Not only that,firemen and policemen have had their lives threatened for not going along with the official version.and again people STOP USING POPULAR MECHANICS AS A SOURCE.The forward in that popular mechanics article was written by John Mccain who is an extremely corrupted politician.He was pressured by the veitnam veterans after the war to try and bring vietnam vets back home and he basically gave them the middle finger and ignored them.That should tell you something about the credibility of popular mechanics and like he said,they basically selected these so called independent investigaters who actually were not independent-they're companies were all connected with government contracts.it was an inside job as any person with logic or common sense knows.countless numbers of demolition experts were bothered by the freefall collapse of the towers.They have said that should never have happened unless it was due to explosives.wake up and smell the folgers.