Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories

I came accross a journal that I thought could be usefull in gathering information concerning the 9/11 conspiracy theory. I'll apologize in advance if this information has allready been included in a thread, if it hasn't then I hope it can be put to use. It's rather long and hopefully will provide some usefull information.

Journal of Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Good for studying ad hominem, straw men, and how to derail from a point in general, but not much else. And on top of that, too cynical and sarcastic to read much of at once. Not professional.

Ya know what i don't get? Why are there so many 'debunkers' to begin with? Why do they seem to spend so much time, all of it, arguing with people that they've never met?

I can understand why truthers may be obsessed with getting justice for these people, but i dont understand how 9/11 debunkers can expend so much energy and effort into organizing such a thing as "The Journal of [Wishful Thinking] 9/11 Debunking"

If you really think somebody's wrong you usually just ignore them. What i am seeing exhibited is a narcissistic manifestation of the incredible threat posed to OCT'rs world views and beliefs that are so directly tied to their perspective of 9/11.

James Meigs at PopMech calls "us" the "Conspiracy Industry." It's part true - look at Loose Change. So then he heads up the CT debunking industry, along w/Screw Loose Change and this site (thanks BTW got it bookmarked.) It's like a joint effort almost - towers of BS erected and then demolished. That's why I'm glad I never moved into any of these buildings but stayed out on the streets of perpetual doubt...

Motives of the debunkers aside, its a step in the debate process. Evidence is presented, it either is or isn't debunked, and I watch. Sometimes they are wrong too, and can be debunked back - it's great fun. I try to debunk myself so others can't, and remain cautious about my explicitly stated facts. If I happen to see these guys cast serious doubt on a charge, I look into it more and, as was the case with the no-plane aht the Pentgon theories, I abandon it for my own credibiliy's sake. So why be defenseive when the debunker men appear? A more solid approach will leave you more secure and less on the defensive.

What i hate are the debunkers who keep asking for evidnece but then turn around and say they do not have to show evidence.

Its usually because they can not post any evidence to support thier side they just like to call others names and ask for evidence.

I have been asking for structural calculations to prove WTC 7 for how long now? Surely all these brilliant engineers should have been able to solve it by now? With all the computer power we have today? I'm also tired of being asked to show evidence, then I show some calculations, and people say physics doesn't count.

The government's the one with all the evidence. They're the one's that need to prove thier theory. Not people who question (9/11 Widows). Why are they hiding it from us?

[edit on 4/19/2007 by Griff]

I've decided that the people who go along and defend the offical story believe in the "Coincidence Theory"!!!!! There are way too many coincidences from passports flying out of pockets, to planes evaporating, but DNA still found, to put options as the offical story leads some to believe.

I'm with you Griff, I find it nearly impossible that a massive 47 steel reinforced building can come crashing to the ground perfectly symetrical at all four corners at free fall speeds due to some fires that were spread unevenly in the building. Even if fire were the cause for a building like this to collapse, it sure as hell wouldn't have happened like that.

So I guess physics took the day off along with North America's Air Defense!!!

When I originally posted this thread I only listed one reference to support my topic. I don't want people to think I'm basing my opinion off of one point of view. I don't have enough information to declare which side I believe so I want to use these threads to gather as much insight and points of view as I can so that I can come to my own conclusion. I think this is important because too many people are basing their ideas and beliefs from limited sources that are using them as pawns to further their own movements.

I'm just asking that everyone keep an open mind and we will tackle this one issue at a time. For each conspiracy I'll try to list as many sources as I can and present what ever evidence I come across in the process.

If anyone has any better sources or information then please post it here or correct me. My sole purpose is to try and put some information out there so that we can all come to our own decisions what we think is plausible and what is downright insane.

SOURCES

Source 1: Debunking911.com
Source 2: Popularmechanics.com
Source 3: Ourworld.cs.com
Source 4: 911truth.org
Source 5: Oilempire.us
Source 6: 911scholars.org
Source 7: Nobeliefs.com
Source 8: Democracynow.org
Source 9: Serendipity.li
Source 10: Loosechange911.com
Source 11: 911proof.com
Source 12: Patriotsaints.com
Source 13: STJ911.org
Source 14: Whatreallyhappened.com
Source 15: Globalresearch.ca
Source 16: Wanttoknow.info
Source 17: 911research.wtc7.net
Source 18: 911timeline.net
Source 19: WTC.nist.gov
Source 20: GPOaccess.gov

Like I stated above I want to try and tackle one issue at a time, partially becuase I don't want to be up all night typing but mainly it's because I want to be more thorough. The topic I'll start off with is the collapse of the World Trade Center towers by demolition:

WTC DEMOLITION


9-11 Conspiracy - Crash Course 1 of 4 - Length: 07:34
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

Part one starts off showing footage shot during the construction of the WTC towers. Les Robertson (WTC structural engineer) and Frank A. DeMartini (Manager, WTC Construction & Project Management) explain how the towers were built with the thoughts of plane crashes in mind. Jonathan R. Barnett, Ph.D. (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) makes a statement that he never saw any protected steel structure collapse in a fire prior to 9/11. James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Deluth) and Jeff King (MIT engineer/research scientist) both talk in detail about the collapse of the towers. They made statements that in order for the floors to fall down in the manor for which they did would have to involve the simultaneous breaking of thousands of joints.

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

9-11 Conspiracy - Crash Course 2 of 4 - Length: 08:32
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

During this segment eyewitnesses recall multiple explosions and NBC's Pat Dawson relates that FDNY's Fire Safety Chief, Albert Turi thought that there were devices planted in the building. William Rodriguez (20+ year WTC employee, and last survivor to exit the WTC) gives his statement of multiple explosions from lower floors. James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Deluth) and Jeff King (MIT engineer/research scientist) tell why the WTC collapses had to be the result of demolitions. During this segment there was discussions concerning what appeared to be an explosion on the first tower right before the plane impacted the building. There was talks about security irregularities at the WTC weeks prior to 9/11, the director of the agency responsible for the security was George Bush's brother.

9-11 Conspiracy - Crash Course 3 of 4 - Length: 08:02
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

In part 3 a CNN reporter discussed the possibility of explosives at the base of the towers; Dallas Landmark Tower Demolition; Scott Forbes (IT Specialist - Fiduciary Trust employee, WTC) and William Rodriguez (20+ year WTC employee, and last survivor to exit the WTC) recall strange happenings at the WTC during the weeks prior to 9-11, which included what sounded like heavy tools and machinery being operated inside the towers. The work being done was loud enough to shake the floors and ceilings. The power was shut off for a whole weekend prior to 9/11 and workers were seen laying cable throughout the towers. The workers explanation was that new internet cable was being installed. Due to the power outage there was no security cameras operating during this time period to record any of the events. There was also evidence of blast damage in the WTC lobby moments after the plane struck.

9-11 Conspiracy - Crash Course 4 of 4 - Length: 06:59
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

BBC news updated that WTC #7 has collapsed (this footage aired BEFORE #7 actually collapsed); Larry Silverstein (WTC leaseholder) recalls the orders to "Pull" WTC #7 on a PBS documentary; Rudy Giuliani reveals that he had been given advanced warning that the World Trade Center was going to collapse, there was a video of a woman in uniform announcing to the crowd that the tower was about to collapse, there was video of the ground shaking just seconds before the collapse of the WTC, Danny Jowenko (Dutch professional demolitions expert) reaffirms his statement that he believes that the WTC had to have been brought down by demolition, Thermal hot spots of ground zero--taken on September 16th and September 23rd, 2001; Evidence of thermite having been used to bring down the WTC; footage of the red-hot rubbel at Ground Zero. It's also worth noting that the following buildings burned but never collapsed: Caracas, Venezeula: A 56-story office tower burned for 17 hours, Taiwan: Building burned for an hour and a half, Los Angeles: 62-story Interstate Bank Building burned for four hours, Madrid, Spain: 32-story Windsor Building burned for two days, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania the 38-story One Meridian Plaza building burned for 18 hours.

This finishes the four part series. On the next post I'll recap the main points talked about in each of the videos.


[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

RECAP OF THE FOUR PART SERIES

1. The steel used in the construction of the WTC was tested at 2000 degrees for 6 hours, steel has a melting point of 3000 degrees. It was estimated that because of the fuel that was present the steel could have reached 1700 degrees but because of the insulation the temperature was estimated to only be around 500 degrees. This is far less than the actual melting point.

2. No protected steel structure has ever collapsed from fire prior to the collapse of the WTC towers.

3. In order for the floors to fall down in the manor for which they did would have to involve the simultaneous breaking of thousands of joints.

4. There appeared to be an explosion on the first tower right before the plane impacted the building.

5. There was talks about security irregularities at the WTC weeks prior to 9/11 and the director of the agency responsible for the security of the WTC was George Bush's brother.

6. There was sounds like heavy tools and machinery being operated inside the towers prior to 9/11. The work being done was loud enough to shake the floors and ceilings.

7. The power was shut off for a whole weekend prior to 9/11 and workers were seen laying cable throughout the towers. The workers explanation was that new internet cable was being installed.

8. Due to the power outage there was no security cameras operating during this time period to record any of the events.

9. There was evidence of blast damage in the WTC lobby moments after the plane struck.

10. Rudy Giuliani reveals that he had been given advanced warning that the World Trade Center was going to collapse.

11. There was video of the ground shaking just seconds before the collapse of the WTC.

I think that one of the things that really seems odd to me after watching these films was the fact that the fire should not have been hot enough to bring the towers down. The likelihood of all the thousands of braces to break just at the right time seems a little fishy, but who knows - No tragedy like this has ever happened before so how could we truly have known what the steel limitations was prior to 9/11?

Below I'll link the video of the speech from Dr. James H. Fetzer (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota). You see bits of this speach through out the 4 films so I thought it would be beneficial to see the whole video in it's entirety.

DR. FETZER’S PRESENTATION OF THE FACTS

Dr. Fetzer's Presentation Of The Facts - Length: 58:30
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

Dr. Ketzer explains that the plane crashed and caused fires making steel to melt and floors to collapse violates laws of physics and engineering and cannot possibly be correct. The collapse of the Twin Towers displays all of the characteristics of controlled demolitions, including the near gravity speed at which they fell, their symmetrical collapse into their own footprints, and their conversion of concrete into very fine dust. The offical account does not even address the collapse of WTC7 nor adequately explain the Pentagon attack. It's a long video but very informative.

I have some more videos that I would like to contribute so that we have different points of views from other people. I'll put them on the next posting.


[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

Dr. Fetzer's Interview With Bill O'Reilly - Length: 06:32

Bill O'Reilly's discussion why the New York Times isn't buying the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

911 Mysteries - Length: 90:41
*****WARNING***** This video contains graphic images from the events that took place during the 9/11 attacks.

What really happened to the Twin towers and wtc building 7?. This is a long video. For more info go to www.911mysteries.com.

I hope these videos prove to be usefull for this debate on the conspiracy theories surronding 9/11 and the possible demolition of the WTC towers. I'd be interested in seeing any documentation from any engineers that investigated the collapse of the towers. The videos were a good start but I'd like to see more proof and points of views so if anyone has anything to add then please do so.


[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

[edit on 20-4-2007 by Empyrean Madness]

It appears that you have done a great deal of research into both sides of this issue. I applaud your efforts and wish you the best of luck on your quest for truth.

There are lots of unanswered questions, not because they are unasked, not because they are unanswerable, but simply because officials, that have 'nothing to hide', refuse to answer them. I will never again cast dispersion onto somebody that asks unorthodox questions.

The problem that i have with these 'debunking 9/11' sites is that they either have been debunked and / or rely on gibberish straw man garbage.

When these site first began appearing, i was actually happy! I though, "finally, somebody can answer my questions and provide me with an explanation of that day that makes sense!" However, i was sadly mistaken.

These debunking sites ignore what they cant explain, then focus in on the weakest BS only endorsed by the most fringe members of the movement.

When they do attempt to tackle tough issues, they rely on total bull# excuses that dont answer anymore questions than they raise. They dont offer any proof or and substantiated evidence, they just regurgitate various derivatives of the official story.

For example, in regards to the planting of the "Terrorist Passport" that survived a plane crash that vaporized the plane, flew through the buildings, and landed on the ground at the feet of an anonymous FBI agent, their proof that it was not faked is, "There is no reason to fake this evidence." They dont explain how it could have survived, and they neglect to mention that this is the only piece of 'evidence' supposedly linking al-qaeda to 9/11. They're only explanation is, "Why fake it?"

Now, thats just ****ing stupid.

[edit on 4/20/2007 by sp00n1]

I second the applause for you Empyrean Madness.

I actually think more people should be doing what your doing. It makes the case for Truth stronger.

I would recommend 9/11 PRESS FOR TRUTH and I would also recommend watching it very, very carefully with a keen eye on Bush, Cheney and Rice. They are obviously lying. There are tough questions asked in the film.

Like ....'what wasn't the South Tower evacuated?' The reason for this question of course is that in July 2001 at a G-8 meeting in Italy the World Leaders were protected by anti aircraft missiles in case of hijackings!

Also they slept at a boat in the sea so the planes wouldn't crash into their buildings!

So two months later?? They didn't evacuate the South Tower?? Just a month after the Presidential Memo?

There are lots of Strange things as well. Also Go to Paul Thompson's Timeline which is incredible, it is spoken of in the movie.

For me what really seals the deal, is I can't see hijackers planning to Strike the Pentagon with a Passenger JET.

Surely anyone would think the Pentagon-Headquarters for the Dpt of Defense, would be defended against a Passenger Jet?

Also the Hijackers left from destination points that left them in the air for long periods.

You would think they would try and fly from the closet points possible.

Unless.....Whomever did this, Knew they would be able to, then and only then would they leave from longer destination points.

Hi Everyone,
This is my first posting. Just call me Gypsy!!

I watched a little of the video's above, and I can't understand why people make up such things, when Osama has already bore responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. I mean it makes no sense for people to think overwise.

On October 29, 2004, at 21:00 UTC, the Arab television network, Al Jazeera, broadcast excerpts from a videotape of Osama bin Laden addressing the people of the United States, in which he accepted responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks. en.wikipedia.org...

news.bbc.co.uk...

Osama's Speech In Arabic: www.aljazeera.net...

The United States government determined that al-Qaeda, headed by Osama bin Laden, bore responsibility for the attacks. en.wikipedia.org...

Maybe someone else here can post the video where Osama told the world he was behind the attacks. I know it's there in internet land, I just can't locate it....

Gypsy!!


[edit on 24-4-2007 by islgypsy]

Osama also said in a few interviews in Mid-East, including the first interview with him after 9/11, that he didn't do it.

Obviously both are not true. How do you discriminate? What's going on?

Originally posted by sp00n1
Ya know what i don't get? Why are there so many 'debunkers' to begin with? Why do they seem to spend so much time, all of it, arguing with people that they've never met?

I can understand why truthers may be obsessed with getting justice for these people, but i dont understand how 9/11 debunkers can expend so much energy and effort into organizing such a thing as "The Journal of [Wishful Thinking] 9/11 Debunking"

If you really think somebody's wrong you usually just ignore them. What i am seeing exhibited is a narcissistic manifestation of the incredible threat posed to OCT'rs world views and beliefs that are so directly tied to their perspective of 9/11.

Could "De-Bunkers" and "Truthers" not be regarded as the same thing bye an onlooker. For example "Terrorist" and "Freedom Fighter". They mean the same end but for "different" reasons?

A "Truther" is trying to out the bull#, While a "De-Bunker" is trying to create bull#..

Bill O'Reilly's discussion why the New York Times isn't buying the 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Discussion? Don't you mean "discussion"?

He's putting him down!! He's not letting him speak at all.

Some good videos there! I think the bigger reason why the media won't touch this stuff is because of the fear of reprisals or something.

Watergate anyone???? I think 9/11 will turn out the same way (eventually).

Originally posted by bsbray11
Osama also said in a few interviews in Mid-East, including the first interview with him after 9/11, that he didn't do it.

Obviously both are not true. How do you discriminate? What's going on?

From my understanding Osama did say in one of his first video speeches, (I think in late 2001 that he was not involved in 9/11, then in his 2004 video speech to the American people he said he was involved in 9/11. I am still looking for both the videos.

HERE is part of a video where Osama talks about his involvement is 9/11.
*************************************************
www.september11news.com...

UBL: (...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all. (...Inaudible...) due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the
fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the
plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is all that we had hoped for.

Shaykh: Allah be praised.
UBL: We were at (...inaudible...) when the event took place. We had notification since the previous Thursday
that the event would take place that day. We had finished our work that day and had the radio on. It was
5:30 p.m. our time. I was sitting with Dr. Ahmad Abu-al-((Khair)). Immediately, we heard the news that a
plane had hit the World Trade Center. We turned the radio station to the news from Washington. The news
continued and no mention of the attack until the end. At the end of the newscast, they reported that a plane
just hit the World Trade Center.

Shaykh: Allah be praised.

UBL: After a little while, they announced that another plane had hit the World Trade Center. The brothers
who heard the news were overjoyed by it.
***************
And here:
UBL: The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and
we asked each of them to go to America but they didn’t know anything about the operation, not even one letter.
But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they
boarded the planes.

UBL: (...inaudible...) then he said: Those who were trained to fly didn’t know the others. One group of people
did not know the other group. (...inaudible...) (Someone in the crowd asks UBL to tell the Shaykh about the
dream of ((Abu-Da’ud)).

*********************************

So the way I see it, since Osama said he and his followers where involved in 9/11, then I tend to believe what he said.


Gypsy!

What about the 'Osama' confession tape that was 'unearthed' in karbala just in time to go to war with iraq?

You know the one im talking about... the one were osama put on 50 pounds? The one where his nose and facial features were totally different... he was wearing gold jewelry, which he never wears....

He even picked up a new skill, writing notes with his right hand, despite the fact that he is left handed.

Yea, some arab claiming to be osama, and being responsible for 9/11 while on some tape. Thats conclusive!!!

How did he manage to destroy all of the evidence implicating him?

How did he manage to get the CIA to issue visas to his 19 known terrorist hijackers?

How did he manage to frame Pakistani ISI General Ahmad with giving Atta $100,000 U$D in the weeks before the attacks? And how did he get Ahmad to meet, in a mysterious breakfast meetings, with Salem bin Laden, George Bush Sr., Saudi Royal Princes, George Tenet, and a number of other members of the Carlyle group on 9.11, while the attacks were in progress???

Originally posted by sp00n1
What about the 'Osama' confession tape that was 'unearthed' in karbala just in time to go to war with iraq?

You know the one im talking about... the one were osama put on 50 pounds? The one where his nose and facial features were totally different... he was wearing gold jewelry, which he never wears....

He even picked up a new skill, writing notes with his right hand, despite the fact that he is left handed.

Yea, some arab claiming to be osama, and being responsible for 9/11 while on some tape. Thats conclusive!!!

How did he manage to destroy all of the evidence implicating him?

How did he manage to get the CIA to issue visas to his 19 known terrorist hijackers?

How did he manage to frame Pakistani ISI General Ahmad with giving Atta $100,000 U$D in the weeks before the attacks? And how did he get Ahmad to meet, in a mysterious breakfast meetings, with Salem bin Laden, George Bush Sr., Saudi Royal Princes, George Tenet, and a number of other members of the Carlyle group on 9.11, while the attacks were in progress???

I have never read anything like that on the main stream media's. I did find some of what you said on a few blog site, but anyone can write those, and post up their blogs. Can you show me on a few main stream media sites where these things have been told on BIG time media news stories... Thanks..

Gypsy,
peace...