To all the debunkers: What makes you think its not a conspiracy?

Originally posted by piacenza
Look Coven I am quite sure many of the debunkers voted for bush in 2004 it would be interesting to make a poll.
As far as evidence I dont know anymore what to say ,if you don't see them you don't see them point.

I understand what you are saying, but some of us really do feel it was just an inside job. so all is good.. now =)

I am sick and tired of exposing them as I mentioned many times I care ZERO if the truth comes out or not .I debate here because there are many smart people and I like to know the real truth about geopolitic.
The meteorite should be more than enough to understand that something very very weird went on on 911, those things are unexplainable unless you believe that bending some metal (as some other thread suggested) will create that kind of energy.

also good deal. Sometimes you just have to validate yourself to people for them to get off their high horse (i.e. ME... LOL) sorry it took me so long to realize your just here to learn too.

Now about the meteorite (though off topic) I think it was simple physics. I will try to explain my view as simply as possible.

So say a nuclear bomb is exploded in the desert. What happens to the sand at the site of impact?
Its molecular structure is changed, and it is turned to glass. Now, some will assume this molecular change is due to the Thermo Nuclear reaction itself. However this change is not due to that... The change is due to the pressure caused by the thermonuclear reaction.

now let us apply the same theory to the towers. (firstly I accept that the IMPACT FORCE of the planes hitting the towers caused seismic reactions throughout the towers, thus weakening the steel) So the towers are collapsing. Hundreds of Thousands of Tons of Concrete and steel collapsing on each other... Wouldn't the IMPACT FORCE alone be enough to change the chemical structure of the metals and concrete into a meteorite like object?

I believe the only people who can answer this question are on the level with Stephen Hawking and Micho Kaku. so until the REAL BIG NAMES of physics are willing to speak on the topic, we are all going to be stuck speculating, causes and reactions.


Coven

Actually Deltaboy the flying of the planes into the towers and the pentagon was the hardest thing to pull on 911.
Have you done some reaserch on the subject? I reccomend pilotsfortruth.org as a start.

actually if the government wanted to do it....they coulda just pulled off another one like the 93 bombing....according to all the reports....had the bomb been another six or so feet...(unsure off the top of my head) closer to one of the pillars it would have brought down the entire building....that'd be the safest bet for the government.....

and if a single bomb in the basement can take down an entire building....why cant a 767 flying really fast and slamming into it not?

Originally posted by Griff

But, that also goes back to my original question. Why is incompetence an acceptable excuse? If one of my designs failed and 3,000 + lives are taken, wouldn't you want to know why, how, when, where and to what extent? Why is a botched "investigation" OK with people?

Ohh I agree totally, I think the real crime here is exactly that. which is why they love the other conspiracies. I think we need to understand , just as we need to understand the Katrina crap. I think the whole administration is at fault and should be held accountable, just not for masterminding it. But for its idiocy.

PS see these are reasonable responses to each other I wish this board was more like we are acting =)

Originally posted by twitchy
Debunkers on ATS? No way... If you do happen to see any around send them here,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I've been looking for some for well over a month now.

Hey cmon now... I smacked down the "cars melted by nuclear bombs" assertion, and the "tv fakery" perspective. That makes me "debunker' by default. It would seem that if you don't subscribe to the fringe theories you're a agent ... in the minds of those who do subscribe to such.

I dont intend to disrupt this important topc. So far I havent seen any bites here. If you reject what I stated just merely mention it and I'll link in the off-topic and we'll divert the issue from here. This is an imporant perspective this topic here...

Originally posted by grover
Why?

For the simple reason that it would have taken a huge number of people to have pulled it off.

It would have taken a huge number of people 'on the inside' to pull it off, however it only took Bin Laden and 19 men to do the exact same thing from the ‘outside’? Where is the logic in that?

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
Like I said I believe there is a cover a cover up of incompetence, look at any action this admin has touch, name 1 thing they have done correctly. But they are the master minds behind the biggest coup in modern history?

Why do people always assume it would have to be the entire Bush administration that pulled this operation off? Is it not more likely that criminal elements within the government, not necessarily even connected to any political party that actually carried out this covert operation to suit their own agenda (which happens to fit well with G. W. Bush and his associates agenda)?

If 19 men and a man in a cave in Afghantistan can pull it off, why can’t elements within the government pull it off? Why is this classified as “the biggest coup in modern history” as if it’s too difficult for a powerful group on the inside to carry out?

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I could almost buy into the controlled demolition theory except for one glaring fact. THE PLANES HITTING THE BUILDINGS!

Think about it for a minute. You are going to create a terrorist incident for the purpose of getting the US into a war in Iraq. You have wired both towers with explosives that guarentees their total destruction. Why fly a plane into them?

Visual effect? Just imagine how many times the media replayed the video of planes hitting the Towers (and the consequent collapses). This probably helped infuriate the American people and get the necessary public support to carry out their agenda. I think that, with the necessary resources, flying two airplanes into the WTC towers would have been relatively simple with the technology available in 2001.

Debunkers? I have stated that to ask for proof is not attempting to "debunk". Providing 911 "truth seekers" with facts is not debunking. It is actually assiting in helping those that are truley looking for the truth...find it.

Most (not all) truth seekers are already set. No matter what facts are presented to them, they will look the other way and just yell out "inside job".

Why isn't it a conspiracy? Plain and simple... no facts! Twitchy mentioned WKJO video. I watched it... very interesting...but if you watch it, there is a lot of speculation that he provided that can not be backed up with proof.

Seems the biggest question is in regards to the collapses. NIST actually held many meetings with engineers,scientists, and citizens. These meetings were held to show preliminary reports and answer questions. I'm curious as to how many truth seekers attended these meetings and how many actually presented NIST with their calculations before the final report was released.


[edit on 25-7-2007 by CaptainObvious]

To believe the official story is to believe that one of the highjackers passport goes flying out of his pocket after he just crashed the plane into the tower, and then it magically floats to the ground so he can be easily identified. Does anyone actually belive this? Does that sound the least bit logical to anyone?

How could the 9-11 Comission Report totally fail to even mention WTC 7??

To believe the offical story is to believe 100's of coincidences!!!

I guess on this subject your either a Conspiracy Theorist or a Coincidence Theorist.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Debunkers? I have stated that to ask for proof is not attempting to "debunk". Providing 911 "truth seekers" with facts is not debunking. It is actually assiting in helping those that are truley looking for the truth...find it.

So... you come here to "debunk" to help me out?

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Why isn't it a conspiracy? Plain and simple... no facts! Twitchy mentioned WKJO video. I watched it... very interesting...but if you watch it, there is a lot of speculation that he provided that can not be backed up with proof.

So why come here? Why do you bother to post here SO MUCH if you know the truth?

You are VERY confused about PROOF, the definition of proof and the burden of proof.

The government HAS NOT met it's burden of proof... ALL OF THEIR REPORTS are THEORIES.

No proof.

Why do you post here Capt. Obvious? What is your goal?

Honestly, the last good "debunker" we had here was Howardroark. Howard would actually talk physics, cite NCSTAR reports, FEMA reports, and other actual data. He rarely used typical "debunker" I am right because you have no proof" line.

Really... I have no proof? Could that be because the government has SUPPRESSED 13,000+ video clips and still photos? ALL of the physical evidence? Most of the 9/11 commission testimony? How about surveillance footage from the Pentagon?

Do I not have the proof because it does not exist OR do I not have the proof because it has been suppressed?

Originally posted by myowncrusade
What we need to know as truth seekers is what, why and where was the failure in preventing these deaths.

I'm paraphrazing here.

"Miss Rice, what was the title of the memo?"

"I believe it was 'Bin Laden set to strike inside the US."

Two sentences later.

"We could never imagine Bin Laden striking in the US."

See where incompetence comes into play?

I think half the problem is the US gov not being honest about their own mistakes leading up to 9/11.

Exactly. And my question still stands. Why is this acceptable?

[edit on 7/25/2007 by Griff]

Originally posted by wenfieldsecret
actually if the government wanted to do it....they coulda just pulled off another one like the 93 bombing....according to all the reports....had the bomb been another six or so feet...(unsure off the top of my head) closer to one of the pillars it would have brought down the entire building....that'd be the safest bet for the government.....

And yet, the official story is that it would take thousands of pounds of TNT to bring the towers down. Which is it? One bomb or thousands of pounds?

No offense, but you guys need to keep your stories straight.

and if a single bomb in the basement can take down an entire building....why cant a 767 flying really fast and slamming into it not?

For the same reason you guys think a top down implosion is impossible. The plane didn't damage enough of the core structure. A bomb in the core would.

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
Ohh I agree totally, I think the real crime here is exactly that. which is why they love the other conspiracies. I think we need to understand , just as we need to understand the Katrina crap. I think the whole administration is at fault and should be held accountable, just not for masterminding it. But for its idiocy.

I agree totally also. But, I think they may have let it happen. That's as far as I'm going to go on the "inside job" thing. Because they would not do it themselves. They'd hire "terrorists" to do it, just like in '93. But, that's just my opinion and take it as such.

PS see these are reasonable responses to each other I wish this board was more like we are acting =)

Actually, the threads have settled down allot and allot of us are getting along fine now that we've put our egos aside (me for one).

Originally posted by Pootie
Do I not have the proof because it does not exist OR do I not have the proof because it has been suppressed?

What a good way of putting it.

BTW, I miss HowardRoark. But, I'd also say that AgentSmith and Damocles should also be mentioned.

They were/are very knowledgeble (sp?) also and Damocles has taught me valuable info on bombs and such.

Originally posted by Vinadetta


How could the 9-11 Comission Report totally fail to even mention WTC 7??

WTC 7 was mentioned in the 911 Commission Report.

The report was NOT to figure out why or how a building fell.

Originally posted by Pootie


So... you come here to "debunk" to help me out?

I read what you post and try to show you the facts.

Originally posted by Pootie
So why come here? Why do you bother to post here SO MUCH if you know the truth?

why are you here? you posts appear to show that you are not interested in it. Do i know the truth? Well.. i have yet to be shown that the offical report is not based on facts.

Originally posted by Pootie
You are VERY confused about PROOF, the definition of proof and the burden of proof.
The government HAS NOT met it's burden of proof... ALL OF THEIR REPORTS are THEORIES.

I am confused? please enlighten me...show me some PROOF that you have on ANY of the conspiracy theories that you support. I'm not saying i have all the answers, but I do have common sence.

Originally posted by Griff
They were/are very knowledgeble (sp?) also and Damocles has taught me valuable info on bombs and such.

I appreciate Damocles knowledge of military FIELD demolitions and standard military HE. I just think that sometimes he fails to believe/admit that there is more than one way to skin a cat and that a combination of a few professionals (CD companies, CIA, DoD) can overcome small issues like his very common remote detonation is not available type arguments. I do think he is very knowledgeable in conventional, standard, low cost style demolition... just forgetting that an agency like the CIA or Mossad has access to an incredible array of tools that we do not know exist but can deduce do.

Really... How hard is it to eliminate detcord and send an encrypted digital firing signal to a shielded blasting cap or other detonator?

IEDs can be detonated remotely with Radio Shack technology. Does anyone really believe that the DoD cannot reliably do the same? I just can't believe that.

Maybe I just have a wild imagination...

As far as posting Physics, there is no reason to. There are only two people in here so far that appear to have any knowledge about physics and engineering. Griff and Bsbray. I am in the majority with the knowledge of building structures and physics ( i know very little).

Point is... for all the so called experts that claim that the NIST report is not accurate, were not around during the meetings that were well know within the Engineering industry. So, we now have an internet with so called experts Monday morning quarterbacking .... but yet to have come out with one paper that explains the discrepancies of the NIST report. Yes one paper that has been properly looked over by the scientific community.