It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
an acceptable theory has no agenda, has supporting evidence provided to back it up, and acknowledges generally accepted facts, rather than conveniently ignoring them.
.02
Originally posted by neformore
Thanks for that Libra, thats the kind of discussion that I'm looking for.
Originally posted by neformore
How then, do you think the various "theories" have spiralled into the various complex webs and confrontational states that they have?
Originally posted by neformore
And is there any way of reconcilling the differences between the factions, or is it like the protestant/catholic split of the churches, where never the twain shall meet again?
Originally posted by thelibra
In other words, a theory is something for which there is a scientific basis, a collection of testable standards to explain a phenomena that can be replicated and predicted using that theory. If the statement made is not testable, not provable, cannot elicit a prediction or a mathematical or logical relation to the same event being able to be replicated, it is not a theory, it is, at best, a hypothesis, and in most cases, mere musing or conjecture.
Hence, the "Post-Impact Controlled Demolition Theory" is probably the closest thing I've seen so far to an honest-to-god "theory" on these 9/11 threads, in that the circumstances could technically be replicated with computer models, or real-life buildings, using known technology, to reproduce the same results. One can actually use math and known fact to logically deduce the cause of a building collapsing into its own footprint. Whether anyone has successfully replicated these events is unknown to me, but it has the makings of a "good" theory. Not good as in I agree with it, but good as in, something that actually qualifies as a real theory.
The idea that aliens, godzilla, or satan caused the 9/11 collapse is not theory. It is conjecture. There is no mathematical series, or set of scientific facts, logical process, or repeatable, testable circumstance to attempt to put such claims to trial by real science. Does it mean that such things are outside the realm of possibility? No. Does it mean it couldn't have happened that way? No. Does it mean one cannot call such things theory? Yes. At least, not accurately so. Technically I could call an apple a cat, but it would not make it so.
Anyway, I hope that answers your question.
Originally posted by neformore
And yet I still read today that people think the planes couldn't have caused the damage. All kinds of fanciful methods for the damage caused are put forward by such folks, and yet the (relatively) simple mathematics of the impact are ignored, and I cannot figure out why they would be.
Originally posted by neformore
Which leads me deeper into the realms of 9/11 conspiracy. Because if the simple stuff is being ignored and re-imagined, I need to know why someone would want to do that, whats in their head and why on earth they don't seem to want to reconcile the basic physics of it all, and want to blame the impacts on explosives and holographic projections.
Originally posted by neformore
Hence, the "Post-Impact Controlled Demolition Theory" is probably the closest thing I've seen so far to an honest-to-god "theory" on these 9/11 threads...
Now that I can take on board. In some respects it makes sense. Maybe the buildings were pre-wired from Day 1 incase they became unstable and threatened to topple across the city.
Originally posted by neformore
It does. but it goes back to the nagging point, because if we can see its plainly conjecture, why are people accepting it as theory? Why is it being offered as "theory" when its no such thing?
Originally posted by neformore
(BTW, am enjoying this discussion Libra!
Originally posted by thelibra
That is, however, pure speculation on my part. My own belief system doesn't really account for why 9/11 happened, but rather how deeply we as a nation have been betrayed since.
Unlike most of the 9/11 threads, this is one I feel I can actually get involved in the discussion on, because it's more about theory versus belief, as opposed to the minute details of how Tower X fell in Y fashion because of Z.
Originally posted by sowada_s
Ok, I'm game! I like math and I have a decent education. Please, in a friendly exchange, answer a few questions for me. You see, I just can't wrap my head around them enough to find the answers.
Originally posted by thelibra
My personal th--er---conjecture on this is that most people don't take a logical approach towards deciding what happened on 9/11.
Well, most people's eyes glaze over when math starts getting used.
Math makes it interesting only to the educated. (,,,)
Originally posted by St Udio
on the first glance at it might seem you are slamming the mathematically challenged among the population...
Without individuals we see only numbers: a thousand dead, a hundred thousand dead, "casualties may rise to a million." With individual stories, the statistics become people--but even that is a lie, for the people continue to suffer in numbers that themselves are numbing and meaningless. Look, see the child's swollen, swollen belly, and the flies that crawl at the corners of his eyes, his skeletal limbs: will it make it easier for you to know his name? his age, his dreams, his fears? To see him from the inside? And if it does, are we not doing a disservice to his sister, who lies in the searing fust beside him, a distorted, distended caricature of a human child? And there, if we feel for them, are they now more important than a thousand other children touched by the same famine, a thousand other young lives who will soon be food for the flies' own myriad squirming children?
We draw our lines around these moments of pain, and remain upon our islands, and they cannot hurt us. They are covered with a smooth, safe, nacreous layer to let them slip, pearlike, from our souls without real pain.
Originally posted by neformore
So the next question is this - are we looking at some kind of post-traumatic stress disorder when it comes to the wilder 9/11 theories? Is that how they've come into being?