9/11 Occam's Razor

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

What explanation would satisfy you? Even though no laws of physics were broken, this angle is played by some CTers to persuade the unsophisticated, often in the ways you've mentioned above, and usually employing a blinded-by-science technique. All physical laws worked perfectly on 911 and not one of the proposed agents that caused the alleged breach in the laws of physics is capable of such a tall order. If you're willing to accept such an absurd claim then presumably anything goes, and you'll likely accept that bombs, nukes or even UFOs could be the culprit.

No physical laws were broken, nor is there a need for that explanation. But the O(bfu)S(cat)ers would have us believe that the "terrorists" got so blessed/lucky on 9/11 that literally hundreds of coincidences and never-before encountered types of symmetric building collapses, NORAD/Air Force paralyzation, FAA ineptitude, disappearing evidence, presidents reading goat books to kids during an enemy attack, airplanes swallowed up into the ground, WTC steel carted of to China ASAP (re Waco crime scene)... all stacked up to be the "NIST/9/11 commission/FEMA/ABCNNBCBS/NEOCON" theory. No need for nukes, bombs, UFOS. It must have been the 19 hijackers "Allah" that did it. If that's the case we are really scr-wed.

No magic needed. We witnessed the biggest crime in the history of the world, in plain sight. Some of us can see, others are hiding it or deluded, and the rest are confused or don't care.

[edit on 14-2-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by smurfy
whatever it is you're talking about.

I'm sorry you're unable to keep up. Here's the Cliff Notes version: if you believe anyone who claims that laws of physics were violated on 911 then you're a dupe.

Now you're going back to one-liners again, and you're telling me about what I believe in... I, repeat I, never said I believe anything about anything...what is it I'm supposed to keep up with? You're the one who keeps rattling on about the laws of physics. I only want to hear what people have to say on the matter of buildings that fall down in an unusual manner, not to see people verbalising about "Trusters" and "Truthers" that's just the old gang mentality.

I made a point, you asked for an explanation. I provide one and you misinterpret the word "you're" as pertaining exclusively to you even though the context clearly indicates it was referring to anyone in general. I never mentioned anything about "truthers" or "trusters" and you appear to be not only confused in general but polarized by your bias and debate experiences. Please approach things with some degree of clarity in the future.

I find it odd that you believe that the buildings involved in 911 "fell in an unusual manner". That is likely the doorway to your presumably alternate beliefs. I don't find anything particularly unusual about them in any way, nor do I see any reason why anyone would. Perhaps you too have been duped by the 911 conspiracy theorists.

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
But the O(bfu)S(cat)ers would have us believe that the "terrorists" got so blessed/lucky on 9/11 that literally hundreds of coincidences and never-before encountered types of symmetric building collapses, NORAD/Air Force paralyzation, FAA ineptitude, disappearing evidence, presidents reading goat books to kids during an enemy attack, airplanes swallowed up into the ground, WTC steel carted of to China ASAP (re Waco crime scene)... all stacked up to be the "NIST/9/11 commission/FEMA/ABCNNBCBS/NEOCON" theory. No need for nukes, bombs, UFOS. It must have been the 19 hijackers "Allah" that did it. If that's the case we are really scr-wed.
[edit on 14-2-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]

A never-before-encountered event is certain to generate what you refer to as "never-before-encountered coincidences". Once you willingly disrupt that kind of congruence you're opening the door to believe the kind of nonsense that distracts you from properly identifying your actual enemy.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer
Hi TD,
Ta very much for my presumed biography, (but you should really have asked me about myself first) or what I think about re; this thread "Occams's Razor" and the finding of Thermite, (What kind) falling buildings, etc or do I even have an opinion. Anyway I leave you now to get back to your drumming...don't forget to take out the nails from the floor before you leave!



[edit on 14-2-2010 by smurfy]

Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Hi TD,
Ta very much for my presumed biography, (but you should really have asked me about myself first) Anyway I leave you now to get back to your drumming...don't forget to take out the nails from the floor before you leave!

A review of our exchange is hardly a biography. It is apparent that interpretation is not your forte, so I wish you the best, sir. Have a great day!

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Once you willingly disrupt that kind of congruence you're opening the door to believe the kind of nonsense that distracts you from properly identifying your actual enemy.

Once you have swallowed that kind of coincidence-basket, that so many OSers have, you are indeed not identifying the true enemy. Why not call for a new, unobstructed, independent investigation? Then we can all know who the enemy really is, not this nonsense that stands as the Official Schpeil.

Originally posted by smurfy
or what I think about re; this thread "Occams's Razor" and the finding of Thermite, (What kind) falling buildings, etc or do I even have an opinion.

Here's your edit, sir.

Frankly, this is and never was the issue. You asked me for an explanation of my statements and it was provided. Since you were unable to interpret my explanation I had to simplify it for you and you still couldn't seem to understand. I am sorry, sir, but I am not interested in the opinions of someone who cannot seem to engage in a simple conversation on a widely discussed topic and then resorts to a "nails in the floor"-type insult about my avatar title.

I wish you the best, sir. Have a great day!

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by downisreallyup
Hey Dave... why don't you correctly represent how a conspiracy might actually work instead of showing that you have no idea whatsoever how one goes about implementing such a conspiracy.

No, actually, this is what we keep asking of you truthers. Conspiracies are supposed to be goal oriented activities workign for some defined objective, not simply a bunch of randomly occuring stunts simply for the sake of pulling off randomly occuring stunts. Did the conspirators openly plant explosives the same way it was done in 1993? NO! They snuck in and planted secret demolitions and used hijacked aircraft as a cover story. Did the conspirators use this as a false flag to blame Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, or some other resource rich country that's been a thorn in our side? NO! We framed Afhgnaistan, the camel dung capital of the world. When we invaded Iraq, did we smuggle in WMD as a false flag operation to fool the world just like we did on 9/11? NO! We openly admitted Iraq had no WMD and invited the absolute scorn of the world. Did all these wars invite massive gov't spending and lead us to economic revival like it did in world war II? NO! the gov't is pinching pennies and we're in the worst recession in decades. And so on and so forth.

I'm sure you know better than this. The North Tower was shut down the weekend before 9-11 in an unprecedented power down. Businesses running 24-7 computer servers had a matter of no more than a few days to mirror their sites. The alarm systems and all security systems went down. The bomb-sniffing dogs were removed. And the main evidence for thermite used in taking down the twin towers were massive pools of molten iron under the complex that stayed hot and liquid for 6 weeks after the attacks.

And certainly the members of the administration and their families (esp. in the case of the Bush family) benefitted tremendously from the wars. Did you forget Cheney's intimate connection to Halliburton, recipient of massive no-bid contracts from the DOD for the entire war, including and up to today? And what about the Saudi's and bin Laden's ties to Bushco?

Speaking of the Bush family, you must be one naive schmuck to have missed the fact that from Prescott Bush's support of the Nazi war machine, GHW's running drugs from South America into the US, his support of death squads and dictators in Central America, and GW's worst presidency in the world, the Bush family has been working against the people of America's interests for 3 generations now. Their political agenda (along with other members of W's administration that signed the PNAC agreement) is pretty much in-your-face F-U-Charlie, so i don't know how you could miss it. Thank God they understand fixing elections so well, or they would have to be more overt in their takeover.

And you may call Afghanistan by whatever silly name tickles you, but I would love to see you say it to one of their faces. Regardless, after the defoliation of Viet Nam, Laos and Cambodia, Afghanistan became the world's largest exporter of narcotic poppy derivatives. And there are oil pipeline deals, its strategic proximity to Iran and Pakistan...I suppose you never heard of Brezhinski's Grand Chessboard, either. A side note...considering that Bushco had already drawn up plans for the invasion of both Iraq and Afgh. months before 9-11, I certainly think that shows that there is something there the administration saw as valuable.

So the agenda for personal gain was certainly there, and we are not talking about chump change. And the following is colorful enough to show that you passed your freshman writing course, but how is any of your France/Germany question pertinent to this thread? If I were to hazard a guess, though, I'd think it would have something to do with the fact that Iraq isn't a major supplier of opium to the world, but Afgh is.

It sounds like the master conspirators behint all these plots are a bunch of stoned high school kids concocting plots involving secret controlled demolitions in between bouts of hallucinating worms crawling out of the walls, more than it does any goal oriented elite operation. Tell me, what was the goal oriented objective in the conspiracy for France and Germany to send troops to help us in Afghanistan, but NOT Iraq? Please explain that one to me, becuase for the life of me I genuinely don't know.

Nobody I know would ever suggest the outlandish things you have suggested there, so your words are just a pointless diatribe. At least I attempt to make my posts make sense and resemble some kind of reality... please do the same.

Please do not insult my intelligence. The forums on this site are chock full of every possible goofball conspiracy claim imaginable, from controlled demolitions to faked crash sites in Shanksville to the planes being holograms to even one guy who said the conspirators are a secret satan worshipping cult who blew up the WTC becuase it looked like a giant number eleven. One guy here even claimed the tragedy in Haiti was caused by secret gov't earthquake machines. If you're attempting to claim that hordes of crackpots are NOT being attracted to your conspiracy movement like a moth to a flame, then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth yet again.

I said it before and I'll say it again- if the conspiracy theorists would only hold their own conspiracy claims up to the same stringent level of critical analysis that they do the commission report, they wouldn't be conspiracy theorists, for very long.

You are playing the "don't insult my intelligence" card here? You?! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Stop, you're killing me!

How is your complaint about what you see on other threads pertinent to this thread? Let's apply a little Occam's razor, ok? Did you not even read the OP? Your comment is pointless, off topic, and yes, insults people's intelligence. But no one can claim crackpots aren't attracted to 9-11 threads on ATS after you posted this here, no one would dream of making such an outlandish statement, no sir. And if this is the standard that you think provides "critical analysis" of conspiracy theories about 9-11, how can you possibly believe any one's argument is threatened by cretinous screed like yours?

In a case such as this,where the prime suspect has all the cards because they've tampered with and destroyed evidence,as well as planting others as well as owning a media source that is brainwash machine (TV),I gotta use a different formulation of Occam's razor.

I prefer the Edgar Allen Poe character in ''The Murders in the Rue Morgue",C. Auguste Dupin(proto Sherlock Holmes),who maintained that you merely eliminate the impossible and whatever remains,no matter how implausable MUST be the truth.So if they have nothing to hide why are they HIDING EVERYTHING?!?

[edit on 14-2-2010 by trueforger]

Originally posted by without_prejudice
The North Tower was shut down the weekend before 9-11 in an unprecedented power down.

Can you please provide a valid source for that claim.

And the main evidence for thermite used in taking down the twin towers were massive pools of molten iron under the complex that stayed hot and liquid for 6 weeks after the attacks.

Pity that they did not actually exist.....

Prescott Bush's support of the Nazi war machine, GHW's running drugs from South America into the US,

Typical silly conspiracy theory nonsense, not based in any fact at all

reply to post by dereks
"Typical silly conspiracy theory nonsense, not based in any fact at all"

Which one are you referring to, or do you mean all?

Edit to add link omitted,
www.guardian.co.uk...

[edit on 14-2-2010 by smurfy]

reply to post by without_prejudice

I'm sure you know better than this. The North Tower was shut down the weekend before 9-11 in an unprecedented power down. Businesses running 24-7 computer servers had a matter of no more than a few days to mirror their sites. The alarm systems and all security systems went down. The bomb-sniffing dogs were removed. And the main evidence for thermite used in taking down the twin towers were massive pools of molten iron under the complex that stayed hot and liquid for 6 weeks after the attacks.

This is a prime example of why its hard to post here anymore. Well, at least post without making remarks that get you in trouble with the Mods anyway.

The North (actually the SOUTH) Tower shut down....a CLASSIC truther tale, except its not quite reality. The story comes from Scott Forbes who stated this in a letter to John Kaminski...

"On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36hrs from floor 50 up. I am aware of this situation since I work in IT and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brough back up afterwards. The reason given by the WTC for the power down was that cabling in the tower was being upgraded ... Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower. "

www.serendipity.li...

Of course, like all heroes of the truther movement, his story changed....drastically.

In a subsequent interview, his story was different...

"GW: You've previously stated that on the weekend of September 8 and 9, 2001, there was a "power down" condition in world trade center Tower 2, the South Tower, and that this power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approximately 36 hours from floor 50 up. Do you know what time the power-down started?

SF: All systems were shutdown on Saturday morning and the power down condition was in effect from approximately 12 noon on Saturday September 8, 2001.

GW: When did it end?

SF: Approximately 2PM on Sunday 9/9."

So now, instead of being 36 hours, its only 26 hours....but he continues..

"GW: How do you know that there was no electricity from floor 50 up, if Fiduciary Trust was on much higher floors -- starting at the 90th floor?

SF: I can't absolutely verify that there was no power on lower floors ... all I can validate is that we were informed of the power down condition, that we had to take down all systems and then the following day had to bring back up all systems ..."

So much for the entire tower. Now he can only state the power down was from his floor (90) on up.

"GW: You've previously stated that you were aware of the power down since you worked in the IT department and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brought back up afterwards. How many other Fiduciary Trust folks were you working with? Can any of them verify your story?

SF: Many, many people worked on the power down, both from the IT department and from the business, revalidating systems when they were available again. Other people can validate my information. Some people do not remember the circumstances, some people will not revisit that time ... but others acknowledge the power down freely and can validate my information"

To date, no one has backed him up.

So his story went from the South Tower being powered down for 36 hours...to the South Tower having a power down condition from his floors up, for 26 hours.

Further research shows that the Obeservation Deck on the 107th floor of the South Tower was still admitting people at the time the tower was supposedly powered down. I think that MIGHT just be a safety issue dont you think?

Even sites like 911review.com do not buy Mr. Forbes story anymore.

911review.com...

And yet, misinformed people still accept his story........

Then there is the "bomb sniffing dogs were removed", again, another classic, that is not quite true.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, Sirius and Officer Lim were at their Station located in the basement of Tower Two...

www.novareinna.com...

The dogs that were removed, were EXTRA dogs that had been onsite for a couple of weeks because of threats that had been phoned in. The dogs, normally assigned to the WTC, were still there, still doing their jobs on 9/11/01.

Finally, the "molten iron" claim. To date, I have yet to see a metallurgical report that says it was inded molten iron. Molten aluminum is a better bet. Not to mention, thinking that pools of a molten metal is proof of thermite.....shows a lack of knowledge about thermite.

A side note...considering that Bushco had already drawn up plans for the invasion of both Iraq and Afgh. months before 9-11, I certainly think that shows that there is something there the administration saw as valuable.

Side note, the Pentagon has plans on file to invade just about every country on the Earth. Its called being prepared.

[edit on 14-2-2010 by Swampfox46_1999]

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Once you willingly disrupt that kind of congruence you're opening the door to believe the kind of nonsense that distracts you from properly identifying your actual enemy.

Once you have swallowed that kind of coincidence-basket, that so many OSers have, you are indeed not identifying the true enemy. Why not call for a new, unobstructed, independent investigation? Then we can all know who the enemy really is, not this nonsense that stands as the Official Schpeil.

You need actual, tangible evidence that would contradict the "official story" (which doesn't exist) in order to validate a new investigation. And in that case it belongs in a court of law, not "independent investigators". Furthermore, should such a new investigation not confirm your preconceived notions you would be unlikely to accept the findings anyway. If you are unable to identify the correct enemy nine years out and cannot verify your perceived enemy with tangible evidence nine years out then you have problems that far exceed the extent of your alleged conspiracies.

reply to post by Chronogoblin


Thank you, thank you, thank you so much for your reasonable, rational, and civil reply on this thread. It was a pleasure to read something that actually points worth considering and ideas that added to the discussion of the 9-11 attacks.

You are a gentleman and a scholar and here's a star for you!

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Once you willingly disrupt that kind of congruence you're opening the door to believe the kind of nonsense that distracts you from properly identifying your actual enemy.

Once you have swallowed that kind of coincidence-basket, that so many OSers have, you are indeed not identifying the true enemy. Why not call for a new, unobstructed, independent investigation? Then we can all know who the enemy really is, not this nonsense that stands as the Official Schpeil.

You need actual, tangible evidence that would contradict the "official story" (which doesn't exist) in order to validate a new investigation. And in that case it belongs in a court of law, not "independent investigators". Furthermore, should such a new investigation not confirm your preconceived notions you would be unlikely to accept the findings anyway. If you are unable to identify the correct enemy nine years out and cannot verify your perceived enemy with tangible evidence nine years out then you have problems that far exceed the extent of your alleged conspiracies.

You have hit the nail on the proverbial head, my friend. The problem with finding evidence to justify calling for a new investigation now is the same problem that a new investigation would run into: each "crime scene" from the attacks was completely and illegally violated; evidence from the WTC in fact was removed and then sold to buyers outside the country.

Perhaps a more constructive approach would be to actually prosecute those individuals and officials who broke the law by their orders and actions on that day. As those trials progressed, if there was anything that suggested new evidence to consider regarding the events of 9-11, the discovery phase of the trials for crimes that were public knowledge is the most likely place for it to be uncovered.

This is the biggest blow to our nation, in my opinion: acceptance of the open disregard for the standard protocols and investigations that we have historically relied upon to prevent disastrous tragedies like this one and to reveal the truth of the event if they do. If it becomes the norm to allow the administration carte blanche above-the-law status then regardless of which party is in power we will have tyranny.

Originally posted by without_prejudice
Perhaps a more constructive approach would be to actually prosecute those individuals and officials who broke the law by their orders and actions on that day.

And just what "law" are they supposed to have broken?

As those trials progressed,

Except that they would never even get started...

for crimes

What "crimes" are you on about?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

"The official story is the one with the most assumptions" its a nice statement, but it has zero basis in reality.

For the official story (hijacked airliners crashing into buildings, buildings falling down) to have happened, there are far, far, fewer assumptions that have to be made. Provided you are willing to accept the facts. You talk about Kerrey's claim of a 30 year conspiracy. Well, in a sense, he does have a point. It has been pointed out on ATS, numerous times, that since the early 70's our politicians have made numerous decisions that have made it harder for our law enforcement, intelligence and defense agencies to do their jobs. Those decisions were made, not out of malice, but out of a near sighted belief in the need to correct (overcorrect actually) the abuses of power made by the FBI and CIA during the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Or, they were decisions made after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when our politicians were falling all over themselves to cut the defense budget so they could spend the "Peace Dividend".

Those decisions prevented full investigation of the information turned up by "Able Danger", prevented the sharing of information between the CIA who had reports of plots to hijack airliners and the FBI who had information about suspected terrorists learning how to fly, took 75% of our Continental Air Defense away from us.....prevented many things from happening. Those are not assumptions...those are facts. It left us wide open.

Far more assumptions would have to be made in order for ANY of the common conspiracy theories to be responsible. More events would have had to taken place, more people would have had to be involved, more people would have had to keep their mouths shut, it would be far more complicated for it to have been anything but a terrorist attack.

The facts you relate are true. It is quite possible, however, that these same facts could be exploited by agents acting for the Bush administration, rogue intelligence agency personnel, the shadow government, etc, or any of these in combination.

Isn't it odd that Haji Hanjour had the FAA (or someone claiming to be FAA) interceding on his behalf,offering to provide a translator to help him get a commercial pilot's license? Some of the suspected hijackers required state department or intelligence community assistance to have their passports VISAs cleared at the border. I find it strange that our government agencies facilitated their entry into the country. Some of the flight schools they used to train (now closed) have ties to our own CIA as well.

Then we have the Saudi connection. The Saudi royal family and the bin Laden family are close business associates of the Bush family. Their business entanglements amount to a miniature version of the petrodollars float that sustained our nation's economy throughout the last quarter of the 20th century running privately between them. Most of the alleged hijackers were Saudi nationals. A Bush president was installed in the White House. I wonder why GWB or even GHWB couldn't have leveraged some of that many decades-long relationship to get some real and pertinent intel on the hijackers, their handlers, their backers, etc. Instead W and his administration blocked efforts both pre and post 9-11 to investigate the suspects, including Osama bin Laden himself (who actually has not been factually linked to 9-11 except in the msm).

Good points you made, but an even wider view reveals more details that cast suspicions on Bushco again.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


I 100% agree with you regarding "Abel Danger", but I think you and and a few others on ATS, Swampfox would know that the "Right hand" doesn't always know what the "Left Hand" is doing".

So do you really believe it would take really that many people to organize and execute a False Flag like 9/11?

I know it would be quite a few who know and are keeping their mouths shut, but there has already been slips been made and good witness testimony. More will hopefully come in the future.

Remember the Australian Defense Force warned Pearl Harbour about the Japanese Planes on approach hours before the bombing, did they not?, just as there were warnings of a 9/11 style attack and also indications (within the stock market) of a serious attack on the world trade center.

P.S - What is your opinion on Operation Northwoods and the connection to JFK"S assassination? Do you think if he agreed to executing Northwoods and leaving the CIA alone (no restructuring etc..), he would have survived Dallas?

Since 1963, most Presidents know it can be dangerous to not do what they are told

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Skyline666]

reply to post by dereks


Dereks, you are the best thing about this thread. No matter what gets said, you are there like white on rice with your standard list of pointless questions and cherry-picked comments. I am very very disappointed, though, that you didn't call me a truther or a liar in this post. Are you slipping, or what?

But just in case you or some of your gang can't read the long paragraphs: tampering with a crime scene, removing evidence, etc are crimes. Meaning that activities are illegal. i am not going to look up the statutes/regulations for you to quote them chapter and verse for you, so don't ask.

reply to post by without_prejudice

you didn't call me a truther or a liar in this post. Are you slipping, or what?

Loltrutherliar

your standard list of pointless questions and cherry-picked comments

Kind of like truthers? Anyways, debunkers are just asking questions, unless you're hiding the answers, you should be fine. Re-investigate why truthers get angry when you ask them questions imo.

tampering with a crime scene, removing evidence

What did they tamper / remove? Tampering and removing like moving rubble to rescue people who may be trapped? Removing the steel? Are suggesting they shouldn't have moved anything? Just leave a massive pile in the middle of NYC?