Psychologists explain why some people can't accept alternate conspiracy theories concerning 9/11.

The average intelligent in America has been properly program from years of propaganda entertainment. Americans were told to not to listen to conspiracy theories, they were told by a very powerful authority, the President of the United States in one of his speeches. Many people believe in authority they are taught to respect authority and not to question authority, we are taught this in most elementary schools.
There is another authority in America and that is Patriotism an absolute belief that my government would never harm its own citizens much less do any False Flag to fool the world that we have an enemy.
What many people do not what to believe is the fact that our government has become very corrupt, thanks to corporate greed. We now have a government that is not accountable for their treasonous actions, the proof was 911.
Anyone who has done a minimal of a week of research into 911 will see all the circumstantial evidence stopped at the Bush administration. The fact is the Bush administration did not want an investigation into 911 and made sure all inquiries were stonewalled. What little information the Bush administration did released turn out to be mostly lies in the end. And yet people still want to believe them, because they are frighten to death that their make believe world may not be what they were taught and perhaps our real enemy lies in our political power structures that runs this country.
Eventually it will be accepted that 911 was a false flag regardless of what the academics want to teach our children. (911 coloring books of the OS)

My husband is such a dick!

reply to post by psikeyhackr

What does the conservation of momentum have to do with architecture? How did 1360 foot buildings come down in less than 18 seconds? That is not architecture or psychology. But people BELIEVING in the physically impossible has something to do with psychology.

Well said. After watching the video where the psychologists were explaining the reasons why one's world view is such a sacred component of psychological stability as well as hearing that phrase 'cognitive dissonance', I realized that these people were saving me the trouble of formulating what I have been wanted to express for so long but didn't know exactly how to begin.

Why can't you build a physical model that can completely collapse.

Yes, I want to see that model too.

reply to post by scoobdude


You forgot to ask if I'm a Truther or a Deniar?

You cannot tell that once you try and shoe-horn a mundane analogy like the Babysitter into this 9.11 deal -- she looks guilty as hell.

I think we are going to have to call "Drop Dead Diva" in for the defense if we want her to stay out of prison.

>> I think it's kind of obvious I'm a "Truther." But I'm pretty dispassionate about 9/11 -- I figure it is not nearly the crime as the Iraq invasion and more people died from the handling of Katrina....

... the MAIN issue I've got with 9/11 -- or even the JFK assassination -- is that as soon as you say; "I don't believe the Government theory..." you are a LOON in the eyes of most people. I can seriously see a glazed look come over people's eyes as soon as you might wander into the discussion -- it's EXACTLY what you see when you start discussing "any" religion with someone who is "born again -- not going to listen to the devil" kind of believer.

I can "discuss" all sorts of things with people who are NOT devout on almost any topic -- at least I used to be able to.

But there is a sort of anti-intellectualism -- a frantic desire NOT to actual discuss certain things.

I don't believe in ghosts, or MOST UFO stories -- but I can speculate about how it might be true, and I can be in a room with someone who believes in either and "discuss" the ideas.

>> But not with CERTAIN things -- I don't necessarily believe the Psychologists rationale for WHY there is a psychosis about 9/11 -- but I do believe there is a psychosis at work. And it effects people even when they are fairly smart and rational about most things.

At some point in the 1930's -- the SMART people got out of Germany. I'm sure if Einstein had sat down with friends, family and neighbors and said; "You know, I don't think the Polish are a threat at all. I think that the economic reparations we had to pay were obscene -- but the way Hitler is blaming everyone but the people who have run our economy is a bit strange. I also have a lot of questions about the Reichstag fire...."

>> About the time you mentioned the Reichstag fire -- you probably got the same reaction as when you bring up "I think perhaps the administration had something to do with 9/11 -- it certainly was convenient..."

IT's illuminating to read a recent revelation that "some" people in the US wanted to destroy England and had plans written up. They wanted to be on the side of the Germans and were GOING to create a situation where the British attacked us.

We are SO DAMN LUCKY that FDR was not George Bush back in the day -- but our luck may have run out.

good one, OP. I'm watching it right now. S&F plus tweeted

Originally posted by Section31
reply to post by Unknown Soldier

 

Regardless about what 9/11 conspiracy theorists say, they already lost the overall argument. Since the official public story is 'on record', without an official effort for an override, the original events we all witnessed on tv and radio will continue to hold truth. We were attacked by terrorists on 9/11. Nothing will officially change that. Thank god.

Good luck on removing the official story from record.

It will never-ever happen.

edit on 9/22/2011 by Section31 because: (no reason given)

Yeah. No doubt Brezhniev also cheered that all the schoolbooks and every article about the 1956 Revolution in Hungary against Soviet rule said "counter-revolution."

That did not stop his brand of power from being overthrown.
Now even their most famous symbol - the red star - is outlawed.

Nothing can stop the truth - sooner or later it will come out.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
In the following video, several highly-educated psychologists explain why some people cling to the official conspiracy theory and won't accept alternate conspiracy theories concerning 9/11:

Very interesting video, thanks for sharing.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
As we've always said, it comes down to denial, ignorance, and/or even trauma.

I think that one or more of the reasons those psychologists spoke of could indeed playing a role for why some people who cling to the official conspiracy theory do not accept the alternate conspiracy theories concerning 9/11, but that cannot count for all in my opinion.
I see the same happening with the ufo-phenomenon were so many people have also different views about the same happenings.
Therefore I believe more and more that there is something else that is playing a major role in this all, something we cannot point out yet.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
People can't accept that lying politicians and corrupt government and military officials could ever possibly do such a thing as to carry out something like 9/11.

I think that most people know or are being aware of that there are lying politicians and corrupt government and military officials, they must know or are being aware of that because many non politicians and government and military officials are doing the same thing.

But despite that all, the million dollar question for me is that if 911 was indeed a so called inside job [as I believe it was], what could be the real reason then for why it was executed the way it was.

It really must be something extraordinary in my opinion.

Originally posted by axslinger
The fact is, insecure people refuse to be "wrong". They want so much to be right they continue to walk around with a chip on their shoulder. They refuse to acknowledge facts that they cannot explain. They are too lazy for research so they get their info from the "News" and pretend they are "knowledgeable". These are the same people who argue for the sake of arguing.

They are also the same sort of people who are happy to go on a conspiracy site, read opinions that somewhat match their own and choose to believe them as 'the truth' and they they are more 'knowledgable'......... I'm guessing you would probably put yourself in that place wouldn't you? But of course, that doesn't make you a sheep for following someones scientifically unfounded opinion, or of course it wouldn't mean you have a chip on your shoulder - would it?

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

Originally posted by Section31
reply to post by smurfy

 

There is nothing to win, there is no prize. Either you believe the propaganda/commission report "lies" and live a lie. Be a happy little sheep. Or you embrace the truth, do the footwork and ask questions... in the process liberating yourself, free your mind from the chains that bind you. That is your born god given right. To be human, to be sane. Don't believe everything you are told, is it that hard to grasp?

911 was an inside job

Or you take the word of unsubstantiated comments on web sites and take them as the gospel truth - does that make you less of a sheep? No. Acutally more so.

reply to post by Mcupobob


Of course there is going to be resistance, einstein, but I was referring more to Building SEVEN, which wasn't hit by any planes. I'll say it again - debunkers like you always avoid talking about Building SEVEN, don't you? Why is that?

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

As we've always said, it comes down to denial, ignorance, and/or even trauma.

Could be. Or it could be the complete lack of evidence to confirm any of the various 911 conspiracy theories.

I'm amazed that these alleged PhDs are resting their opinions on obvious fallacies.

Anyway, if you want to claim 911 was an inside job, fine. Go get the evidence, prove your case in court and we'll all believe you.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

As we've always said, it comes down to denial, ignorance, and/or even trauma.

Could be. Or it could be the complete lack of evidence to confirm any of the various 911 conspiracy theories.

I'm amazed that these alleged PhDs are resting their opinions on obvious fallacies.

Anyway, if you want to claim 911 was an inside job, fine. Go get the evidence, prove your case in court and we'll all believe you.

This is exactly the person these PhDs were speaking of.

Are you comfy in your denial? All snuggly in your fallacious worldview that the government would never do such a thing?

Evidence is in spades right in front of your face.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
This is exactly the person these PhDs were speaking of.

Are you comfy in your denial? All snuggly in your fallacious worldview that the government would never do such a thing?

Evidence is in spades right in front of your face.

Whoops, you are incorrect. I looked at all the evidence cited in each of the various 911 conspiracy theories and found none if it to confirm the alleged conspiracy. I really wanted to believe it but there's nothing there.

So, if rejection of the evidence after careful examination of it constitutes "denial" then so be it. But if you believe the evidence is confirmatory of conspiracy why are you on ATS instead of a courtroom?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
This is exactly the person these PhDs were speaking of.

Are you comfy in your denial? All snuggly in your fallacious worldview that the government would never do such a thing?

Evidence is in spades right in front of your face.

Whoops, you are incorrect. I looked at all the evidence cited in each of the various 911 conspiracy theories and found none if it to confirm the alleged conspiracy. I really wanted to believe it but there's nothing there.

So, if rejection of the evidence after careful examination of it constitutes "denial" then so be it. But if you believe the evidence is confirmatory of conspiracy why are you on ATS instead of a courtroom?

Denial would suggest you respond as you did. Now make sure you post again to get the last word.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Denial would suggest you respond as you did. Now make sure you post again to get the last word.

Ahhh, I see! Never address any points that someone brings up. Just keep yelling "denial!" and you'll never have to face all the shortcomings that come with subscribing to implausible, unproven conspiracy theories.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


I've talked about building seven before in other threads. It was my first on my debunking list in fact. Anyways, beside hashing old stuff I'm just going to ask you this. What would be the point of demoing a empty building? What messaged did that send? Nobody got angry over building 7, cause no lives were lost. Its ignored by the Government and by the people, it was ignored by the firefighters and that why the fire went uncontrolled for 7 hours and brought down the building. There would be no reason to bring building 7 down. What did that possibly gain them?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I'm amazed that these alleged PhDs are resting their opinions on obvious fallacies.

That's because they've seen the evidence and agree that the official theory doesn't hold water to what the evidence corresponds to.

It's only "obvious fallacies" in your opinion. But there are far too many people with PhD's, physicists, scientists, engineers, etc., that would say otherwise.

I'm amazed that there continues to be more and more highly educated and qualified individuals that are coming out against the official theory, then we have a few anonymous internet individuals such as yourself that keep claiming "fallacies" this and "debunked" that. There's obviously something keeping you from seeing the evidence and ultimately the big picture. It's up to you to find out what that "something" is.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I'm amazed that these alleged PhDs are resting their opinions on obvious fallacies.

That's because they've seen the evidence and agree that the official theory doesn't hold water to what the evidence corresponds to.

It's only "obvious fallacies" in your opinion. But there are far too many people with PhD's, physicists, scientists, engineers, etc., that would say otherwise.

I'm amazed that there continues to be more and more highly educated and qualified individuals that are coming out against the official theory, then we have a few anonymous internet individuals such as yourself that keep claiming "fallacies" this and "debunked" that. There's obviously something keeping you from seeing the evidence and ultimately the big picture. It's up to you to find out what that "something" is.

Really? Qualified? Where? AE4911T? I think I count the number of actual "qualified" people on that list, on one hand. People that have some knowledge relevant to 9/11. The rest, are a joke.

Originally posted by Golden Rule
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

What does the conservation of momentum have to do with architecture? How did 1360 foot buildings come down in less than 18 seconds? That is not architecture or psychology. But people BELIEVING in the physically impossible has something to do with psychology.

Well said. After watching the video where the psychologists were explaining the reasons why one's world view is such a sacred component of psychological stability as well as hearing that phrase 'cognitive dissonance', I realized that these people were saving me the trouble of formulating what I have been wanted to express for so long but didn't know exactly how to begin.

Why can't you build a physical model that can completely collapse.

Yes, I want to see that model too.

>> I think what HELPS psychologically prepare people is to "think outside the box" about scenarios. As a Kid, I loved "Mission Impossible" and the more 'realistic' spy thrillers. I'd constantly think about vulnerabilities at a bank, or how I would "deal with" an attack ... these are things we grow out of usually as we get older.

However my wife asked me, when we visited the WTC in about 1998, if they could be destroyed by airplanes. I told her; "If a fire could collapse two or more levels all at once -- the bridge-like construction COULD cause a pancake collapse.

... yeah, seriously -- I've got a good mind for "simulations."

>> However, I was not aware of at the time, that there were so many vertical supports on the levels ... but a pancake is still viable.

>> When I eventually saw the towers fall on a web video stream the day of 9/11 -- my FIRST impression was; "Somebody rigged that for a demolition." My first suspects were either the Mossad or Bush's friends in the military complex who wanted to justify more spending on "defense."

What helped, is that I didn't form my opinion based upon someone TELLING me what to think. I also DIDN'T think it was my pancake collapse theory -- because it was TOO FAST! It didn't look right. A pancake would have a "whoomp, whoomp" and the air would "billow out" as each level overcame the one below. What we saw was a continuous collapse into it's own footprint.

When that top of the North Tower toppled a bit -- it was about a 20 story section -- it was surreal as it "crumbled into dust" in mid-air. I REALLY don't know how air friction or merely falling would cause that.

Also, there was way too much fine dust -- half the building was basically atomized. What was later described as "pyroclastic flows."


Regardless of the "conspiracies" -- I kind of made up my mind until SOMEONE could explain a decent alternative (which I've yet to hear) for what I saw on 9/11. The BEST FIT, is that someone destroyed the "core supports" at the base, then used radio-controlled and sequenced shaped charges -- probably with C4 and a metal plate that can cut through a tank and only be as loud as a firecracker. Other parts of the building MIGHT have had some super Thermate -- because it was OBVIOUS in some videos that MOLTEN STEEL was pouring out. It cannot be Aluminum or Copper or Tin -- because of it's color -- that's basic physics of melting metals.

Those attempts to DEBUNK thermate were likely designed to fail. Mythbusters -- BEFORE they tried to debunk, had an episode where they showed about a pound of thermate eating right through and engine block.

But the "picking and choosing" the worst Conspiracy theories, in order to IGNORE the need for an investigation, is what really irks me. We don't KNOW all the facts before a trial -- we have a trial when we SUSPECT that a crime has been committed and there is a period known as DISCOVERY.

>> Apparently, all the bloggers with no access to anything but other websites, are supposed to PROVE beyond any and all doubts, that Bush did it, and come up with the fingerprints as well -- BEFORE we can see justice.

However, we've got ABSOLUTE PROOF, that the Bush administration lied us into war against a country that was not a threat and committed war crimes. Their Constitutional end-runs and their economic policies designed to bankrupt the citizens of this country constitute treason IMHO.

They used Domestic spying well before 9/11, to go after people in the media and politics who could stand in their way -- if they were TOO BUSY being incompetent and somehow Bin Laden got lucky -- they are likely guilty of involuntary manslaughter and criminal Negligence.

WITHOUT anything proving a theory about 9/11 -- these guys should be investigated and charged -- but that isn't happening. Another STRONG bit of evidence for the involvement of the Bush administration -- is that our justice system is ENTIRELY BROKEN. Only people who want to commit crimes have a reason to make it easy to commit crimes.

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

Originally posted by steveknows

Originally posted by impressme
We cannot have liberty without Truth.
It really amazes me that there are long time ATS members in here who still believe in the OS of 911. From my years of research on 911, people who do not believe in the evidences that 911 was an inside job eventually will when more of the US population begins to accept the fact that the government lied to us and are hiding the Truth. Those that cannot conceive the idea that a small fraction of powerful politicians in the Bush administration and Pentagon officials pulled off the greatest deception in the world, are completely in “denial” or do not want to know the truth, and discussing 911 with them is the same as having a discussion with a role of toilet paper.

"We cannot have liberty without Truth."

So all the propaganda dished out by the allies in both world wars was truth was it? All Germans were nazis? All Japs were of a lesser breed? All white english speeking people would go the same way as the jews?

Your opening statement is flawed so anything else you said is as well. Well it is even without your opening statement.

I do not see the correlation between your examples and Liberty and Truth. Supposedly our country is suppose to be about liberty and justice, justice is suppose to be based on and founded on truth. Not corruption and propaganda. What propaganda used in WW2 , NAM ect does not excuse the 911 lies told to us. You are way off track there. Just sayin.

edit on 23-9-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)

No I'm not. You said you can't have liberty without truth and that is wrong therefor a lame point. The Boston masacre where all these unarmed people were massacred by the English redcoats for example. That was one of the things that led to U.S liberty. Truth is there were a few young scared redcoats faced with an angry mob who had blocks off wood with nails hanging out of them ganging up on these kids who were then forced to open fire to protect themselves. But the propaganda at the time was that people were murdred by these nasty English redcoats for no good reason.

When it comes to getting what it wants liberty will lie just as fast as any other idiology.