11 Most Compelling 9/11 Conspiracy Th...
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#43 Dec 30, 2012
walterfm wrote:
I still like the theory where Dubya and the people who voted for him were idiots, thus leading to the failure to head off the the successful execution of the most brilliant criminal scheme in the history of the world.
It can't be disproven. That's something, right?
Controlled demolition of the three World Trade Center buildings is PROVEN. This completely undermines the official narrative.

Pre-planned demolition is also incompatible with your supposition that Dubya's cognitive shortcomings allowed a foreign adversary to exploit our nation in its "weakened state," if that's what you are suggesting.(By the way, I suspect that Dubya wasn't a complete idiot, since he was able to fulfill quite a few of his policy objectives. What I don't understand is how Obama supporters can overlook the fact that their man has continued, and in many cases expanded, Dubya's destructive policies).
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#44 Dec 30, 2012
Here's a good summary of the Obama administration's perpetuation and expansion of the previous Criminal-in-Chief's policies, presented by director Oliver Stone and historian Peter Kuznick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch... #!

.
coo

Huntsville, AL

#45 Dec 30, 2012
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
Controlled demolition of the three World Trade Center buildings is PROVEN.
).
koo, cookoo, cookoo
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#46 Jan 1, 2013
coo wrote:
<quoted text>
koo, cookoo, cookoo


.

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#47 Jan 2, 2013
walterfm wrote:
I still like the theory where Dubya and the people who voted for him were idiots, thus leading to the failure to head off the the successful execution of the most brilliant criminal scheme in the history of the world.
It can't be disproven. That's something, right?
Ah but President Hussein Obama was and is complicit in this scheme as well...

Including continuing and expanding TSA powers, patriot act and various other big brother agencies...and now looking into getting Obamacare {doctors} to police gun ownership...
El Chingon

Monroe, VA

#48 Jan 2, 2013
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#49 Jan 2, 2013
El Chingon wrote:
Careful! You shouldn't be handling razors if you don't know how to use them properly! Might cut yourself ...(oh, but then again your existence was pretty unlikely to begin with....)
El Chingon

United States

#50 Jan 2, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
Careful! You shouldn't be handling razors if you don't know how to use them properly! Might cut yourself ...(oh, but then again your existence was pretty unlikely to begin with....)
Come again?

“26.2”

Since: Feb 08

Santa Fe, NM

#51 Jan 2, 2013
9/11 Conspiracy Theory Logic:

A horse has four legs. Therefore, everything with four legs is a horse.

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#52 Jan 3, 2013
Lobo Viejo wrote:
9/11 Conspiracy Theory Logic:
A horse has four legs. Therefore, everything with four legs is a horse.
You're a horse? Oh...I get the picture now...cool...
dpb

Center, CO

#53 Jan 3, 2013
At least he's the whole horse -- You, on the other hand, are just the horse's ASS.

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#54 Jan 3, 2013
dpb wrote:
At least he's the whole horse -- You, on the other hand, are just the horse's ASS.
Hmm...

Join me in a game of chess on the Topix thread...text chess thread...
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#55 Jan 3, 2013
Lobo Viejo wrote:
9/11 Conspiracy Theory Logic:
A horse has four legs. Therefore, everything with four legs is a horse.
9/11 Conspiracy Analysis Logic:

- videos show the symmetric, free-fall drop of the roof-line of a massive, structurally redundant steel-framed highrise for over 100 feet, which is the equivalent of eight floors suddenly and symmetrically ceasing to provide any structural support at all. This building, WTC-7, is completely destroyed.(Historical fact: such a structural failure among steel-framed highrises is unprecedented for any reason other than preplanned demolition).

- The FEMA report provides a preliminary metallurgical analysis that details anomalies in steel beams from WTC-7 and the Towers, finding inexplicable and extremely high temperature "corrosion" that reduced the recovered steel beam samples to hole-riddled, thinned debris. The authors of this Appendix urged a followup investigation.

- NIST did no follow-up investigation on the FEMA Appendix C anomalies. They did not examine steel from WTC-7 AT ALL (!!), and they limited their metallurgical analysis to less than 0.5% of the steel from the Towers (!!). The NIST metallurgical analysis, limited as it was, found that almost none of the steel had reached temperatures of 250 C, and NO (!!) steel samples tested showed signs of reaching 600 C. In other words, NIST's metallurgical data doesn't support its conclusions of fire-induced failure.

- NIST did not seriously consider any alternative to the fire-induced failure hypothesis. Debris was not tested for signs of accelerants, including such high-temperature incendiaries as thermite, which is standard protocol when severe destruction is evident in a steel structure.

- Independent scientists HAVE analyzed dust and debris, and they have found abundant evidence of extremely high temperatures, far beyond the range of hydrocarbon fires (from jet fuel and office building contents).

- Independent scientists HAVE ALSO found what appears to be a very sophisticated pyrotechnic material, present in ABUNDANT quantities (TENS OF TONS, conservatively). Chemical analysis indicates that the material is in the thermite family, but grain sizes are so fine, and the co-mingling of particles is so thorough and locked in a durable matrix that researchers were absolutely convinced this pyrotechnic was highly engineered. When ignited, this material produces large, narrow exotherms, sometimes exceeding energetic characteristics published on military grade nano-energetic composites.

- Several of the NIST investigators have extensive knowledge and experience in the field of nano-energetic
pyrotechnics, so this isn't a line of inquiry that simply never occurred to them.

- NISTs WTC-7 computer model looks nothing like the event they are attempting to model, and yet their conclusions are based on this model.

- The discovery of 700+ human bone fragments on the roof of a neighboring building are consistent with explosive demolition of the towers but not with gravity-driven collapse.

- The severity of destruction of the towers is consistent with explosive demolition but not with gravity-driven collapse.

- NIST limited the scope of its investigation of the towers to include only the period between plane impacts and the ONSET of failure, thus sidestepping the need to explain energy and momentum transfer deficits during the actual destruction that rule out gravity-driven collapse.

-[insert many more salient facts here....]

-------

Therefore, our government's investigative agency NIST is peddling false conclusions to support an official narrative while ignoring all the facts that completely undermine that narrative. In effect, they are shielding the perpetrators, making the lead NIST authors accessories to mass murder.
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#56 Jan 3, 2013
El Chingon wrote:
<quoted text>
Come again?
Tell me about Occam's Razor.
El Chingon

Earlysville, VA

#57 Jan 3, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell me about Occam's Razor.
From Wikepedia,

"It {Occam's razor] states that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected."

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#58 Jan 3, 2013
El Chingon wrote:
<quoted text>
From Wikepedia,
"It {Occam's razor] states that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected."
Controversial aspects of the razorOccam's razor is not an embargo against the positing of any kind of entity, or a recommendation of the simplest theory come what may.[c] Occam's razor is used to adjudicate between theories that have already passed "theoretical scrutiny" tests, and which are equally well-supported by the evidence.[e] Furthermore, it may be used to prioritize empirical testing between two equally plausible but unequally testable hypotheses; thereby minimizing costs and wastes while increasing chances of falsification of the simpler-to-test hypothesis.

The other things in question are the evidential support for the theory.[d] Therefore, according to the principle, a simpler but less correct theory should not be preferred over a more complex but more correct one. It is this fact which gives the lie to the common misinterpretation of Occam's razor that "the simplest" one is usually the correct one. For instance, classical physics is simpler than more recent theories; nonetheless it may not be preferred over them, because it produces inaccurate predictions in some circumstances.

Another contentious aspect of the razor is that a theory can become more complex in terms of its structure (or syntax), while its ontology (or semantics) becomes simpler, or vice versa.[f] Quine, in a discussion on definition, referred to these two perspectives as "economy of practical expression" and "economy in grammar and vocabulary", respectively.[64] The theory of relativity is often given as an example of the proliferation of complex words to describe a simple concept.

Galileo Galilei lampooned the misuse of Occam's razor in his Dialogue. The principle is represented in the dialogue by Simplicio. The telling point that Galileo presented ironically was that if you really wanted to start from a small number of entities, you could always consider the letters of the alphabet as the fundamental entities, since you could construct the whole of human knowledge out of them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#59 Jan 3, 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Anti-razorsOccam's razor has met some opposition from people who have considered it too extreme or rash. Walter of Chatton was a contemporary of William of Ockham (12871347) who took exception to Occam's razor and Ockham's use of it. In response he devised his own anti-razor: "If three things are not enough to verify an affirmative proposition about things, a fourth must be added, and so on." Although there have been a number of philosophers who have formulated similar anti-razors since Chatton's time, no one anti-razor has perpetuated in as much notability as Chatton's anti-razor, although this could be the case of the Late Renaissance Italian motto of unknown attribution Se non vero, ben trovato ("Even if it is not true, it is well conceived") when referred to a particularly artful explanation.

Anti-razors have also been created by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (16461716), Immanuel Kant (17241804), and Karl Menger. Leibniz's version took the form of a principle of plenitude, as Arthur Lovejoy has called it, the idea being that God created the most varied and populous of possible worlds. Kant felt a need to moderate the effects of Occam's razor and thus created his own counter-razor: "The variety of beings should not rashly be diminished."[65]

Karl Menger found mathematicians to be too parsimonious with regard to variables so he formulated his Law Against Miserliness which took one of two forms: "Entities must not be reduced to the point of inadequacy" and "It is vain to do with fewer what requires more." See "Ockham's Razor and Chatton's Anti-Razor" (1984) by Armand Maurer. A less serious, but (some might say) even more extremist anti-razor is 'Pataphysics, the "science of imaginary solutions" invented by Alfred Jarry (18731907). Perhaps the ultimate in anti-reductionism, "'Pataphysics seeks no less than to view each event in the universe as completely unique, subject to no laws but its own." Variations on this theme were subsequently explored by the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges in his story/mock-essay Tln, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius. There is also Crabtree's Bludgeon, which takes a cynical view that "[n]o set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated."

Finally, William Shakespeare's Hamlet asserts that "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."[66]
El Chingon

Earlysville, VA

#60 Jan 3, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
9/11 Conspiracy Analysis Logic:
- videos show the symmetric, free-fall drop of the roof-line of a massive, structurally redundant steel-framed highrise for over 100 feet, which is the equivalent of eight floors suddenly and symmetrically ceasing to provide any structural support at all. This building, WTC-7, is completely destroyed.(Historical fact: such a structural failure among steel-framed highrises is unprecedented for any reason other than preplanned demolition).
- The FEMA report provides a preliminary metallurgical analysis that details anomalies in steel beams from WTC-7 and the Towers, finding inexplicable and extremely high temperature "corrosion" that reduced the recovered steel beam samples to hole-riddled, thinned debris. The authors of this Appendix urged a followup investigation.
- NIST did no follow-up investigation on the FEMA Appendix C anomalies. They did not examine steel from WTC-7 AT ALL (!!), and they limited their metallurgical analysis to less than 0.5% of the steel from the Towers (!!). The NIST metallurgical analysis, limited as it was, found that almost none of the steel had reached temperatures of 250 C, and NO (!!) steel samples tested showed signs of reaching 600 C. In other words, NIST's metallurgical data doesn't support its conclusions of fire-induced failure.
- NIST did not seriously consider any alternative to the fire-induced failure hypothesis. Debris was not tested for signs of accelerants, including such high-temperature incendiaries as thermite, which is standard protocol when severe destruction is evident in a steel structure.
- Independent scientists HAVE analyzed dust and debris, and they have found abundant evidence of extremely high temperatures, far beyond the range of hydrocarbon fires (from jet fuel and office building contents).
- Independent scientists HAVE ALSO found what appears to be a very sophisticated pyrotechnic material, present in ABUNDANT quantities (TENS OF TONS, conservatively). Chemical analysis indicates that the material is in the thermite family, but grain sizes are so fine, and the co-mingling of particles is so thorough and locked in a durable matrix that researchers were absolutely convinced this pyrotechnic was highly engineered. When ignited, this material produces large, narrow exotherms, sometimes exceeding energetic characteristics published on military grade nano-energetic composites.
- Several of the NIST investigators have extensive knowledge and experience in the field of nano-energetic
pyrotechnics, so this isn't a line of inquiry that simply never occurred to them.
- NISTs WTC-7 computer model looks nothing like the event they are attempting to model, and yet their conclusions are based on this model.
- The discovery of 700+ human bone fragments on the roof of a neighboring building are consistent with explosive demolition of the towers but not with gravity-driven collapse.
- The severity of destruction of the towers is consistent with explosive demolition but not with gravity-driven collapse.
- NIST limited the scope of its investigation of the towers to include only the period between plane impacts and the ONSET of failure, thus sidestepping the need to explain energy and momentum transfer deficits during the actual destruction that rule out gravity-driven collapse.
-[insert many more salient facts here....]
-------
Therefore, our government's investigative agency NIST is peddling false conclusions to support an official narrative while ignoring all the facts that completely undermine that narrative. In effect, they are shielding the perpetrators, making the lead NIST authors accessories to mass murder.
Deunked at:

http://www.debunking911.com/
El Chingon

Earlysville, VA

#61 Jan 3, 2013
Debunked. Not deunked. ;-)

“Shoot First, Think Never”

Since: Jun 09

Elk Grove

#62 Jan 3, 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

Hanlon's razorFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search Hanlon's Razor is an eponymous adage that reads:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
This particular form is attributed to Robert J. Hanlon. However, earlier utterances that convey the same basic idea are known.

Origins and similar quotationsThe quotation first came from Robert J. Hanlon of Scranton, Pennsylvania, according to his friend Joseph Bigler, as a submission for a book compilation of various jokes related to Murphy's law published in 1980 titled Murphy's Law Book Two, More Reasons Why Things Go Wrong.[1] The name was inspired by Occam's razor.[2]

A similar quotation appears in Robert A. Heinlein's 1941 short story "Logic of Empire" ("You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"); this was noticed in 1996 (five years before Bigler identified the Robert J. Hanlon citation) and first referenced in version 4.0.0 of the Jargon File,[3] with speculation that Hanlon's Razor might be a corruption of "Heinlein's Razor". "Heinlein's Razor" has since been defined as variations on Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice.[4]

Yet another similar epigram ("Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence") has been widely attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte.[5] Another similar quotation appears in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774): "...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less frequent."

A common (and more laconic) British English variation, coined by Sir Bernard Ingham, is the saying "cock-up before conspiracy", deriving from this quotation:

Many journalists have fallen for the conspiracy theory of government. I do assure you that they would produce more accurate work if they adhered to the cock-up theory.
Sir Bernard Ingham[6]

{On this note...I'd have to still agree that there is an authentic 9/11 conspiracy...}

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Albuquerque Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News New Mexico Public Education Secretary Skandera ... 3 hr Dohshla 15
News Gas near $3 a gallon (Jan '11) 3 hr Jilly 114
News City breaks ground on Paseo del Norte landscaping 3 hr Joaquin 9
Academy Estates, Far NE Heights, Albuquerque, NM 3 hr Corky 2
News New Education chief seeks modern solutions 3 hr Rachel 4
Albq Named TOP Car Theft City 3 hr Lorenzo 19
News NM bill outlaws smoking in vehicles with kids (Feb '09) 3 hr Rajalihi 365

Albuquerque Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Albuquerque Mortgages