Conspiracy Files: The Third Tower

Longbow said:
But do you see how your arguement is falling apart, and how video's like "Loose Change" use half truths, and full lies?
Click to expand...

Not really. I use my discretion rather than following one side or the other. I don't believe some of the parts of 'The Conspiracy' as fed to us by the likes of Loose Change, while at the same time I think some parts of 9/11 need some serious looking into.

People talk about evidence. Well, when you're dealing with a conspiracy, the idea is not to get caught, right? So how are you going to get evidence when the conspirators are wiping it out as quickly as its made? All you can do is look at the big picture, see who was involved in what and where, what happened and how, and then start throwing questions in. If you can't get answers to those questions then you really need to ask why.
 
UnusualSuspect said:
Not really. I use my discretion rather than following one side or the other. I don't believe some of the parts of 'The Conspiracy' as fed to us by the likes of Loose Change, while at the same time I think some parts of 9/11 need some serious looking into.

People talk about evidence. Well, when you're dealing with a conspiracy, the idea is not to get caught, right? So how are you going to get evidence when the conspirators are wiping it out as quickly as its made? All you can do is look at the big picture, see who was involved in what and where, what happened and how, and then start throwing questions in. If you can't get answers to those questions then you really need to ask why.
Click to expand...

Gotta love the crap that comes out of some peoples mouths.

:)
 
UnusualSuspect said:
People talk about evidence. Well, when you're dealing with a conspiracy, the idea is not to get caught, right? So how are you going to get evidence when the conspirators are wiping it out as quickly as its made?
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is, because there's NO evidence proving it's an inside job, then it must be an inside job?

Right.
 
badbob said:
Because there is no evidence that god doesn't exist, then he must exist.

Same idea, and people throw rationality out of the window.
Click to expand...

Not the same idea at all. That's a very poor analogy.
WTC can be shown to collapse with science and how it should have behaved. The same can't be said about god.

Unfortunately when you're talking about God, science isn't the tool needed to prove or disprove it.
 
What doesn't help to put conspiracy theories into bed is the fact that US has a long history of inventing and creating bull "es" to start wars (anything from Vietnam igniting Gulf of Tonkin incident that never happened all the way to WMD's in Iraq). Add the fact their press and media is completely dependant on propaganda (anyone remember all US news channels getting all excited and extatic with civilian zones of Baghdad lighting up like fireworks in the background?) and you'll end up with Van Daeniken readers doing the only investigative work on the subject.
 
Part of the reason behind people saying how the 'Towers couldn't have collapsed in that way', is because nothing like this has ever happened before.

No-one can have a clue towards how the towers 'should have' collapsed because what is there to compare it with? How people cannot see a plane flying into a building and the building collapsing is ludicrous. It's PHYSICS. Fact is Commercial Airliners are far more effective weapons than any missile and of course a building like the Trade Centre would collapse because at the end of the day, like any other skyscraper, its fragile.

Skyscrapers aren't built to be strong, they're built to be flexible, to sway in the wind as it were. With any buidling that tall, its designed to move up to a metre or more across at the top. They're actually pretty weak and slamming a plane into the side would easily result in what everyone saw on 9/11.
 
Why do people go out their way to castigate and vilify conspiracy theorists? If they want to believe that the government/cia etc murdered those people then let them.

If someone is set upon one agenda then nothing you can say will change their mind. In any set of proofs - there has to be conditions which would prove it false. If you admit of no conditions that would do so then the whole argument is redundant.

No one here has a valid opinion to be honest. None of us were there first-hand. 2nd hand sourced knowledge has a habit of being corrupted. (ie read into that that people use 2nd hand knowledge to support their own agenda)
 
There can be no doubt over the main towers.

The only doubt I can see would be over the third.

Still, 3000 people didnt die in the third, so even if it was demolished on purpose (which is unlikely) then I dont care.
 
Surfer said:
Why do people go out their way to castigate and vilify conspiracy theorists? If they want to believe that the government/cia etc murdered those people then let them.
Click to expand...
That would be fine, but that's not what happens.
They spread lies and convert other people, who haven't read all the fatcs and just assume what they read is correct.
 
Flapstick said:
The only doubt I can see would be over the third.
Click to expand...
Even though it had huge fires an entire corner missing and otehr photos with massive damage coursed by the collapse

Surfer said:
No one here has a valid opinion to be honest. None of us were there first-hand. 2nd hand sourced knowledge has a habit of being corrupted. (ie read into that that people use 2nd hand knowledge to support their own agenda)
Click to expand...

We can look at photos that aren't faked and ridicule CTs on pretty much everything due to just that.
Physics can then prove that the towers could and did collapse how they should have.
 
You cant save people from themselves. You can encourage them to learn for themselves but you cant force them.
(Religion does this as well..whole different ball game though)


We can look at photos that aren't faked and ridicule CTs on pretty much everything due to just that.
Physics can then prove that the towers could and did collapse how they should have.
Click to expand...

How do you know they aren't fake? Do you mean they are photos from credible 1st hand sources? Then yep i agree. At some level you have to take something on faith. We have to take it on faith or trust that the photos havent been chopped :)

"Physics can then prove...how the towers did and should have collapsed" < You dont see anything wrong with that statement?

Since when does a theory dictate what happens in reality? Isnt it usually the other way around? Continuous observation of phenomena leads to basic principles and theories being built up to describe how things behave/happen.

But this never precludes the possibility events actually happening differently from how they should. Events can always happen differently...especially unique "one-of-a-kind" events that have never happened before.

But in saying all that :D...the simplest explanation is usually the one to go for (towers collapse due to known generally accepted factors)

The evidence to the contrary has to be absolutely overwhelming and only then would another hypothesis be seriously considered (and not just be CT sensationalist fodder)
 
Last edited:
UnusualSuspect said:
People talk about evidence. Well, when you're dealing with a conspiracy, the idea is not to get caught, right? So how are you going to get evidence when the conspirators are wiping it out as quickly as its made? All you can do is look at the big picture, see who was involved in what and where, what happened and how, and then start throwing questions in. If you can't get answers to those questions then you really need to ask why.
Click to expand...
I don't refute what you're saying, it is still possible that all of this is an elaborately covered-up conspiracy, with all the evidence showing it to be a terrorist attack having been fabricated. That means nothing - the world might be run by hyper-intelligent 8-eyed lizards living in the Andes: just because there's no evidence to support it doesn't mean it's not POSSIBLE!

The issue I have with your argumentation of your views is that, in your enthusiasm, you're skipping over logical steps of the argument. You've been offered conclusive scientific evidence to explain the way the towers collapsed, and you refused to acknowledge it. You've had your "rivers of molten metal" bit of sensationalist journalism refuted and you skipped it over and started talking about all the other coincidences that make you doubt the official story. You've had pictures of the Pentagon debris posted and you refused to even SEE them!

All the supposedly inexplicable things about 911 can be explained, every part of the official story can be backed up by solid evidence. There is not a single piece of evidence to support your theory that it's a conspiracy - every single piece of speculation you have posted has been debunked.

EVEN SO, your theory is still POSSIBLE, I'm not denying it! But surely, when the official story fits the evidence 100%, it's up to YOU to dig up evidence in favour of the conspiracy theory, not to insult people for point out the obvious to you!

The basic problem with this thread is not that one side is wrong and one side is right, but that one side is completely ignorant of all the rules of logic, debate and deductive reasoning. You rely solely on your own conviction and then flame anyone who SHOWS you evidence that your beliefs are unsupported by facts or science.
 
Surfer said:
Since when does a theory dictate what happens in reality? Isnt it usually the other way around? Continuous observation of phenomena leads to basic principles and theories being built up to describe how things behave/happen.
Click to expand...

Actually it's pretty common for the theory to come first. Someone will have an idea/theory based on either logical thought or one observation, they then use that theory to make predictions about something else and then you see if that prediction is correct. If it is correct you make more predictions and carry on and on and on.

Surfer said:
But this never precludes the possibility events actually happening differently from how they should. Events can always happen differently...especially unique "one-of-a-kind" events that have never happened before.
Click to expand...

You're right in that just because you have a theory about something it doesn't mean that the opposite can't happen. But if this does happen then your theory ceases to be a theory and becomes an incorrect idea that you had or possible an incomplete theory that needs further work.
 
Surfer said:
Why do people go out their way to castigate and vilify conspiracy theorists? If they want to believe that the government/cia etc murdered those people then let them.
Click to expand...

Because it's dangerous to let stupidity go unchallenged. A better example of why this is are the conspiracy theorists that go around saying that the holocaust was made up and a big Jewish scam to help them achieve world domination. Do you think these people should just be allowed to go unchallenged spreading their propaganda?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom