The Scientific evidence is in: 9/11 was an inside job

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I'm no fan of the Bush administration, but to say that he pulled off a conspiracy in which he essentially murdered 3000 people just to solidify his grip on power would mean that he's both smart and evil.

Let's face it, folks. He's neither of those things.

I'm gonna go off on a bit of a tangent here, this seems to be very simplistic view of the american administration.

I don't buy into the conspiracy theories regarding 911, but you can't seriously think GWB is really the one in control, do you? His administration is full of people that I believe are way smarter, and way more "evil" than that dumbass is. And why wouldn't it be possible for someone "evil" to be in power in America? Simply because its America? I think there's definitely a few people in that administration/circle who are up to no good. I guess evil doesn't wear a suit and tie?

And if you don't think there are groups of elite/rich powerful people in the west who "conspire" to somehow keep, or further their influence, you're living in a dream world.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Looger

send me a pm with your e-mail, and when i make copies i'll send one to you. i don't have a dvd burner but sometime this weekend i'll make some copies of the videos involved.

if you want to meet at schanks or something with a few people i'll bring my laptop and some videos to show people, does schanks have power outlets?

I'll send you my email address, but only if you plan on showing me some real documentation that shows that the much more likely scenarios that I have brough up have been fully investigated and disproven.

Do you have anything on paper, such as lab results, or do you have any video showing these lab results?
Or do you have a bunch of videos showing guys using small facts, to support their own theory, and completly ignoring what anyone with even a small bit of technical knowledge can see is a much more likey scenario?

if all you have is some "Expert" saying he has proof I don't want to see it. I want to see that experts proof.

[Looger]

EDIT:

steve jones has backup for his research, it's on the links i started the thread with. i've got all kinds of documents etc. plus his powerpoint presentation, for what it's worth.

the best thing to do is follow up his research, be critical of his documentation and his peer reviews and his evidence.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Looger

if there's no structure in the centre of the building, then it would collapse on the side that got hit and burned. that plane went into the corner.

You're not listening....

gravity>>>>>>>>>>>weight (as in proper def of) of building.

The building would accelerate with more force down then laterally. It would take a very even and strong force applied to topple a building of this size.

[Looger]

fine.

i'm not here to say i'm an expert on demolitions.

i'm here to say if anyone wants to see the evidence i have, they are welcome to meet me somewhere or ask me for copies.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Igottago

And if you don't think there are groups of elite/rich powerful people in the west who "conspire" to somehow keep, or further their influence, you're living in a dream world.

Of course, those kinds of conspiracies exist--sometimes the perpetrators get caught, as was the case with Enron. I just don't believe that Bush OR members of his administration would engage in an unnecessarily complex conspiracy when something cheaper and on a smaller scale would have achieved the same goal. I don't believe that they're capable of it--and maybe I'm a starry-eyed optimist, but I don't believe that they WOULD do it if they WERE capable.

On the other hand, members of the Bush administration did cynically manipulate 9/11 after the fact, pretending that there were links between Al-Qaeda and Iraq that didn't actually exist, generating fear amongst the populace when that suited their purpose, etc. As a long term strategy that has backfired somewhat, but it's also a very different kind of conspiracy than what Looger is suggesting.

The kinds of conspiracies you're talking about-where the powerful conspire to stay powerful and the rich conspire to stay rich--I never commented one way or another about them. I'd suggest that they're a fact of life in a late capitalist democracy. But maybe that's too simplistic.

[photon]

The reality is that there has never been anything more than random information thrown out by CTs claiming that the house of cards is evidence. There is no proof, only observations which are completely incorrect, "evidence" that has been refuted, and unanswered questions (an unanswered question is not evidence, it's simply a question that hasn't been answered yet).

If anyone wants to really challenge their belief in the 9/11 conspiracy theories, go here: http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=7 and post your theories. There's a good number of critical thinkers that will help show what's been easily refuted and what still is a valid question.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

If the original post in this thread had capital letters, I might pay it some heed. You know, read it and stuff. It smacks of being lazy as is, or perhaps written by a impressionable youth who simply doesn't know any better.

Either way, not worth the bother.

obviously worth commenting on however.

yep, no doubt, these drive-by posts are total brilliance. astounding really. clearly i am in the presence of a keen mind. against arguments like this, facts wilt and die.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Alright Looger,
I'll ask you one more time since you have followed up on the research.
Have the possibilites I've presented even been addressed in this dude's research.
you're in a much better position to answer this than anyone else.
If the possibilites I mentioned were even brought up then I'll consider looking at the rest of the evidence, but if a supposed expert didn't even think of or mention these posibilites, then I don't want to see is research because it is clearly incomplete.

So did he even mention the possibilties I brought up?

[Frank the Tank]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

So did he even mention the possibilties I brought up?

I think you know the answer to that question BBS.

[Looger]

Bring_Back_Shantz,

you've said it yourself above: me saying 'it's true' isn't going to help you.

i've got some video evidence, and i've given you links for the scientific evidence.

http://www.st911.org/

one of the links i posted is a 44 minute interview with the guy talking aboot his research and its backup.

WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Frank the Tank

I think you know the answer to that question BBS.

wow. this is some stinging commentary.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Looger

Bring_Back_Shantz,

you've said it yourself above: me saying 'it's true' isn't going to help you.

i've got some video evidence, and i've given you links for the scientific evidence.

http://www.st911.org/

one of the links i posted is a 44 minute interview with the guy talking aboot his research and its backup.

WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?

I think he wants you to answer his question, not avoid it.

[Clarkey]

You gotta love the self-proclaimed guru's!

They usually choose some extreme position then make lot's of noise, often involving fear or the potential revelation of secret information. They know that more sensible thoughtful opinions don't attract as much attention. Unfortunately it's true, people buy into this stuff hook line and sinker.

You see these guys in every field, religious guru's, fitness guru's, political guru's, and the conspiracy guru's. And they're all selling something! Whether it's dvds, books, or a seminar these charlatans are often making big bucks off of poor suckers. It sounds like Looger probably spent a couple thousand bucks on this stuff himself.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Buff

I think he wants you to answer his question, not avoid it.

he asked me where's the backup for all this science, and i posted the links.

i bet his mom still cuts his steak-ey.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Looger

Bring_Back_Shantz,

you've said it yourself above: me saying 'it's true' isn't going to help you.

i've got some video evidence, and i've given you links for the scientific evidence.

http://www.st911.org/

one of the links i posted is a 44 minute interview with the guy talking aboot his research and its backup.

WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?

Can you not read????

I want to know.
Does the guy address the possibities that I've brought up for the existance of evidence for a thermide reaction and the "Molten Iron"?
I'll gladly look at the videos if he does. But if the only thing he talks about in the video is what he beleives happens the I don't want to see it because it is incomplete.

It's a yes or no question.
Does he address these posibilites at all, or does he only focus on his own theory?

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Looger

yep, no doubt, these drive-by posts are total brilliance. astounding really. clearly i am in the presence of a keen mind. against arguments like this, facts wilt and die.

Then

Originally Posted by Looger

i bet his mom still cuts his steak-ey.

You know what they say about people who live in glass houses..............

But I see BBS's point. You say you have this 44 minute video. He asks "does it contain "X" information?" He asks that because there is no point in him wasting 44 minutes of his time to find out the video is just stuff that we have heard before.

Many people using (what is in my mind) the same flawed logic doesn't make their arguement more logical.

[Looger]

he mentions that there wasn't anything else on the scene that could account for the sulfur, or the specific chemical signature in the molten material found, or anything else to account for molten metal found weeks after the collapse. in fact the official 9/11 account mentions a mysterious 'sulfidation' of the metal.

this is getting a little silly.

if you won't watch the video, then don't. but this... asking me if i think it will answer your specific questions, well... that's up to you. it's evidence, it's theory, it's an opinion. pay attention to it, or don't.

[Looger]

should i pull a lanny and post his whole document in 90 post windows?

i posted a link to his .doc research paper. in my opening post. open it and search it with a search engine if you want to look for specific information.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

The sulfur is not the point in question.
I want to know if he addresst he possibility of the things I brought up.
Does he or does he not?
These are valid posibilities, and without debunking them his research is incomplete.
Simply saying "I can't think of anything else" is not proof that what you thought of is true.