Hey Matt, the 3rd building was NOT hit by a plane. So if that is the reason that the other buildings came down the way they did "in your opinion", then how do you explain the the 3rd building coming down? I think there is a flaw in your reasoning. I am not a Truther so to speak but a realist. I don't believe the lies in the media in the same way I don't believe the lies in the bible. I usually respect what you have to say but I find you a little over zealous and bossy.
You want to know what is not logical? Its not Logical to compare what happened on Sept 11th to ANY OTHER EVENT!!. What happened to these buildings was entirely unique to the day. You cannot cross reference this to XYZ building and say..."Well it burned all day and never collapsed".. No other buildings have had the amount and kind of structural damage these buildings received.
There IS NO straight across comparison to ANY other situation. 911 was UNIQUE. It shares no precedent.
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
@TexasBlaineSaw ESB has a different structure than the WTC. Go into the ESB and you will see that the walls are made of brick, its structural fortification is on the insides, unlike the WTC outer support and the level of damage was not similar to that of the WTC
@TexasBlaineSaw to clarify, the Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber, not a B-2. And just add a little critical thinking, the differences between the 2 incidents are so great, that the only similarity is that a plane struck a building. Thats where it stops.
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
And this guy calls himself rational? lol He's not much better than Creationists who have a preconceived idea without real evidence. A lot of the reason he believes it is because he WANTS to believe it and he doesn't know how to evaluate the facts and situation properly. He needs to learn much more about real science and how it works. These guys are more annoying than the Ron Paul zealots.
well, as much as i think this guys are funny and like to see religious nonsense idiots getting shut down, i think this guys are a little bit close minded, but still this dude calling is not really smart
sorry, nice try guys but buildings do NOT collapse symmetrically at virtual freefall speed via fire. This only has occurred as a result of controlled demolition. Still no one has provided an example from history or from experiment that demonstrates this. Controlled demolition is the only rational explanation, period! Not to mention all the whistleblowers and eyewitness testimony who refute your official government position. You guys, like Shermer, are skeptical of the WRONG things.
@dwheel39 I don't agree with the government position, but the scientist who came up with an explanation of how the buildings fell as you propose would be pretty famous right now because it would of been proven soundly through scientific methods it would be published in all science journals, and would undoubtedly make all the front pages, because this big conspiracy had been unearthed.
@KingPiccolo001 Well, i'm glad you don't agree with the government story as they have lied about almost everything in recent history :)
As far as the other stuff, on youtube check out : The War on Whistelblowers: Sibel Edmonds. It's not related to the building demolition specifically but you will get a good idea of how difficult it is to expose the truth and get a real investigation. Check it out and let me know what you think.
@KingPiccolo001 (cont) And as far as these guys here in this vid, i suspect they are just parroting what they heard from Shermer or guys like him. If anyone REALLY looks into the evidence and reads the books, not through Popular Mechanics, they will see 100% the government let this happen, purposely, in order to go to war with Iraq. As far as their level of involvement, well, we need a new, independent investigation, NOT one by the government like the last one.
@dwheel39 I would agree with having as many investigations as needed, however if someone would've uncovered a conspiracy like the fact that the buildings could've fall I'm sure it would be front page news. Also what I don't hear a lot in these theories is how the impact of the plane going into the building could have affected the building itself before the whole fire, plane or missile (as some would suggest) I've yet to hear any ideas regarding the collision.
@KingPiccolo001 It would be front page news, however guess who owns the media and has control? Many of the very suspects of the 9/11 event! As far as the buildings, think about this, why do they never show WTC building 7 on the news? When 9/11 truth advocates are interviewed, they aren't allowed to show footage of building 7. If it was just fire damage (which is absurd) then why are they hiding everything? That's the biggest clue that they are lying..they hide and destroy evidence.
@dwheel39 Regardless of the misunderstanding of a previous point I have seen the Northwoods file but there is no real evidence to suggest an operation has been carried out similar to this, you also mention the plan to attack Iraq prior, and that whistleblowers have come out from the Agencies since, but you haven't provided any evidence for these two claims. There are a few unresolved points but these two I would like cleared up somewhat.
@KingPiccolo001 Well i was just sharing information that i thought would be helpful. I'm not trying to debate here. As far as whistleblowers, just google and you will find. I've heard many speak on radio shows myself. I wanted you to see the Northwoods file because it proves that this is how our government thinks. Would our government really attack American people in order to go to war? Well the Northwoods PROVES that yes, of course they would..it's not even up for debate.
@dwheel39 I'm not disputing the thought process and the radio is just useless rhetoric when it comes to Politics. Facts and evidence would be the better route than assumptions based on Cold war documents, I'm not denying a 9/11 cover up is possible but from what I've heard and seen at the moment it's not convincing.
@KingPiccolo001 I sent you another link with tons of information. Please weigh out what these kind of guys say (Dillahunty and Glasser here) and then read the answers and evidence that debunks the "debunkers". And keep in mind, the thrust of the 9/11 truth movement is to get a new investigation. The alternate speculations are just that, speculations but they are MUCH more plausible than most of the government B.S.
I don't understand 911 truthers: why all the wild theories, quote mining and anomaly hunting? If terrorists could do it -- like the government claims -- without any inside help, it's even more likely they could do it with inside help. Just some untraceable interference here and there to give those zealots the opportunity. Here you go, a much more believable story, you are welcome.
@ClumsyRoot I can agree with that also. I never disagree with logic but wouldnt you agree that we saw the towers collapse and we didnt see anybody or anything created the earth 6,000 years ago. We got it on tape to be analyzed over and over again. Can you say that about the creation of earth 6,000 yrs ago?
The majority of Matt & Russell's argument is the peer review process; NIST released its final report on the collapse of 7 World Trade Center on on Nov. 20, 2008. The report concluded that the building's collapse was due to the effects of the fires which burned for almost seven hours.
The issues are: 1) steel beams do NOT break, they bend 2) Fires have never brought down "High Rise" buildings before. 3) The NIST report doesn't explain about HOW the steel frame building FELL at free-fall speed.
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
There is no science to debunk the molten iron. That's why NIST never looked into it or they never looked into explosive evidence as they weren't looking for. To cause building 7 to come straight down you have to cut all 24 support columns within a fraction of a second of eachother as fire collapse would have made it fall asymmetrically. The fires and explosions even started before building 1 and 2 collapsed evidence from the only 2 men to get out of the building.
LOL this guy has been so brainwashed by morons like "Richard Gage" "Alex Jones" and the idiots who create videos like "Loose Change" theirs no hope for this guy.
I'm amazed by the 2 camps that have set up around 9/11. 1) it was a conspiracy by the bush administration to get us into war 2) it was terrorist so all the wars were justified. Ok, think outside the box a bit. It's entirely possible that the 2 wars that were started were totally unjustifiable and unreasonable given the actions of a small number of radicalized religious extremists. Why does it have to be bush who did it for those wars to be wrong?
@Mo09ful find it your self. Thats your problem, you're to fucking lazy to do anything for your self.you expect everything to be put at your feet. Do something for yourself for once, if you REALLY wanna know the truth turn off your fucking TV and read a little.
@krypekeeper see this is the common bullshit that spews threw the mouth of you idiotic truthers. you have no link therefore no proof so in order to get yourself out of the corner ive put you in you begin to insult me. yet again proving to me and any1 with half a brain, your an idiot.
@Mo09ful LOL actually I had the link copied and ready to post here, but it was to long. then I thought fuck you, you can find it in 2 fucking minutes. Not my vault your a brain dead sheep who cant think, or apparently use a search engine on your own. You're fucking pathetic.you live in this fantasy world where if its not on fox news then its not true. WAKE THE FUCK UP!
@krypekeeper wow more bullshit, the link was too big for the comment, are you stupid? you are aloud 500 characters in one comment what webpage has more than 500 words, oh btw i hate fox news ill agree with you on that one, fox is filled with lies, but not as much as your conspiracy theory.
@SmokiSounds im not a sheep, i dont live in a fantasy world like you, in fact i hate the government mainly because of the economy, but im not stupid and thats what you are STUPID, to actually believe the government did 9/11. brainless idiot who will achieve nothing in life except for a jail sentence.
@Mo09ful If you actually knew ANYTHING you would see this isnnt even the first time they have done something like this. Its a false flag attack to get us into war fro profit
@krypekeeper and what profit have we attained numbnuts, we are in the worst economic state since the depression. if you new ANYTHING you would realise we are in a war for the security of our country.
The problem with leaving peer review as a barrier to plausibility of science ignores the fact that this is an emotionally and politically charged issue where a presupposed bias could easily cause a group of "skeptics" to keep something out simply based on political and not scientific suppositions. IE: "We believe the official story, it's already been explained, there's no reason for you to write this". I think after awareness of issues has been raised, a peer review process will follow.
@TheJavecantrell well thats true in some cases, but the point of peer review is to be judged by a lot of people who have a lot of different emotional and political ideas. So if you are rejected by someone who is being close-minded and bias, there is always the next scientific magazine around the corner waiting for your idea submission! In the end, the facts will come forward, even if it takes some time. That's the "magic" of science!
The only reason so many atheists ignore 9/11 truthers is because they like to use Muslim extremism to back their claims that religion is wrong. I am an atheist, but I don't give a shit if people are religious, this is because I don't blame religion for war, I blame power/money hungry leaders for it, who have often, throughout history, used religion as a way to start wars. I wish people like these guys, who claim to want the truth, would apply that to more than just religion.
@tool2342 that may be partially true that atheists see the fact that 9/11 shows the danger of religion in a dramatic fashion but most ignore 9/11 conspiracies because atheists tend to think more logically and examine evidence and they know that a government coverup of 9/11 is obviously logically impossible and that the evidence for it is non-existant. The government is terrible at covering things up (wikilinks) even when they are irrelevent to think they could coverup 9/11 is pure insanity
if its a conspiracy no DIPSHIT they're not gonna let the scientists who think it was a conspiracya nd have 'proof' go through with it. wooow ven i get that! :S
@sungate153 Also its hilarious conspiracy whackjobs often all those who doubt them uninformed when in reality the more educated someone is and the more research one does on such issues the less likely one is to believe in crazy anti-semetic conspiracies. Its obvious that you are are much too deep in your feces to listen to reason hence why scientifically literate debunkings like the amazing one popular mechanics did don't phase your thinking
@sungate153 While this may seem unlikely many such unlikely events that have actually happened. You would say that jumping out of a plane and surviving is ridiculous if it happened in a Hollywood movie but such things have actually happened. Whats more is even this is far more likely then a government coverup on the magnitude of 9/11. Such a conspiracy would require thousands yet not one got drunk and exposed the plot. The more people required for a conspiracy the less likely that it is true.
@Jimboman300 You exposed me though. You see Im really behind the secret zionist martian conspiracy to fake the moon landing, kill 3000 Americans on 9/11 in order to steal all the oil and make you my personal slave whahahahahahhahahahah. You will never expose us we are all knowing and all powerful. We also steared Hurricane Katrina into New Orleans with our hurricane machine, bumbed off JFK when he found out about our plot and we can do the same to all youtube commentators who know too much
I was actually part of the team which generated Hurricane Katrina, using a mixture of alien technology from Area 51 and some secret Illuminati weather recipes. Elvis Presley was my coworker on that project - he's a real character, that one. BTW, we didn't stear it - just created it. Katrina's navigation and movement was done by the Queen of England, using her prehensile lizard tale.
@sungate153 Id say Watergate refutes every conspiracy threoy. The government couldn't even cover up breaking into a couple offices successfully to think they could cover up something as massive as 9/11 or the moon landing is nothing but pure maddness. Though 9/11 was a conspiracy. Muslims motivated by there God conspired to kill thousands with suicide attacks. Thats already one hell of a conpiracy and it actually has evidence to back it up
@sungate153 It was never discredited. Fact is 9/11 Conspiracy wackjobs are simply motivated by hatred of America and Jews. Every single claim was fantastically debunked case closed. The only criminals on the loose are the MUSLIMS who continue to kill on a daily basis. Want to know how I know the US government wasn't behind 9/11. Cause it worked. The government are incompetant clowns to cover up something on that magnitude requires ridiculous impossible efficiency.
@Jimboman300 You sound just like a religious person who says: "Atheist wackjobs are simply motivated by hatred of God and Jesus. Evolution has been debunked,case closed. These heathens are continuing to sin on a daily basis. Want to know how I know God created the world. Cause it's here. The world couldn't make itself, something of this magnitude requires an intelligent designer."
I don't know who is responsible for 9/11. But I look for the truth, this mentality caused me to become an atheist.
@tool2342 Wrong. Ive studied 9/11 Conspiracies and every claim they made. All are easily debunked with even the slightest research. Some are debunked so easily its actually hilarious. On the other hand the motive and evidence for Al Qaeda's desire to kill is overwhelming. Al Qaeda admitted responsibilty and had it not been for idiotic information restrictions passed by the Clinton administration the plot could have easily been peiced together and then stopped before it happened.
@Jimboman300 OK. I'm not callingh you a liar. I would really like to know the truth. i haven't studied, so don't know the facts. But there are things that confuses me about the whole thing, which make me question the official story. One is building 7 - how come that came down? There are a lot of other things, but that just sprung to mind. Do you know? I would love to know all the facts, I really would, It sickens me to think it could have been the government.
@tool2342 World Trade Center 7 was consumed in fire for several hours as a result of having two massive towers fall on top of it. It got little media attention because nobody died there and it was reletively insignifigant compared to the rest of the days events. It surprises me little you say you haven't studied anything but you have the nerve to step on the memories of the millions who die in Islamic attrocities by trying to absolve them of the blame. Your nothing but a butboy for theocracy
@Jimboman300 It's "'You're' nothing but a butboy", not "'Your' nothing but a butboy" - as in 'you are'. And I'm female. Again you sound like a theist when you criticise me for asking questions, saying things like "you have the nerve to step on the memories of the millions". We are allowed to question historical events, and 'official' stories, if we didn't we all still think the earth was flat! I have never denied it was atrocious! Just wanted to know the truth, which is not a crime.
@tool2342 I don't attack you for asking questions. I attack you for making ignorant statements that are completely backed up by nothing concerning the deaths of 2,976 Americans I had questions about 9/11 as well but I researched them and found alternative explains for 9/11 completely without merit. All are based on misunderstanding of facts with alot of hatred of Jews and America mixed in.
@Jimboman300 What 'ignorant statement' have I actually made?!! I haven't made any statements about it! Look back on what I have written! You are the ignorant one shooting anyone down whose opinions might conflict with your own. Shut up and grow up! Trying to insult and make stupid arguments with someone who was admitting they didn't know the facts, and looked to you for answers!
@sungate153 Except that popular mechanics debunked every claim 9/11 conspiracy wackjobs have put out. And even if they haven't its not enough to find a percieved inconsitancy in the official account you have to find your own coherent threoy of events. 9/11 conspiracy nuts haven't done that and they are constantly changing there stories (look at all the different versions of Loose Change). There is no coherent peer reviewed alternative to the official account. Theres also no evidence at all
Those planes crashed into the towers at about 567 mph. The resulting fires generated about four times the heat of a nuclear power plant for an hour, in buildings who's creators had skimped on fire proofing. Why is it so damn hard to believe that this was enough to make those towers collapse?
@orion1 they're not high levels at all, the levels are miniscule in reality, not in the propaganda the anti vaccine movement feeds you. and no actual studies show that the levels are harmful, and it's not the mercury that's in your thermometer. but whatever, i know it's useless to bring facts to the table. i know science based medicine is nothing against hype and conspiracy theories for someone who has the mindset to buy into them. i don't trust my government by the way.
lol. i can totally see they completely bullshit everything that is related to "conspiracy theories" or "zeitgeist" without even trying to dig into it too much. at 8:12 the caller was actually right that matt was doing the same, yet he forcibly insisted in not even thinking about it and shoved the poor guy off air.
The peer review process must be perfect and unbias according to these guys.
The peer review process is led by people. People make mistakes and are not perfect. So of course there are mistakes. Peer review is also succeptible to deceit and lies, just like anything else that involves humans.
I wish I had their kind of faith in science to be always correct.
@jbourg333 "The peer review process" they don't think it's perfect, I've seen them talk about it before. Here's the deal. no, it's not perfect. yes, there have been frauds in peer review papers (for example, Dr Wakefields fraudulent paper that vaccine conspiracy theorists use as "evidence" of a connection to autism in the MMR vaccine). Do you know who ends up uncovering frauds in the peer review process? PEERS, DUE TO THE PROCESS. if you don't submit, you don't take part in the process.
being a controllfreak is a powerFAIL in itself.....being a powerFAILED controllfreak on youtube is just funny!!....im an atheist my self, but watching this n00b pressing the button to shut up a guy who wants to speak is just pathetic!!!...ask yourself one question!!...: why did they let him on the air when it is clear that they dont want him to speak!!???
i guess you believe that a bunch of alcoholridden muslims in a plot brought to life by a ->
@xcoroner <-old man 100% linked to medical surveilance due to his dialysis planned a attack that pierced through the most powerful/secure airsecurity in the world,not one time,but 4 times in a couple of hours in the same day with boxcutters, and then the biggest most strategic military power in the world failed 4 times on the same day, followed by 3 steel structures all of whom fell into theire own footprints because of fires?? be real!! do you still believe in santa claus??
@undernorm You admit that your entire argument is a fallacy. You're arguing numbers and authority, not facts. Phlogiston and poppycock.
I'd disagree that it was meticulously researched as well. You don't see valid collapse mechanics discussed -anywhere- in the official reports. Meticulous research is generally done by the minority of people. It certainly was -not- done by NIST, whose findings are demonstrably flawed and fraudulent.
@OneVoiceMore So you've read all 10,000 pages of the NIST report, and are qualified to determine whether it's credible or not? Are you a structural engineer, or are you just regurgitating what you hear from loose change and alex jones? Not trying to be facetious, i really want to know.
@undernorm Your question is also a fallacy. What was in the NIST report largely requires no engineering degree, as almost none of the FIRST report is about the collapse. I've read both in their entirety. Have you?
Your AJ / LC straw man has no traction with me. You want to discuss the aspects of the report I question? Or are you just in 'destwoy de twoofer' mode?
We can start with the initial fraudulent claim of '40% of free fall' in the WTC7 report, which had to be amended to admit free fall.
Watch the WAY they fall tho...Why does a plane crash in the upper 1/4 of the buildinngs cause a colapse of the lower floors in a manner identical to explosive demolitions?
@whiteowl1415 Hmm, i believe the actual number was around 1600. Let's do a little math here...there are over 1.5 million employed engineers in the united states alone, 1600 don't believe the official story, so that comes out to roughly .001 percent. It appears my estimation may have been a little too generous.
@whiteowl1415 The collapse of the world trade center towers is the most meticulously researched structural failure in human history. And out of the 1.5 million experts, your movement could only get 1600 behind your theory? And how many of them are actually qualified to make such assertions? I really don't like to argue too much about this, because essentially it's an appeal to authority fallacy, but if you want to play that game, i've got you beat by about 1,498,400.
lol....K you're going to try and tell me that EVERY menber of those groups backked up the groups offical line.
Im not saying conspiracy...I'm just saying it dosn't look right.
Think about Pearl Harbor and how it was 50 YEars + before the government came clean about knowing there had been Subs in the area, and having got intel of an inpending attack.
As citizens, it is our DUTY to question our government.
@whiteowl1415 Those numbers should at least make you realize how small of a number 1600 is here. And I completely agree about questioning our government. I'm ALWAYS suspicious. In fact, there was a brief time when I hopped on the truther bandwagon. But the "truth" is that there isn't any good evidence supporting a controlled demo theory. The idea that they had advanced knowledge of the attacks is a bit more rational, and i wouldnt be surprised if that was revealed someday.
@undernorm It's been revealed, just to update you. Able Danger, FBI Chicago, Sibel Edmonds, and dozens of other whistleblowers have come forward, and have been variously gagged and punished.
9/11 was at the very least a LIHOP operation, but suspecting active involvement by US elements is more than reasonable.
Acknowledging that the attacks were CONTROLLED makes CD a moot point. Who -did- it is more important than how, yes?
Doesn't peer review involve a handful of people? There are around 1600 architects and engineering professionals who have signed a petition demanding congress to do an independent investigation. If they all learned the same thing in college then why would they have a difference in thought? It's like saying there's 10 mechanics and 2 of them argue with the other 8 saying that they don't know how cars operate. It makes no sense. Who ever they chose to peer review got bribed
While I do agree with Matt that proper peer-reviewing is essential to science, the caller still has a point in that if a scientist is backed up by another 99 scientists who agrees with the first scientist, then that is a form of peer-reviewing. The caller should've stated it like that. Of course, it cannot compare to proper peer-reviewing, but it is certainly more valid than a scientist who is not backed by any other scientists.
I don't think there was an actual conspiracy to bring down the towers after being hit by planes (quite the opposite: the planes themselves were sufficient to bring down the towers), but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a conspiracy by the Bush administration to use the attack as a front to push the patriot act through and start two costly wars and attempt to start a third one with Iran. Do I have proof of that? No, but it is a much more likely conspiracy theory than all the others.
Who were these people that were peer reviewed and by what peers were their papers being reviewed? That is what I would have asked. These men are always very intellectually dishonest and are in love with their obtuse cadence of thought. Science is not an entity unto itself,no more than logic is a material. Science has not been the most reliable. The only thing reliable is uniformed scientific laws that are proven and in place right now. Which are our
I congratulate that Atheist caller. I no longer think that all Atheists are condemned to a learning disability that causes them to think that nature and science changes in its principles and composite; just so to suit their inability to match physics and chemistry and metallurgy to measure the known against 9/11. I thought that the Atheists on this show were the great free will thinkers.
Laws of Thermodynamics, inertia, quantum physics none of ours aligns with the official 9/11 story.
"I don't know nothing 'bout no science, but I do know one thing: co2 emissions ain't causing no global warming/people don't just done evolved from apes/them towers didn't done collapse cuz a no fires. Science backs me up! Too bad I don't done know nothing 'bout no science..."
Read the NIST Report, Read the FEMA Report, Read 9/11 commission report..
The Atheist purveyors of knowledge who give you a diligent casting of aspersion are the same one's who don't bother to support their argument by reading anything that could ruin their sophomoric ideals ever. Even the New York fire commission at findings showed what I researched, temps up to 2 weeks after the collapse were at 2,800 to 3,500 degrees. Kerosene doesn't
A plane made of mostly aluminum impacted in such a way to ruin the integrity of the buildings , as jet fuel burns consisting of 90 percent kerosene, causing spandrels, tresses, ad joints that were connected to 47pieces of inner steel tubing with about 247 pieces of 3-5 in. steel columns that aligned the outside of each building. Fire at the point of impact at its highest never reached over 1800*, after collapse temperatures were read about 2800 degrees. Fire, Kerosene, aluminum didn't do that.
Other buildings have been on fire and not fallen do to the simple fact that there wasn't A FUCKING JET FLOWN INTO THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And by the way tall buildings HAVE fallen due to FIRE!!!!!!!!!
Haha, too bad he didn't touch on Matt's analogy of the guy who jumped off the plane. I thought it was hilarious when he then went over his crazy conspiracy theory again in which all you had to do was exchange the word "tower" with guy out of a plane" and "collapse" with "die." xD
Why is it that, when it comes to the dogmatic ideologies of religion, you guys are able to see through all that and use your logic, along with research to come to the conclusion that the existence of an intervening personal God is highly improbable. But when it comes to 9-11, you're all about the dogma, you don't want to look into it at all, and you even ridicule the messenger. Open your eyes and do some research. Start here: ae911truth . org
God is a spirit, an immaterial conscious being. All things in the universe consists of matter and/or energy, so if God isn't matter, is energy by definition. Energy is the capacity to do work, is eternal, omnipresent, wasn't created and can't be destroyed, can create matter, was the only thing present before the BB, and the energy required to make the universe must had been powerful. All these match Biblical descriptions of God. He wants us to elevate our consciousness to the next level, is real
You see, normally I am in agreement with you guys and appreciate your logic in response to various Christian believers but I found your reasoning on the 9/11 issue to be quite irritating.
You base your beliefs (or lack thereof) on pure and simple logic. Is it not logical to you that those buildings came down in a professional and well planned demolition?
And maybe you should do some research.... seeing as you're so interested in facts.... 3 buildings fell into their own footprint on that day, 3!
@LeftWingPOG Agreed Leftwing, I also believe in my heart that it was a very well planned take down by the bush administration.
The issue is that these guys are talking about cold, hard facts. Just saying you know in your heart isn't good enough for them..... you have to be able to back it up with some semblance of logic/reality.
It is sad to hear such (usually) rational and reasonable people discount and pick apart a truther - the irony is abound!
@Carpediem0303 Even though I think Bush is as dumb as nails, I think he fooled the entire country in the 2000 election when he rigged the election. And even though I think Bush is as dumb as nails, I think he master-minded the 9/11 attacks! Kudos to Pres Obama for getting Bin Laden tho! Im glad it was him and not some Republican piece of shit.
@LeftWingPOG He personally didn't rig anything.... he's just a puppet and it's the people behind the curtain pulling the strings you need to be aware of.
This whole thing is a show to please the audience.
As for Obama, he's just another puppet. He's done NOTHING since arriving in office except exasperate the already dire situation. Obama was apparently killed and thrown in the sea.... so like the existence of god, I'd like some proof before I start believing that piece of shit propaganda.
Finally if bombs were planted people would have noticed. No one in ther right mind would willingly throw their lies away to protct this secret. The 2000 and 2004 elections may have been shams and Dick Cheny was an evil bastard, but there is honestly no way in hell this is true. Unless you can actually do the science and put your findings through peer review so others can repeat the experiment testing said hypothesis, it will be thrown out like creationism.
From a guy who'se home nearly caught fire a couple of months ago, I shall say this; with the two towers on fire flames can travel to other buildings quite easily and set them on fire just as well. If lef alone the steel framework will weaken.
@NUTCASE71733 How would steel weaken in a fire, do tell. Ask any welder or person who's profession it is to cut metal, if it's possible that fire (even jet fuel fire) could weaken a steel beam.
Ask them if they'd trade their tank of oxy acetylene for a tank of jet fuel and wait...... for them to tell you that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough.
As for buildings on fire, there have been many many steel framed buildings that have burned for DAYS and were still standing at the end of it all.
Fire can't weaken steel in an instant. That's your problem to start. The buildings were burning for hours before they fell. The heat plus all the flamable material in the buildings (papers, chemicals, ect) added to the initial jet fuel explosion. There's hundreds more factors at work there you're purposfully ignoring.
@NUTCASE71733 I addressed the issue of fires in a steel framed building already. There have been a number that have burned for hours ~ one in particular for DAYS and it still did not fall.
On the subject of purposefully ignoring things, you mentioned nothing of my Pentagon point. How is it that only 1 piece of footage was released by the pentagon? From a grainy cctv camera? If they really wanted to prove that it was a plane, why don't they just release more footage? Seeing is believing right?
I ignored the pentegon statement because all the footasge I've seen showed plane wreckage being removed from the building, so I'm throwing it out. Until you can demonstribly prove your assertionwith actual evidence rather than half-baked claims, You have nothing. Where do you get your info? Alex Jones? That man's a republican shill who gets paid to keep people divied much like Beck or Limbaugh.
@NUTCASE71733 But there was more than 1 camera trained on that area of the building that would have caught a shot of a plane. Why have the Pentagon confiscated every single bit of footage of the "plane" hitting the building? Show me actual footage of a plane hitting the pentagon from any one of the other camera angles and I'll believe that part of the official story. Until then, I'll just keep on questioning the official report.
@Carpediem0303 Many atheists have what I call a "bundle of beliefs"- . I am sure they would object to the term "belief" here--too bad. What is a bundle of beliefs-well check out many of the professional skeptics and somehow issues about the existence of God, conspiracy to kill JFK, UFO's, ghosts, 911 and other disparate events and phenomena are all grouped together under one of their favorite polemic categories: superstition, hoax, or just plain irrationality.
@RPenta The point I made previously is the point I'll make again ~ seeing is believing,
We all know the government lie lie lie and cover up, it's no secret. So when it comes to official reports and official statements I take them with a pinch of salt then do my own research or listen to my own logic.
You cannot dispute the evidence that JFK was shot, 911 happened and UFOs are regularly seen. What you can dispute is any existence of any god. Can't see him anywhere.
@Carpediem0303 i know what "UFO" stands for. following that logic, not only ufos exist but ghosts, angels, demons, fairies, bigfoot, loch ness monster, sasquatch, gnomes, and everything else.
you see, just because people "see" it, doesnt mean they're not seeing things/lying.
@BattousaiHBr - Sorry to stick my nose in but that is not the same logic at all. UFO's are unidentified flying objects, nothing more. There are regularly confirmed sightings. This does not mean they are from another world it simply means there is something moving in the air that cannot be identified. These could be spy planes, test planes, balloons, satellites falling to earth, experiments of all kinds and natural phenomena like ball lightning, meteors etc.
@Carpediem0303 "t is sad to hear such (usually) rational and reasonable people discount and pick apart a truther - the irony is abound!" they're being rational here. want to be taken seriously? publish your claim in a paper submitted for peer review. otherwise, groups like "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" are just blowhards on the Internet who don't have the balls or courage of their convictions to put their reputation on the line for their claims.
@BillKiernan We're never taken seriously at first, then the truth slowly starts to seep out and then there's nothing to do but agree with that truth. We are mocked for stating the obvious.... shame you can't see it too.
@Carpediem0303 scientists convinced of the truth of their arguments submit their findings to peer review. cowards who want internet credibility and to sell books, website subscriptions, t shirts, etc, hide on the internet.
The problem with your "logic" (mor like LOLgic) is that if you think about the conspiracy a bit more, it becomes unbeleivable at any point. First off conspiracy theorists use the same fallacies as creationists, so if you're really an athiest you should know better.
@NUTCASE71733 Exactly, everybody knows that there have been no political or conspiracies in US history unlike all the other nations that have ever existed on earth. I have three items for sale today: a Mannlicher Carcano rifle that shots magic bullets, a US navy destroyer that was never attacked by the North Vietnamese, and a US navy intelligence ship (slightly used) that was attacked by mistake by the Israelis; it includes the large US Flag it was flying on the day of the attack.
Second in another point in this very episode this clip was from, Don explains the cover up process would be pretty much impossible as it becomes lie a demented comedy sketch in which any witnesses need silencing. And given the sheer number of people that would have to be involved it would be increasingly more difficult to keep it secret. Anyone who can see that point will call bullshit on the whole conspiracy.
These three buildings, collapsing into their own footprints, suspend the laws of physics. They could never fall into their own footprints ever without 'help'. Building 7 was a classic example of engineered demolition. So what's your point in denying the truth here guys?
Thank god we have 911 truther newbs to explain the laws of physics. I almost listened to a professional architect who actually knew what he was talking about
The thing is that people have survived falls from planes numerous times. So the video of a person surviving a fall like this is unexpected but not outside of probability.
Historically, no steel-structure sky scraper has com close to falling from a fire. So there is no point for your falling out of an airplane comment.
Three skyscraper buildings fell at 911. Even one is very, very unlikely statistically. Two is in the realm of impossible. Three is completely outside of probability.
@ButterflyStorms Hey. This video just proves that even science-worshipping atheists can be scientifically irrational too, i.e. stupid. Anyone who thinks jet fuel can disintegrate a building, and a few fires in another very sturdy building can also make it disintegrate and fall the way it did should just stop thinking, and stop calling themselves "rational".
@TOSTunes I agree with what you're saying, but can we please not use the phrase "science-worshipping"? Most scientists and atheists do not worship science. They do not worship anything. The word "worship" has powerful religious undertones, implying unthinking acceptance of something as unalterably true. This is NEVER the case for science - as it is constantly open to criticism, adjustment and improvement. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
@hmspinaforethisisspa Disagree, with one word---phlogiston. The fact that you impart to all atheists and scientists some above-reproach quality, ipso facto by an intolerant world view says precisely what you deny.
These goofballs don't help the case of atheism, nor science.
[Some of the people who didn't think the buildings would fall were the DESIGNERS of the WTC. They don't even TOUCH WTC7.]
@OneVoiceMore I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment - please be a bit more clear (eg. are you saying scientists worshipped phlogiston? cos I'm pretty sure they didn't...)
Simplistic generalities only make you look stupid. Jet fuel didnt "disintegrate" anything. It softened the steel so it lost its strength. The formula for that is 10th grade high school physics, which 911 truth newbs all admit to having slept through. A "few" fires? LOL Revisionist history for $1000 Alex
Simplistic generalities only make you look stupid. Jet fuel didnt "disintegrate" anything. It softened the steel so it lost its strength. The formula for that is 10th grade high school physics, which 911 truth newbs all admit to having slept through. A "few" fires? LOL Revisionist history or deliberately playing dumb
@ButterflyStorms You are going to be my favorite person for this week for saying that! If only everyone could understand it as easily as you explain it =)
Hey Matt, the 3rd building was NOT hit by a plane. So if that is the reason that the other buildings came down the way they did "in your opinion", then how do you explain the the 3rd building coming down? I think there is a flaw in your reasoning. I am not a Truther so to speak but a realist. I don't believe the lies in the media in the same way I don't believe the lies in the bible. I usually respect what you have to say but I find you a little over zealous and bossy.
IQueenly 1 week ago
You want to know what is not logical? Its not Logical to compare what happened on Sept 11th to ANY OTHER EVENT!!. What happened to these buildings was entirely unique to the day. You cannot cross reference this to XYZ building and say..."Well it burned all day and never collapsed".. No other buildings have had the amount and kind of structural damage these buildings received.
There IS NO straight across comparison to ANY other situation. 911 was UNIQUE. It shares no precedent.
roquefortfiles 1 week ago
@roquefortfiles That's an excellent point.
YaleBreaker 1 week ago
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
TexasBlaineSaw 1 week ago
@TexasBlaineSaw ESB has a different structure than the WTC. Go into the ESB and you will see that the walls are made of brick, its structural fortification is on the insides, unlike the WTC outer support and the level of damage was not similar to that of the WTC
TheCrisisKings 5 days ago
@TexasBlaineSaw to clarify, the Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber, not a B-2. And just add a little critical thinking, the differences between the 2 incidents are so great, that the only similarity is that a plane struck a building. Thats where it stops.
simplemind28 19 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
TexasBlaineSaw 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles The Empire State building was hit by a B-2 Bomber, and received damage such as what happened to the Twin Towers. It stood. But I'm not here to argue. So 9/11 is not truly unique. I will admit that the difference besides the fall, is that 9/11 was deliberate and the ESB was not.
TexasBlaineSaw 1 week ago
And this guy calls himself rational? lol He's not much better than Creationists who have a preconceived idea without real evidence. A lot of the reason he believes it is because he WANTS to believe it and he doesn't know how to evaluate the facts and situation properly. He needs to learn much more about real science and how it works. These guys are more annoying than the Ron Paul zealots.
ridewave444 1 week ago
well, as much as i think this guys are funny and like to see religious nonsense idiots getting shut down, i think this guys are a little bit close minded, but still this dude calling is not really smart
IsraelMedinense 1 week ago
sorry, nice try guys but buildings do NOT collapse symmetrically at virtual freefall speed via fire. This only has occurred as a result of controlled demolition. Still no one has provided an example from history or from experiment that demonstrates this. Controlled demolition is the only rational explanation, period! Not to mention all the whistleblowers and eyewitness testimony who refute your official government position. You guys, like Shermer, are skeptical of the WRONG things.
dwheel39 2 weeks ago
@dwheel39 I don't agree with the government position, but the scientist who came up with an explanation of how the buildings fell as you propose would be pretty famous right now because it would of been proven soundly through scientific methods it would be published in all science journals, and would undoubtedly make all the front pages, because this big conspiracy had been unearthed.
KingPiccolo001 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 Well, i'm glad you don't agree with the government story as they have lied about almost everything in recent history :)
As far as the other stuff, on youtube check out : The War on Whistelblowers: Sibel Edmonds. It's not related to the building demolition specifically but you will get a good idea of how difficult it is to expose the truth and get a real investigation. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Peace :)
dwheel39 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 (cont) And as far as these guys here in this vid, i suspect they are just parroting what they heard from Shermer or guys like him. If anyone REALLY looks into the evidence and reads the books, not through Popular Mechanics, they will see 100% the government let this happen, purposely, in order to go to war with Iraq. As far as their level of involvement, well, we need a new, independent investigation, NOT one by the government like the last one.
dwheel39 1 week ago
@dwheel39 I would agree with having as many investigations as needed, however if someone would've uncovered a conspiracy like the fact that the buildings could've fall I'm sure it would be front page news. Also what I don't hear a lot in these theories is how the impact of the plane going into the building could have affected the building itself before the whole fire, plane or missile (as some would suggest) I've yet to hear any ideas regarding the collision.
KingPiccolo001 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 It would be front page news, however guess who owns the media and has control? Many of the very suspects of the 9/11 event! As far as the buildings, think about this, why do they never show WTC building 7 on the news? When 9/11 truth advocates are interviewed, they aren't allowed to show footage of building 7. If it was just fire damage (which is absurd) then why are they hiding everything? That's the biggest clue that they are lying..they hide and destroy evidence.
dwheel39 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 I left you a couple links to check out in your YouTube inbox too.
dwheel39 1 week ago
@dwheel39 Regardless of the misunderstanding of a previous point I have seen the Northwoods file but there is no real evidence to suggest an operation has been carried out similar to this, you also mention the plan to attack Iraq prior, and that whistleblowers have come out from the Agencies since, but you haven't provided any evidence for these two claims. There are a few unresolved points but these two I would like cleared up somewhat.
KingPiccolo001 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 Well i was just sharing information that i thought would be helpful. I'm not trying to debate here. As far as whistleblowers, just google and you will find. I've heard many speak on radio shows myself. I wanted you to see the Northwoods file because it proves that this is how our government thinks. Would our government really attack American people in order to go to war? Well the Northwoods PROVES that yes, of course they would..it's not even up for debate.
dwheel39 1 week ago
@dwheel39 I'm not disputing the thought process and the radio is just useless rhetoric when it comes to Politics. Facts and evidence would be the better route than assumptions based on Cold war documents, I'm not denying a 9/11 cover up is possible but from what I've heard and seen at the moment it's not convincing.
KingPiccolo001 1 week ago
@KingPiccolo001 I sent you another link with tons of information. Please weigh out what these kind of guys say (Dillahunty and Glasser here) and then read the answers and evidence that debunks the "debunkers". And keep in mind, the thrust of the 9/11 truth movement is to get a new investigation. The alternate speculations are just that, speculations but they are MUCH more plausible than most of the government B.S.
dwheel39 1 week ago
Bellend theorist cunt!
Stu3100 3 weeks ago
These hosts are the smartest monkeys I ever heard!
Gaybykersonacid 3 weeks ago
@Gaybykersonacid haha i know they're so good at what they do.
Freethinker12341 3 weeks ago
I don't understand 911 truthers: why all the wild theories, quote mining and anomaly hunting? If terrorists could do it -- like the government claims -- without any inside help, it's even more likely they could do it with inside help. Just some untraceable interference here and there to give those zealots the opportunity. Here you go, a much more believable story, you are welcome.
27182818284590452354 3 weeks ago in playlist The Atheist Experience
@27182818284590452354 u fools worships peer review
AnonymousElektron 2 weeks ago
He is a liar. It HAS happened before, there's a whole website made to document the buildings of the same type that DID collapse.
daemonowner 3 weeks ago
Bs if an engineer says its impossible buddy its pretty much that peer reviewed or not.
KingDavid478 4 weeks ago
@KingDavid478
So if a single engineer insists something's impossible, the matter's settled? I'm pretty sure that's not the way science works...
ClumsyRoot 4 weeks ago
@ClumsyRoot Agreed, but 1,500? Got ya!
KingDavid478 1 week ago
@KingDavid478
Sorry, but that's not how science works either. I could probably find 1,500 scientists who will insist that the earth is 6,000 years old.
ClumsyRoot 1 week ago
@ClumsyRoot I can agree with that also. I never disagree with logic but wouldnt you agree that we saw the towers collapse and we didnt see anybody or anything created the earth 6,000 years ago. We got it on tape to be analyzed over and over again. Can you say that about the creation of earth 6,000 yrs ago?
KingDavid478 1 week ago
@KingDavid478
I agree. My point is that truth in science is not a numbers game; it's possible to find an educated person who will support ANY claim.
ClumsyRoot 1 week ago
The majority of Matt & Russell's argument is the peer review process; NIST released its final report on the collapse of 7 World Trade Center on on Nov. 20, 2008. The report concluded that the building's collapse was due to the effects of the fires which burned for almost seven hours.
The issues are: 1) steel beams do NOT break, they bend 2) Fires have never brought down "High Rise" buildings before. 3) The NIST report doesn't explain about HOW the steel frame building FELL at free-fall speed.
yhenry77 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 1 month ago
There is no science to debunk the molten iron. That's why NIST never looked into it or they never looked into explosive evidence as they weren't looking for. To cause building 7 to come straight down you have to cut all 24 support columns within a fraction of a second of eachother as fire collapse would have made it fall asymmetrically. The fires and explosions even started before building 1 and 2 collapsed evidence from the only 2 men to get out of the building.
RickAstley56 1 month ago
There's no surveilance cameras or defence at the pentagon. It's an unimportant building that nobdoy cares about.
end sarcasm
Demolition companies have all gone out of business since WTC7 fell. People just light small fires nowadays.
ComicPenius 1 month ago 2
Anyone who believes it was an "inside job" should see a surgeon to have their cranium extracted from their rectum.
5jerry1 1 month ago
LOL this guy has been so brainwashed by morons like "Richard Gage" "Alex Jones" and the idiots who create videos like "Loose Change" theirs no hope for this guy.
TheAlexJonesCult 1 month ago
Why won't they show us any good footage of a plane crashing into the pentagon...?
dwgangsat 1 month ago
@dwgangsat /watch?v=kXEZp-ULmXw&feature=related
The hotel across the street. No plane seen in the video.
Twiztidninjas 1 month ago
@Twiztidninjas yea i totally agree with you that there wasn't a plane...9-11 was a complete inside job...
dwgangsat 1 month ago
I'm amazed by the 2 camps that have set up around 9/11. 1) it was a conspiracy by the bush administration to get us into war 2) it was terrorist so all the wars were justified. Ok, think outside the box a bit. It's entirely possible that the 2 wars that were started were totally unjustifiable and unreasonable given the actions of a small number of radicalized religious extremists. Why does it have to be bush who did it for those wars to be wrong?
herefordparkour 1 month ago
The buildings were designed to take the impact of a commercial size aircraft.
krypekeeper 1 month ago
@krypekeeper lies, they weren't. stop lieng, stop talking shit.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@Mo09ful yes they fuckin were moron. the engineer himself said so in an interview when they opened
krypekeeper 1 month ago
@krypekeeper link please, i want proof.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@Mo09ful find it your self. Thats your problem, you're to fucking lazy to do anything for your self.you expect everything to be put at your feet. Do something for yourself for once, if you REALLY wanna know the truth turn off your fucking TV and read a little.
krypekeeper 1 month ago
@krypekeeper see this is the common bullshit that spews threw the mouth of you idiotic truthers. you have no link therefore no proof so in order to get yourself out of the corner ive put you in you begin to insult me. yet again proving to me and any1 with half a brain, your an idiot.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@Mo09ful LOL actually I had the link copied and ready to post here, but it was to long. then I thought fuck you, you can find it in 2 fucking minutes. Not my vault your a brain dead sheep who cant think, or apparently use a search engine on your own. You're fucking pathetic.you live in this fantasy world where if its not on fox news then its not true. WAKE THE FUCK UP!
krypekeeper 1 month ago
@krypekeeper wow more bullshit, the link was too big for the comment, are you stupid? you are aloud 500 characters in one comment what webpage has more than 500 words, oh btw i hate fox news ill agree with you on that one, fox is filled with lies, but not as much as your conspiracy theory.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@Mo09ful Stop being a witless sheep and do some simple research. What a blind fool.
SmokiSounds 1 month ago
@SmokiSounds im not a sheep, i dont live in a fantasy world like you, in fact i hate the government mainly because of the economy, but im not stupid and thats what you are STUPID, to actually believe the government did 9/11. brainless idiot who will achieve nothing in life except for a jail sentence.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@Mo09ful If you actually knew ANYTHING you would see this isnnt even the first time they have done something like this. Its a false flag attack to get us into war fro profit
krypekeeper 1 month ago
@krypekeeper and what profit have we attained numbnuts, we are in the worst economic state since the depression. if you new ANYTHING you would realise we are in a war for the security of our country.
Mo09ful 1 month ago
@SmokiSounds yeah, your research is watching "loose change" or reading an infowars article.
TheAlexJonesCult 1 month ago
The problem with leaving peer review as a barrier to plausibility of science ignores the fact that this is an emotionally and politically charged issue where a presupposed bias could easily cause a group of "skeptics" to keep something out simply based on political and not scientific suppositions. IE: "We believe the official story, it's already been explained, there's no reason for you to write this". I think after awareness of issues has been raised, a peer review process will follow.
TheJavecantrell 1 month ago
@TheJavecantrell well thats true in some cases, but the point of peer review is to be judged by a lot of people who have a lot of different emotional and political ideas. So if you are rejected by someone who is being close-minded and bias, there is always the next scientific magazine around the corner waiting for your idea submission! In the end, the facts will come forward, even if it takes some time. That's the "magic" of science!
Ichthyologistic 1 month ago
This caller was a complete ass.
TheBlueManChoo 1 month ago
The only reason so many atheists ignore 9/11 truthers is because they like to use Muslim extremism to back their claims that religion is wrong. I am an atheist, but I don't give a shit if people are religious, this is because I don't blame religion for war, I blame power/money hungry leaders for it, who have often, throughout history, used religion as a way to start wars. I wish people like these guys, who claim to want the truth, would apply that to more than just religion.
tool2342 2 months ago
@tool2342 that may be partially true that atheists see the fact that 9/11 shows the danger of religion in a dramatic fashion but most ignore 9/11 conspiracies because atheists tend to think more logically and examine evidence and they know that a government coverup of 9/11 is obviously logically impossible and that the evidence for it is non-existant. The government is terrible at covering things up (wikilinks) even when they are irrelevent to think they could coverup 9/11 is pure insanity
Jimboman300 2 months ago
if its a conspiracy no DIPSHIT they're not gonna let the scientists who think it was a conspiracya nd have 'proof' go through with it. wooow ven i get that! :S
ncdangale112 2 months ago
@sungate153 Also its hilarious conspiracy whackjobs often all those who doubt them uninformed when in reality the more educated someone is and the more research one does on such issues the less likely one is to believe in crazy anti-semetic conspiracies. Its obvious that you are are much too deep in your feces to listen to reason hence why scientifically literate debunkings like the amazing one popular mechanics did don't phase your thinking
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@sungate153 While this may seem unlikely many such unlikely events that have actually happened. You would say that jumping out of a plane and surviving is ridiculous if it happened in a Hollywood movie but such things have actually happened. Whats more is even this is far more likely then a government coverup on the magnitude of 9/11. Such a conspiracy would require thousands yet not one got drunk and exposed the plot. The more people required for a conspiracy the less likely that it is true.
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@Jimboman300 You exposed me though. You see Im really behind the secret zionist martian conspiracy to fake the moon landing, kill 3000 Americans on 9/11 in order to steal all the oil and make you my personal slave whahahahahahhahahahah. You will never expose us we are all knowing and all powerful. We also steared Hurricane Katrina into New Orleans with our hurricane machine, bumbed off JFK when he found out about our plot and we can do the same to all youtube commentators who know too much
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@Jimboman300
I was actually part of the team which generated Hurricane Katrina, using a mixture of alien technology from Area 51 and some secret Illuminati weather recipes. Elvis Presley was my coworker on that project - he's a real character, that one. BTW, we didn't stear it - just created it. Katrina's navigation and movement was done by the Queen of England, using her prehensile lizard tale.
crapatev 2 months ago
@sungate153 Id say Watergate refutes every conspiracy threoy. The government couldn't even cover up breaking into a couple offices successfully to think they could cover up something as massive as 9/11 or the moon landing is nothing but pure maddness. Though 9/11 was a conspiracy. Muslims motivated by there God conspired to kill thousands with suicide attacks. Thats already one hell of a conpiracy and it actually has evidence to back it up
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@sungate153 It was never discredited. Fact is 9/11 Conspiracy wackjobs are simply motivated by hatred of America and Jews. Every single claim was fantastically debunked case closed. The only criminals on the loose are the MUSLIMS who continue to kill on a daily basis. Want to know how I know the US government wasn't behind 9/11. Cause it worked. The government are incompetant clowns to cover up something on that magnitude requires ridiculous impossible efficiency.
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@Jimboman300 You sound just like a religious person who says: "Atheist wackjobs are simply motivated by hatred of God and Jesus. Evolution has been debunked,case closed. These heathens are continuing to sin on a daily basis. Want to know how I know God created the world. Cause it's here. The world couldn't make itself, something of this magnitude requires an intelligent designer."
I don't know who is responsible for 9/11. But I look for the truth, this mentality caused me to become an atheist.
tool2342 2 months ago
@tool2342 Wrong. Ive studied 9/11 Conspiracies and every claim they made. All are easily debunked with even the slightest research. Some are debunked so easily its actually hilarious. On the other hand the motive and evidence for Al Qaeda's desire to kill is overwhelming. Al Qaeda admitted responsibilty and had it not been for idiotic information restrictions passed by the Clinton administration the plot could have easily been peiced together and then stopped before it happened.
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@Jimboman300 OK. I'm not callingh you a liar. I would really like to know the truth. i haven't studied, so don't know the facts. But there are things that confuses me about the whole thing, which make me question the official story. One is building 7 - how come that came down? There are a lot of other things, but that just sprung to mind. Do you know? I would love to know all the facts, I really would, It sickens me to think it could have been the government.
tool2342 2 months ago
@tool2342 World Trade Center 7 was consumed in fire for several hours as a result of having two massive towers fall on top of it. It got little media attention because nobody died there and it was reletively insignifigant compared to the rest of the days events. It surprises me little you say you haven't studied anything but you have the nerve to step on the memories of the millions who die in Islamic attrocities by trying to absolve them of the blame. Your nothing but a butboy for theocracy
Jimboman300 2 months ago
@Jimboman300 It's "'You're' nothing but a butboy", not "'Your' nothing but a butboy" - as in 'you are'. And I'm female. Again you sound like a theist when you criticise me for asking questions, saying things like "you have the nerve to step on the memories of the millions". We are allowed to question historical events, and 'official' stories, if we didn't we all still think the earth was flat! I have never denied it was atrocious! Just wanted to know the truth, which is not a crime.
tool2342 2 months ago
@tool2342 I don't attack you for asking questions. I attack you for making ignorant statements that are completely backed up by nothing concerning the deaths of 2,976 Americans I had questions about 9/11 as well but I researched them and found alternative explains for 9/11 completely without merit. All are based on misunderstanding of facts with alot of hatred of Jews and America mixed in.
Jimboman300 1 month ago
@Jimboman300 What 'ignorant statement' have I actually made?!! I haven't made any statements about it! Look back on what I have written! You are the ignorant one shooting anyone down whose opinions might conflict with your own. Shut up and grow up! Trying to insult and make stupid arguments with someone who was admitting they didn't know the facts, and looked to you for answers!
tool2342 1 month ago
@sungate153 Except that popular mechanics debunked every claim 9/11 conspiracy wackjobs have put out. And even if they haven't its not enough to find a percieved inconsitancy in the official account you have to find your own coherent threoy of events. 9/11 conspiracy nuts haven't done that and they are constantly changing there stories (look at all the different versions of Loose Change). There is no coherent peer reviewed alternative to the official account. Theres also no evidence at all
Jimboman300 2 months ago
I didn't know there were still conspiracies out there
zfan2591 2 months ago
911 nutters. they're like an annoying itch
TheZachary86 2 months ago
Those planes crashed into the towers at about 567 mph. The resulting fires generated about four times the heat of a nuclear power plant for an hour, in buildings who's creators had skimped on fire proofing. Why is it so damn hard to believe that this was enough to make those towers collapse?
Mauropus 2 months ago
@orion1two yeah they can be dicks sometimes no doubt.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
@orion1 they're not high levels at all, the levels are miniscule in reality, not in the propaganda the anti vaccine movement feeds you. and no actual studies show that the levels are harmful, and it's not the mercury that's in your thermometer. but whatever, i know it's useless to bring facts to the table. i know science based medicine is nothing against hype and conspiracy theories for someone who has the mindset to buy into them. i don't trust my government by the way.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
Where are the peer reviewed papers explaining the molten metal which Matt mentions? I can only find the Steve E Jones paper.
JustOneQuestion 2 months ago
lol. i can totally see they completely bullshit everything that is related to "conspiracy theories" or "zeitgeist" without even trying to dig into it too much. at 8:12 the caller was actually right that matt was doing the same, yet he forcibly insisted in not even thinking about it and shoved the poor guy off air.
BattousaiHBr 2 months ago
The peer review process must be perfect and unbias according to these guys.
The peer review process is led by people. People make mistakes and are not perfect. So of course there are mistakes. Peer review is also succeptible to deceit and lies, just like anything else that involves humans.
I wish I had their kind of faith in science to be always correct.
jbourg333 2 months ago
@jbourg333 "The peer review process" they don't think it's perfect, I've seen them talk about it before. Here's the deal. no, it's not perfect. yes, there have been frauds in peer review papers (for example, Dr Wakefields fraudulent paper that vaccine conspiracy theorists use as "evidence" of a connection to autism in the MMR vaccine). Do you know who ends up uncovering frauds in the peer review process? PEERS, DUE TO THE PROCESS. if you don't submit, you don't take part in the process.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
omg shut the fuck UP and let the person who called TALK assholes.
OceansideRamona 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=iPrzoQH97s0
Watch at 6:00.... Wiki ,Deborah Palfrey, that is how she died
ALL the other deaths are weird , but there is no proof that there deaths are from the coverup
BUT that single death is enough to persuade me
judge for yourself
nigdean789 3 months ago
Being a controllfreak live = FAIL!!!
(look it up!!)
xcoroner 3 months ago
Ahhhhhh Truthers, Birthers and the rest, should just die.
Plz, Jesus, I'll follow you right now if you take them all.
willdrake1 3 months ago
the moment that the controllfreak on the right pushed the "silence i speak-button" the caller won the debate!!!.....end of story!!!.......
xcoroner 3 months ago
@xcoroner uhh... nope.
LordScrambles 3 months ago
@LordScrambles uhh...yeah...totally...!!!!
being a controllfreak is a powerFAIL in itself.....being a powerFAILED controllfreak on youtube is just funny!!....im an atheist my self, but watching this n00b pressing the button to shut up a guy who wants to speak is just pathetic!!!...ask yourself one question!!...: why did they let him on the air when it is clear that they dont want him to speak!!???
i guess you believe that a bunch of alcoholridden muslims in a plot brought to life by a ->
xcoroner 2 months ago
@xcoroner <-old man 100% linked to medical surveilance due to his dialysis planned a attack that pierced through the most powerful/secure airsecurity in the world,not one time,but 4 times in a couple of hours in the same day with boxcutters, and then the biggest most strategic military power in the world failed 4 times on the same day, followed by 3 steel structures all of whom fell into theire own footprints because of fires?? be real!! do you still believe in santa claus??
xcoroner 2 months ago
@undernorm You admit that your entire argument is a fallacy. You're arguing numbers and authority, not facts. Phlogiston and poppycock.
I'd disagree that it was meticulously researched as well. You don't see valid collapse mechanics discussed -anywhere- in the official reports. Meticulous research is generally done by the minority of people. It certainly was -not- done by NIST, whose findings are demonstrably flawed and fraudulent.
OneVoiceMore 3 months ago
@OneVoiceMore So you've read all 10,000 pages of the NIST report, and are qualified to determine whether it's credible or not? Are you a structural engineer, or are you just regurgitating what you hear from loose change and alex jones? Not trying to be facetious, i really want to know.
undernorm 3 months ago
@undernorm Your question is also a fallacy. What was in the NIST report largely requires no engineering degree, as almost none of the FIRST report is about the collapse. I've read both in their entirety. Have you?
Your AJ / LC straw man has no traction with me. You want to discuss the aspects of the report I question? Or are you just in 'destwoy de twoofer' mode?
We can start with the initial fraudulent claim of '40% of free fall' in the WTC7 report, which had to be amended to admit free fall.
OneVoiceMore 3 months ago
BUILDING 7
richard gage
48mmwatch 3 months ago
Watch the WAY they fall tho...Why does a plane crash in the upper 1/4 of the buildinngs cause a colapse of the lower floors in a manner identical to explosive demolitions?
whiteowl1415 3 months ago
@whiteowl1415 maybe you should ask an architectural engineer. 99 percent of them agree with the official story of the collapse.
undernorm 3 months ago
@undernorm
No they don't...there was a pettetion done by engineers to reexamine the causes,
It was ignored by Congress, despite nearly 2000 Signatures
whiteowl1415 3 months ago
@whiteowl1415 Hmm, i believe the actual number was around 1600. Let's do a little math here...there are over 1.5 million employed engineers in the united states alone, 1600 don't believe the official story, so that comes out to roughly .001 percent. It appears my estimation may have been a little too generous.
undernorm 3 months ago
@undernorm
1600 Were willing to actively sing a petition...How many backed the story? 100, 200?
whiteowl1415 3 months ago
@whiteowl1415 The collapse of the world trade center towers is the most meticulously researched structural failure in human history. And out of the 1.5 million experts, your movement could only get 1600 behind your theory? And how many of them are actually qualified to make such assertions? I really don't like to argue too much about this, because essentially it's an appeal to authority fallacy, but if you want to play that game, i've got you beat by about 1,498,400.
undernorm 3 months ago
@whiteowl1415 a little more than 100 or 200. Let's see,
American Society of Civil Engineers (123,000 members)
American Institute of Architects (80,000 members)
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (120,000)
Just to name a few...
undernorm 3 months ago
@undernorm
lol....K you're going to try and tell me that EVERY menber of those groups backked up the groups offical line.
Im not saying conspiracy...I'm just saying it dosn't look right.
Think about Pearl Harbor and how it was 50 YEars + before the government came clean about knowing there had been Subs in the area, and having got intel of an inpending attack.
As citizens, it is our DUTY to question our government.
whiteowl1415 3 months ago
@whiteowl1415 Those numbers should at least make you realize how small of a number 1600 is here. And I completely agree about questioning our government. I'm ALWAYS suspicious. In fact, there was a brief time when I hopped on the truther bandwagon. But the "truth" is that there isn't any good evidence supporting a controlled demo theory. The idea that they had advanced knowledge of the attacks is a bit more rational, and i wouldnt be surprised if that was revealed someday.
undernorm 3 months ago
@undernorm It's been revealed, just to update you. Able Danger, FBI Chicago, Sibel Edmonds, and dozens of other whistleblowers have come forward, and have been variously gagged and punished.
9/11 was at the very least a LIHOP operation, but suspecting active involvement by US elements is more than reasonable.
Acknowledging that the attacks were CONTROLLED makes CD a moot point. Who -did- it is more important than how, yes?
OneVoiceMore 3 months ago
Doesn't peer review involve a handful of people? There are around 1600 architects and engineering professionals who have signed a petition demanding congress to do an independent investigation. If they all learned the same thing in college then why would they have a difference in thought? It's like saying there's 10 mechanics and 2 of them argue with the other 8 saying that they don't know how cars operate. It makes no sense. Who ever they chose to peer review got bribed
bangmeister 3 months ago
hahahha this is awesome!
Freethinker12341 3 months ago
While I do agree with Matt that proper peer-reviewing is essential to science, the caller still has a point in that if a scientist is backed up by another 99 scientists who agrees with the first scientist, then that is a form of peer-reviewing. The caller should've stated it like that. Of course, it cannot compare to proper peer-reviewing, but it is certainly more valid than a scientist who is not backed by any other scientists.
antiHUMANDesigns 3 months ago
@antiHUMANDesigns Exactly! Do they think that 100 scientists don't know what they're talking about
bangmeister 3 months ago
What's funny is there are PEER REVIEWED Creation Science Journals. LOL.
kazoorocketman54 3 months ago 13
@kazoorocketman54 well that throws peer review's credibility out the window
bangmeister 3 months ago
@kazoorocketman54 I think you mean "Peer reviewed" chreation science journals. XD
BigLundi 2 months ago
I don't think there was an actual conspiracy to bring down the towers after being hit by planes (quite the opposite: the planes themselves were sufficient to bring down the towers), but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a conspiracy by the Bush administration to use the attack as a front to push the patriot act through and start two costly wars and attempt to start a third one with Iran. Do I have proof of that? No, but it is a much more likely conspiracy theory than all the others.
Forlo12345 3 months ago
Who were these people that were peer reviewed and by what peers were their papers being reviewed? That is what I would have asked. These men are always very intellectually dishonest and are in love with their obtuse cadence of thought. Science is not an entity unto itself,no more than logic is a material. Science has not been the most reliable. The only thing reliable is uniformed scientific laws that are proven and in place right now. Which are our
measure.
If 9/11 conclusions don't match?
mamaschristmasbunny 3 months ago
I congratulate that Atheist caller. I no longer think that all Atheists are condemned to a learning disability that causes them to think that nature and science changes in its principles and composite; just so to suit their inability to match physics and chemistry and metallurgy to measure the known against 9/11. I thought that the Atheists on this show were the great free will thinkers.
Laws of Thermodynamics, inertia, quantum physics none of ours aligns with the official 9/11 story.
mamaschristmasbunny 3 months ago
@mamaschristmasbunny
"I don't know nothing 'bout no science, but I do know one thing: co2 emissions ain't causing no global warming/people don't just done evolved from apes/them towers didn't done collapse cuz a no fires. Science backs me up! Too bad I don't done know nothing 'bout no science..."
SgtSanchez 3 months ago
Read the NIST Report, Read the FEMA Report, Read 9/11 commission report..
The Atheist purveyors of knowledge who give you a diligent casting of aspersion are the same one's who don't bother to support their argument by reading anything that could ruin their sophomoric ideals ever. Even the New York fire commission at findings showed what I researched, temps up to 2 weeks after the collapse were at 2,800 to 3,500 degrees. Kerosene doesn't
do that
You rational thinkers, keep reading comic books
mamaschristmasbunny 3 months ago
A plane made of mostly aluminum impacted in such a way to ruin the integrity of the buildings , as jet fuel burns consisting of 90 percent kerosene, causing spandrels, tresses, ad joints that were connected to 47pieces of inner steel tubing with about 247 pieces of 3-5 in. steel columns that aligned the outside of each building. Fire at the point of impact at its highest never reached over 1800*, after collapse temperatures were read about 2800 degrees. Fire, Kerosene, aluminum didn't do that.
mamaschristmasbunny 3 months ago
Comment removed
mamaschristmasbunny 3 months ago
why congratulate them for going to hell?
kobebryant1227 3 months ago
Other buildings have been on fire and not fallen do to the simple fact that there wasn't A FUCKING JET FLOWN INTO THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And by the way tall buildings HAVE fallen due to FIRE!!!!!!!!!
themacfan16 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@themacfan16 Give me 1 example....
Carpediem0303 3 months ago
Haha, too bad he didn't touch on Matt's analogy of the guy who jumped off the plane. I thought it was hilarious when he then went over his crazy conspiracy theory again in which all you had to do was exchange the word "tower" with guy out of a plane" and "collapse" with "die." xD
morbus3000 4 months ago
Why is it that, when it comes to the dogmatic ideologies of religion, you guys are able to see through all that and use your logic, along with research to come to the conclusion that the existence of an intervening personal God is highly improbable. But when it comes to 9-11, you're all about the dogma, you don't want to look into it at all, and you even ridicule the messenger. Open your eyes and do some research. Start here: ae911truth . org
SeerBrandon 4 months ago
@NUTCASE717333 I bet!
OpethIsTheBestBand 4 months ago
Why does it sound like hes about to burst out crying
OpethIsTheBestBand 4 months ago
@OpethIsTheBestBand Because he's wrapped up in his conspiracy he cries if one makes fun of it. Just like christians do when their religion is mocked.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God is a spirit, an immaterial conscious being. All things in the universe consists of matter and/or energy, so if God isn't matter, is energy by definition. Energy is the capacity to do work, is eternal, omnipresent, wasn't created and can't be destroyed, can create matter, was the only thing present before the BB, and the energy required to make the universe must had been powerful. All these match Biblical descriptions of God. He wants us to elevate our consciousness to the next level, is real
dejesusluisx 4 months ago
You see, normally I am in agreement with you guys and appreciate your logic in response to various Christian believers but I found your reasoning on the 9/11 issue to be quite irritating.
You base your beliefs (or lack thereof) on pure and simple logic. Is it not logical to you that those buildings came down in a professional and well planned demolition?
And maybe you should do some research.... seeing as you're so interested in facts.... 3 buildings fell into their own footprint on that day, 3!
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303 George Bush did 9/11! I know in my heart he did! And it's NOT the same as religious belief.
LeftWingPOG 4 months ago
@LeftWingPOG Agreed Leftwing, I also believe in my heart that it was a very well planned take down by the bush administration.
The issue is that these guys are talking about cold, hard facts. Just saying you know in your heart isn't good enough for them..... you have to be able to back it up with some semblance of logic/reality.
It is sad to hear such (usually) rational and reasonable people discount and pick apart a truther - the irony is abound!
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303 Even though I think Bush is as dumb as nails, I think he fooled the entire country in the 2000 election when he rigged the election. And even though I think Bush is as dumb as nails, I think he master-minded the 9/11 attacks! Kudos to Pres Obama for getting Bin Laden tho! Im glad it was him and not some Republican piece of shit.
LeftWingPOG 4 months ago
@LeftWingPOG He personally didn't rig anything.... he's just a puppet and it's the people behind the curtain pulling the strings you need to be aware of.
This whole thing is a show to please the audience.
As for Obama, he's just another puppet. He's done NOTHING since arriving in office except exasperate the already dire situation. Obama was apparently killed and thrown in the sea.... so like the existence of god, I'd like some proof before I start believing that piece of shit propaganda.
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303 Lol, I meant OSAMA.... not Obama
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303
Finally if bombs were planted people would have noticed. No one in ther right mind would willingly throw their lies away to protct this secret. The 2000 and 2004 elections may have been shams and Dick Cheny was an evil bastard, but there is honestly no way in hell this is true. Unless you can actually do the science and put your findings through peer review so others can repeat the experiment testing said hypothesis, it will be thrown out like creationism.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 The buildings, all 3 of them, came down in their own footprint. Only 2 were hit by planes.... something fishy going on if you ask me.
No debris anywhere on the ground bigger than a handful at the Pentagon....
Experiments and peer reviews aside, what you can SEE WITH YOUR OWN EYES should make it clear.
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303
From a guy who'se home nearly caught fire a couple of months ago, I shall say this; with the two towers on fire flames can travel to other buildings quite easily and set them on fire just as well. If lef alone the steel framework will weaken.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 How would steel weaken in a fire, do tell. Ask any welder or person who's profession it is to cut metal, if it's possible that fire (even jet fuel fire) could weaken a steel beam.
Ask them if they'd trade their tank of oxy acetylene for a tank of jet fuel and wait...... for them to tell you that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough.
As for buildings on fire, there have been many many steel framed buildings that have burned for DAYS and were still standing at the end of it all.
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303
Fire can't weaken steel in an instant. That's your problem to start. The buildings were burning for hours before they fell. The heat plus all the flamable material in the buildings (papers, chemicals, ect) added to the initial jet fuel explosion. There's hundreds more factors at work there you're purposfully ignoring.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 I addressed the issue of fires in a steel framed building already. There have been a number that have burned for hours ~ one in particular for DAYS and it still did not fall.
On the subject of purposefully ignoring things, you mentioned nothing of my Pentagon point. How is it that only 1 piece of footage was released by the pentagon? From a grainy cctv camera? If they really wanted to prove that it was a plane, why don't they just release more footage? Seeing is believing right?
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303
I ignored the pentegon statement because all the footasge I've seen showed plane wreckage being removed from the building, so I'm throwing it out. Until you can demonstribly prove your assertionwith actual evidence rather than half-baked claims, You have nothing. Where do you get your info? Alex Jones? That man's a republican shill who gets paid to keep people divied much like Beck or Limbaugh.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 But there was more than 1 camera trained on that area of the building that would have caught a shot of a plane. Why have the Pentagon confiscated every single bit of footage of the "plane" hitting the building? Show me actual footage of a plane hitting the pentagon from any one of the other camera angles and I'll believe that part of the official story. Until then, I'll just keep on questioning the official report.
Carpediem0303 4 months ago
@Carpediem0303 Many atheists have what I call a "bundle of beliefs"- . I am sure they would object to the term "belief" here--too bad. What is a bundle of beliefs-well check out many of the professional skeptics and somehow issues about the existence of God, conspiracy to kill JFK, UFO's, ghosts, 911 and other disparate events and phenomena are all grouped together under one of their favorite polemic categories: superstition, hoax, or just plain irrationality.
RPenta 3 months ago
@RPenta The point I made previously is the point I'll make again ~ seeing is believing,
We all know the government lie lie lie and cover up, it's no secret. So when it comes to official reports and official statements I take them with a pinch of salt then do my own research or listen to my own logic.
You cannot dispute the evidence that JFK was shot, 911 happened and UFOs are regularly seen. What you can dispute is any existence of any god. Can't see him anywhere.
Carpediem0303 3 months ago
@Carpediem0303 "and UFOs are regularly seen"
i sure hope that part was a joke
BattousaiHBr 2 months ago
@BattousaiHBr No, it was not a joke, UFOs are regularly seen! Look up the definition of UFO.....
Carpediem0303 2 months ago
@Carpediem0303 i know what "UFO" stands for. following that logic, not only ufos exist but ghosts, angels, demons, fairies, bigfoot, loch ness monster, sasquatch, gnomes, and everything else.
you see, just because people "see" it, doesnt mean they're not seeing things/lying.
BattousaiHBr 2 months ago
@BattousaiHBr - Sorry to stick my nose in but that is not the same logic at all. UFO's are unidentified flying objects, nothing more. There are regularly confirmed sightings. This does not mean they are from another world it simply means there is something moving in the air that cannot be identified. These could be spy planes, test planes, balloons, satellites falling to earth, experiments of all kinds and natural phenomena like ball lightning, meteors etc.
WillShakespeare2007 2 months ago
@RPenta
the word your looking for is "axiom" , not belief
TimothyTwoofer 3 months ago in playlist 911 debunking
@Carpediem0303 "t is sad to hear such (usually) rational and reasonable people discount and pick apart a truther - the irony is abound!" they're being rational here. want to be taken seriously? publish your claim in a paper submitted for peer review. otherwise, groups like "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" are just blowhards on the Internet who don't have the balls or courage of their convictions to put their reputation on the line for their claims.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
@BillKiernan We're never taken seriously at first, then the truth slowly starts to seep out and then there's nothing to do but agree with that truth. We are mocked for stating the obvious.... shame you can't see it too.
Carpediem0303 2 months ago
@Carpediem0303 in 15 years you'll be as relevant as moan landing hoax conspiracy enthusiasts, not relevant at all.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
@Carpediem0303 scientists convinced of the truth of their arguments submit their findings to peer review. cowards who want internet credibility and to sell books, website subscriptions, t shirts, etc, hide on the internet.
BillKiernan 2 months ago
@Carpediem0303
The problem with your "logic" (mor like LOLgic) is that if you think about the conspiracy a bit more, it becomes unbeleivable at any point. First off conspiracy theorists use the same fallacies as creationists, so if you're really an athiest you should know better.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 Exactly, everybody knows that there have been no political or conspiracies in US history unlike all the other nations that have ever existed on earth. I have three items for sale today: a Mannlicher Carcano rifle that shots magic bullets, a US navy destroyer that was never attacked by the North Vietnamese, and a US navy intelligence ship (slightly used) that was attacked by mistake by the Israelis; it includes the large US Flag it was flying on the day of the attack.
RPenta 3 months ago
@Carpediem0303
Second in another point in this very episode this clip was from, Don explains the cover up process would be pretty much impossible as it becomes lie a demented comedy sketch in which any witnesses need silencing. And given the sheer number of people that would have to be involved it would be increasingly more difficult to keep it secret. Anyone who can see that point will call bullshit on the whole conspiracy.
NUTCASE71733 4 months ago
These three buildings, collapsing into their own footprints, suspend the laws of physics. They could never fall into their own footprints ever without 'help'. Building 7 was a classic example of engineered demolition. So what's your point in denying the truth here guys?
ButterflyStorms 4 months ago
@ButterflyStorms
Thank god we have 911 truther newbs to explain the laws of physics. I almost listened to a professional architect who actually knew what he was talking about
SpreadingtheMuse 4 months ago 2
The thing is that people have survived falls from planes numerous times. So the video of a person surviving a fall like this is unexpected but not outside of probability.
Historically, no steel-structure sky scraper has com close to falling from a fire. So there is no point for your falling out of an airplane comment.
Three skyscraper buildings fell at 911. Even one is very, very unlikely statistically. Two is in the realm of impossible. Three is completely outside of probability.
ButterflyStorms 4 months ago
@ButterflyStorms Hey. This video just proves that even science-worshipping atheists can be scientifically irrational too, i.e. stupid. Anyone who thinks jet fuel can disintegrate a building, and a few fires in another very sturdy building can also make it disintegrate and fall the way it did should just stop thinking, and stop calling themselves "rational".
TOSTunes 4 months ago
@TOSTunes I agree with what you're saying, but can we please not use the phrase "science-worshipping"? Most scientists and atheists do not worship science. They do not worship anything. The word "worship" has powerful religious undertones, implying unthinking acceptance of something as unalterably true. This is NEVER the case for science - as it is constantly open to criticism, adjustment and improvement. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
hmspinaforethisisspa 4 months ago 11
@hmspinaforethisisspa Disagree, with one word---phlogiston. The fact that you impart to all atheists and scientists some above-reproach quality, ipso facto by an intolerant world view says precisely what you deny.
These goofballs don't help the case of atheism, nor science.
[Some of the people who didn't think the buildings would fall were the DESIGNERS of the WTC. They don't even TOUCH WTC7.]
OneVoiceMore 3 months ago
@OneVoiceMore I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment - please be a bit more clear (eg. are you saying scientists worshipped phlogiston? cos I'm pretty sure they didn't...)
hmspinaforethisisspa 3 months ago
@TOSTunes
Simplistic generalities only make you look stupid. Jet fuel didnt "disintegrate" anything. It softened the steel so it lost its strength. The formula for that is 10th grade high school physics, which 911 truth newbs all admit to having slept through. A "few" fires? LOL Revisionist history for $1000 Alex
SpreadingtheMuse 4 months ago
@TOSTunes
Simplistic generalities only make you look stupid. Jet fuel didnt "disintegrate" anything. It softened the steel so it lost its strength. The formula for that is 10th grade high school physics, which 911 truth newbs all admit to having slept through. A "few" fires? LOL Revisionist history or deliberately playing dumb
SpreadingtheMuse 4 months ago
@ButterflyStorms You are going to be my favorite person for this week for saying that! If only everyone could understand it as easily as you explain it =)
shady9321 4 months ago