Crazy Conspiracy Theories part 1 of 2

Will they never cease?

NOTE: To read comments properly, click "read all (X) comments" (However, note that the comments may display in reverse-chronological order. But within a chain of replies, it will be chronological order. Weird, I know.)

http://xkcd.com/258/
http://revisionism.nl

And to people giving me comments purporting 9/11 conspiracy theories:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Conspiracy_Theories
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_demolition_hypothesis_for_the_collaps...

Some more stuff:
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/nyregion/02conspiracy.html?ex=1314849600&am...
http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1540044.stm
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5442
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-06-20-fireproofing-wtc-collapse_N.htm

Even more stuff (most of it about a certain Mr. Griffin):
http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/dubious_claims.html
http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/Griffin1.html
http://mckinneysucks.blogspot.com/2002_07_01_mckinneysucks_archive.html#78639317
http://www.911myths.com/html/omissions____chapter_1.html
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
http://enr.construction.com/news/buildings/archives/021104.asp
http://www.iscpubs.com/articles/al/a0212mar.pdf

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/26/150221

AMY GOODMAN: Are you saying that planes did not -- you do not believe the evidence is there that planes brought down the world trade center, the planes that slammed into tower one and tower two?

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: I'm saying that people who have studied this have come up with very strong reasons to believe that neither the impact of the plane combined with the fires would be sufficient, and many fire men as I record in the book, have -- and engineers have come to that conclusion, too. Again, I'm calling for an investigation by people who do have the expertise, but the problem is that the Bush administration created a halo over 9/11, so it became not only unpatriotic, but almost sack religious to raise any questions. Therefore, the main line press has not raised these questions such as was the hole in the Pentagon only 18 feet in diameter as this picture suggests? They have not raised questions about why the photograph doesn't show any plane on the pentagon lawn. They haven't raised questions about the official story which says that somehow the plane went inside, and then the fire was so hot that it vaporized, it vaporized aluminum and tempered steel and yet somehow left the bodies in tact enough that they could be identified either through DNA -- these are ludicrous.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you name an expert you have relied on, for example on the issue of the world trade center towers going down, expert in structural engineering who has said it is impossible for the explanation to be the planes hit, and the fires caused the towers to go down?

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: Well, again, I say I have got 40 pages of notes. I've got a lot of notes on that chapter, and so readers can go and see the --

AMY GOODMAN: Name just one. Name just one structural engineering expert who said it is not feasible that the planes caused the towers to go down.

DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: I'm sorry, I don't have that information at my fingertips right at this moment.

--
well, there you go. he can't name a single expert in his defense. Now granted, I'm sure that you can find a couple of experts here and there that agree with Mr. Griffin. I, on the other hand, can find dozens more to argue against him.

Snopes stuff:
http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/2051
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/rumors.asp
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/fema.htm
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/clinton.htm

Oh, and Osama is guilty, by the way:
Here it is from the British Government:
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/page3682.asp
All about the video where he claims responsibility:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_bin_Laden_video
Here it is in its original arabic:
http://www.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=97259
Here's the translation (provided by Al-Jazeera, which is not affiliated with the U.S.):
http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=7403
Here's CNN confirming it:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/05/binladen.transcript/in...
And some san diego paper:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/terror/20041029-1423-binladentape.html
Here's another transcript:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• conspiracy
• theory
• 9/11
• nonsense
• logic

[saramichealhpt]

Lol. You failed, there are more dilikes, because you either are lying or are blind af. Sad, thats sad.

[sonicsuns]

@saramichealhpt I find it more likely that many of my viewers were simply being unfair.

[MysticXtU]

Government is a conspiracy. watch 'State is not great' and 'The death of statism'. You think it's so hard to fool people when they won't see through that one?

btw your 9/11 link collection is pathetic.. except for wikipedia of course, because wikipedia always gives you the truth.

check out the last 2 paragraphs of this: tiny.cc /02li9

good luck

[sonicsuns]

@MysticXtU Even if government is a "conspiracy", government *exists*, unlike many of the events or entities described by Crazy Conspiracy Theories.

My 9/11 link collection contains citations from Cambridge and Edinburgh Universities, and quotes many experts.

You criticize me for citing Wikipedia (in addition to the experts I cited), yet the *only* counter-evidence you offer is an opinion poll of non-experts. And even in that poll, a strong plurality agrees with me.

[TwentyThousandTwelve]

Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point.

[sonicsuns]

@TwentyThousandTwelve yeah, I know. I should be more efficient when I speak.

[sexywildlad]

@TwentyThousandTwelve The Point (02:36): conspiracy theories use the lack of evidence as evidence for their theory that supports the initial unproven premise that there is a conspiracy theory (i.e. there is no evidence because all of it is hidden, so that must be evidence for a conspiracy). The logic is circular, and should therefore be dismissed.

For otherwise we could assume many other things (i.e. the moon does not exist), with the same reasoning that there is in conspiracy theories.

[sexywildlad]

Thank you for some sound arguments!

[saramichealhpt]

@saramichealhpt

You are not sad, the way you don' t see thing is sad. Wake up, I am saying it for your future too.