Monk-Eye

"Were Shape Charges Used In The World Trade Center Collapes?"

Shaped Charges and the World Trade Center Collapses (link)

__________________
Hanged Man
Melpomene

Monk-Eye

"1000 Degrees"

How did these hot spots develop?

ashurbanipal

I wish there had been an option something like "There is evidence that shows a high probability of shaped charges."

No matter what, it will be impossible to absolutely prove it. I nevertheless voted for the first option as that's the closest to my opinion.

Those who voted for no evidence either didn't look at the pictures, didn't understand the implications of what they were seeing, or don't understand what constitutes evidence.

Kandahar

You guys would be more credible if your source didn't link to a bunch of anti-semitic propaganda, and claim that the BBC was somehow involved in the conspiracy and/or could predict the future.

Actually, no you wouldn't. This would be just as ludicrous even from a different source.

__________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams

Hatuey

U.S. Government...incapable of not losing my mail...behind....terrorist attack....that killed 3,000 Americans....all of this goes off without a hitch.....tin foil....fashioned into hat.....here you go.

__________________
Is Intolerant Because He Won't Let The Intolerant Run Other People's Lives.

ashurbanipal

If Hitler had told you that 2+2 does, in fact, equal 4, you would claim that he was lying?

I'm not anti-semitic and I don't think the Jews had anything to do with 9/11. I know some people do, and where they take that view because they're suspicious generally of Jews, I think that's disgusting. But that doesn't mean they may not have a point about there having been some kind of conspiracy other than the officially sanctioned one.

Do you have a good explanation for how that whole thing happened, then? I have a pretty good one that fits with a conspiracy. But let's hear yours.

But even if you do have one, why does that suddenly show that all the other ideas that might support conspiracy are suddenly absurd?

Then just explain why. All I'm looking for is for someone to look at a given piece of evidence or body of evidence (OK, so let's go with just what's presented in this thread), and explain it completely by mundane means. If someone can do that, and can satisfactorily answer all my questions without ever calling me an idiot or insisting that conspiracies are just impossible, I'd be likely to believe that piece of evidence is better explained without conspiracy. And if someone can do that for all the evidence that I think is credible, then I'd change my mind.

ashurbanipal

No, not the whole government. A very, very small part of it.

I seem to get mail on a pretty regular basis, and 99% of the mail I send out gets where it's going without a hitch. Still, there are some issues from time to time. I'm not sure why this is relevant since I'm not aware of any conspiracist who insists that the Post Office is behind it all.

No, there were many, many hitches. If there were no hitches, there wouldn't be conspiracy theorists.

Kandahar

If I didn't already know the answer, I'd certainly be more skeptical of the source than I would be if someone credible told me that.

Ya, then you're what is known as a "useful idiot" for the anti-semitic agenda.

19 Arab Muslim males hijacked four planes, crashing two of them into the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon. One crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, because of an unclear reason.

Your turn. The entire conspiracy, from start to finish, please.

Occam's Razor. If things can be explained using the simplest explanation, there is no reason to assume the existence of elaborate conspiracies. What you have done is the opposite...Occam's Sledgehammer, if you will. You seem to believe that the more incredible and sexy the story is, the more likely it is to be true.

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the plane itself exploded, seeing as it was on fire and full of jet fuel?

You won't change your mind, because all the evidence in the world won't convince you. There is no evidence that could POSSIBLY exist, even in theory, that would persuade you that you are wrong. You'll ALWAYS be able to come up with some bull**** excuse, until your whole theory becomes even more incredible than it already is.

talloulou

We shot it down.



This Razor thing comes up alot lately. It's an old idea but I've only heard it used tons in the past few months. Meme? I hear it on TV, I hear it on the radio, on here, and my husband used it in conversation the other day. What gives?

Also I know that in many instances the easiest explanation is the right explanation however how that idea can be used as a debate technique or method to explain why something is right is beyond me. Since it's not always true it's a good theory to apply to "guessing games" but as far as trying to figure something out or claim something is true or false I don't see how Occam's Razor is at all useful.

Kandahar

That's most likely what happened, however, there isn't a whole lot of evidence to support any particular conclusion about why that plane crashed. It is also very plausible that the passengers overtook the hijackers, or that the hijackers were just stupid and didn't know how to fly it properly.

I dunno. I've known about it for years, and haven't heard it used more recently.

If faced with two theories, it's best to assume the theory that hypothesizes the fewest amount of unproven entities or other theories.

So for example, if the question is "What happened to the fly we put in the spider web?", you might see two theories: A) The spider ate it, B) An invisible dragon shrunk himself down to the size of the spider, battled the spider, and ate the fly after he won.

One theory makes lots of assumptions that have not been proven, whereas the other can be reasonably deduced from what we already know.