Poll: A third of U.S. Public Believes 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

[Lubbock]

Poll: A third of U.S. Public Believes 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
By THOMAS HARGROVE
Scripps Howard News Service

More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.

The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be.

Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Suspicions that the 9/11 attacks were "an inside job" -- the common phrase used by conspiracy theorists on the Internet -- quickly have become nearly as popular as decades-old conspiracy theories that the federal government was responsible for President John F. Kennedy's assassination and that it has covered up proof of space aliens.

Seventy percent of people who give credence to these theories also say they've become angrier with the federal government than they used to be.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/279827_conspiracy02ww.html?source=mypi

[Antigone]

How many people in the US claim to be radical Bush Hating Liberals? Wanna bet the number is around one third of the US public? :evilgrin:

[Eagle1]

give me a break
300 out of 1000 people polled believe 9/11 was a government conspiracy?? did they poll 1000 people from berkley???

[The_Elucidator]

How many people in the US claim to be radical Bush Hating Liberals? Wanna bet the number is around one third of the US public? :evilgrin:

Wanna guess how many of that 1/3 voted Democrat in the last election???:question:

[Lubbock]

" . . . 3. There is no obvious explanation for why those buildings fell. Actually, forget "obvious." . . . "

I do not understand that statement, cited as a "factor" for why anyone would believe terrorists didn't bring them down.

It's pretty obvious to me why those building fell.

Anyone who's watched the two-hour HC special regarding the design, engineering, construction method and construction materials used in the building of the WTC Towers would understand instantly why the buildings didn't stand up after having two 737s loaded with jet fuel flown through them.

As dumb as I am, I understand why the buildings collapsed.

[Borgia]

I think the 9/11 conspiracy theorists are just plain bonkers. It is my shame that the majority of them appear to be liberals. A good friend of mine is one of them. Oh the horror!

[ConspiracyBuff]

The documentaries are preety well done. They involve firefighters accounts of multiple bombs going off on the base floors (between floors 1-4) these are recorded on the dispatch tapes. The new coverage of the time has helped the conspiracy. Also, the flight recorders were never recovered-fishy, all bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the building one week prior for no apparent reason-fishy, put-options on the stocks of American Airlines were 11 times the norm on September 10-fishy. The planes melted and the building collapses and yet 3 blocks away one of the terrorists passport (paper) is found by an FBI agent-fishy. The original hole in the pentagon did not have holes in the sides where the wings would have hit initially-people inside the pentagon are quoted as saying multiple explosions were going off in different parts of the building-fishy. Melted steel from jet fuel (a 2,000 degree fire) seems to be a new discovery in the history of melted steel -fishy. The fact that the fires only burned for about an hour and the building collpases when fires have burned for nearly 24 hours on buildings even older than this and the building has not totally collapsed. A partial collapse would have been different. The fact that the building collapses at free fall speed-fishy. The recent discovery of thermite from a melted steel sample-fishy.

Bottom line folks is that 1/3 of America want's answers to these questions and more that the government has failed to adress.

http://www.loosechange911.com/

[Lubbock]

CB, supposing that what you just posted is the truth [and I don't suppose for one split second that it is] then I would like for you to give us your explanation for just what happened in this nation on September 11, 2001.

Start with the airport video of the terrorists getting on the planes, right on through the clean up at ground zero.

Start at the beginning and take us through it.

The terrorists boarded the planes . . .

Go from there.

[DoctorDoom]

Unfortunately, the further away we move in time from an event, the more susceptible it is to encrustation with conspiracy bullshit. Memories fade, and liars create their mythologized versions to "enhance" the events for their own ends. The BS about 9/11 was inevitable.

[Rhino]

Bottom line folks is that 1/3 of America want's answers to these questions and more that the government has failed to adress.And they saw Elvis last weekend. The credibility level is about the same.

[Rhino]

It wasn't quite as bad as the article suggests.

There are also accusations being made following the 9/11 terrorist attack. One of these is:
People in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted to United States to go to war in the Middle East.*

Very likely 16%
Somewhat likely 20%
Not likely 59%
Don't know 5%http://www.newspolls.org/question.php?question_id=716

'Somewhat likely' is a bit different from 'believing' it.

[Kathy29]

One thing that conspiracy theorists never talk about is history. They act as if 911 happened in a vacuum. It was once. It was an isolated incident to get us to go to war. They never consider that the 911 attack was the SECOND attack. They never consider that islam has been at war with us for over 20 years with out government doing nothing but burying the dead. So, Bush takes the terrorists to task one time, and our government wants to get into a war in the middle east. We have been at war in the middle east for decades! Just because we didn't fight back doesn't mean we're not at war.

The left wants us to be another Israel, just take the bombings, the murders, and blown up planes, and all the rest and do nothing. Like Kerry wanted to do, consider it a nuisance. The price we pay for peace. We need to be Eloi, just letting people go to the Morlocks to die to keep from a real war. Don't hit them, they might really hurt us.

Liberals never get tired of being wusses and pussies. With every death at islamic hands, the examine their manicures and are glad it wasn't them.

[Borgia]

Liberals never get tired of being wusses and pussies. With every death at islamic hands, the examine their manicures and are glad it wasn't them.

I was 100% in favor of the attack on Afghanistan. The 9/11 planners were there so it was wise to go there and try to get them. You will note that almost all Democrats supported our invasion of Afghanistan.

I'll have to tell my two liberal friends in the Air Force that Kathy29 says they are wusses and pussies. I'll have to email one of them since he is in Qatar right now. The other one already served a term in Iraq last year.

[Kathy29]

The military is filled with liberals who are there, cause it's the contract, its the job, otherwise they could care less. Maybe if they get a chance, they can rat out a braver comrade.

[Lubbock]

Poll: A third of U.S. Public Believes 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

Let's keep it on TOPIC, Borgia.

No Rabbit Trails for you today.

No Gotcha Moments.

[Borgia]

The military is filled with liberals who are there, cause it's the contract, its the job, otherwise they could care less. Maybe if they get a chance, they can rat out a braver comrade.

Perhaps. My liberal friend who served in Iraq is 100% behind the Iraqi invasion. My other liberal friend is over there as a doctor patching up the soldiers. I am sure they are both just waiting for their chance to rat out a braver comrade.

[Oolon Coluphid]

The military is filled with liberals who are there, cause it's the contract, its the job, otherwise they could care less. Maybe if they get a chance, they can rat out a braver comrade.

Kathy, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You sound just as crazy as these conspiracy nuts. You've even got your own conspiracy!

OMFG!! Teh libruls are gonna get me!!!111!!

http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/0976726904.01._BO2,204,203,45,-64_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_V65621288_.jpg

[Kathy29]

Maybe they aren't liberals. Just trying to make you feel comfortable, like you are among liberal, America hating friends.

I don't know your friends all two of them. I do know lots of liberals, and a bigger bunch of evil you might never find.

Of course I know what I'm talking about. I live in a liberal state. I see the damage they do every day, and hear about the damage they want to do every day.

Liberals are evil in the truest and purest sense of the word. The biggest danger our country faces isn't from terrorisim, isn't from open borders, it is from liberals.

[Borgia]

Poll: A third of U.S. Public Believes 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

Let's keep it on TOPIC, Borgia.

No Rabbit Trails for you today.

No Gotcha Moments.

So conservative posters can go off topic as much as they like and malign liberals with nary a complaint from you. I respond and *I* am admonished?
-----
Like Doom said, this percentage will probably increase as we move further in time away from 9/11. I think holocaust deniers have gained adherents as time progressed. It sickens me that 20 years from now we will still be dealing with idiots who think Bush was behind 9/11. I say just ignore them or flat out ridicule them. Reasoned debate is better than they deserve.

[Rhino]

The military is filled with liberals who are there, cause it's the contract, its the job, otherwise they could care less. Maybe if they get a chance, they can rat out a braver comrade.
You're entitled to your opinions on liberals, but as a retired military member, I have to say that such comments don't sit well with me. I had many fellow military members who were liberals, and although I did not agreee with their politics, they were just as brave and loyal as anyone else. Comments that appear to denigrate military members, regardless of their political persuasion, are simply uncalled for, in my opinion.

[Borgia]

Maybe they aren't liberals. Just trying to make you feel comfortable, like you are among liberal, America hating friends.
Neither has ever voted for a Republican President. Both support liberal candidates. I know both loved Wellstone for example. None of us hate America.

I don't know your friends all two of them. I do know lots of liberals, and a bigger bunch of evil you might never find.
I would wonder what constitutes evil but, heaven forfend, I don't want to go off topic. :)

[Borgia]

You're entitled to your opinions on liberals, but as a retired military member, I have to say that such comments don't sit well with me. I had many fellow military members who were liberals, and although I did not agreee with their politics, they were just as brave and loyal as anyone else. Comments that appear to denigrate military members, regardless of their political persuasion, are simply uncalled for, in my opinion.

Didn't you get the memo? Politics first, respect for military is second. :(

[TechnoPrincess]

You're entitled to your opinions on liberals, but as a retired military member, I have to say that such comments don't sit well with me. I had many fellow military members who were liberals, and although I did not agreee with their politics, they were just as brave and loyal as anyone else. Comments that appear to denigrate military members, regardless of their political persuasion, are simply uncalled for, in my opinion.

:claps:

I have several retired military members in my family that are liberal who I would not doubt their bravery or their willingness to server for a moment. One even signed up for Vietnam 3 times because he felt it was 'the right thing to do'. I also work with several Veterans who HATE Bush and are very liberal but have even said they would sign up today if they were younger to help defend our country from the terrorists.

Not all liberals have limp wrists. :limp:

[Lubbock]

Well, while we're off topic, let me just say that Kathy's remark pissed me off too.

[Kathy29]

Since the military has been hollowed out (by liberals) yes, there will be loyal and brave, patriotic military members of every persuasion.

There will also be gang members, gays, liberals and any other type of person who are in the military for many reasons other than bravery, loyalty and patriotisim.

It's not your father's military.

Somebody contrived the humiliation at Abu Ghraib into abuse. Somebody contrived and reported on Haditha. Someone informed on their fellow military members. Someone rolled a grenade into a tent of sleeping military. WHO? Members of the military who, in addition to loyalty, bravery and patriotisim have other agendas.

Liberals not only will get us all killed. Liberals want to get us all killed.

[Oolon Coluphid]

Liberals not only will get us all killed. Liberals want to get us all killed.

Kathy, you are as nutty as a 9/11 conspiracy theorist

http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/images/icons/goofyeye.gif

[Kathy29]

Judging from the harm liberals do on a daily basis, I'm also correct.

[DoctorDoom]

Foolon, have you collected enough quotes to satisfy the idiot children at the fundy board?

[The_Elucidator]

OMFG!! Teh libruls are gonna get me!!!111!!



Oolon - the "F" in OMFG better not stand for what I think it does! :flame:

[Oolon Coluphid]

Oolon - the "F" in OMFG better not stand for what I think it does! :flame:
Fantabulous? Friendly? Fortuitous? Take your pick.

[ConspiracyBuff]

CB, supposing that what you just posted is the truth [and I don't suppose for one split second that it is] then I would like for you to give us your explanation for just what happened in this nation on September 11, 2001.

Start with the airport video of the terrorists getting on the planes, right on through the clean up at ground zero.

Start at the beginning and take us through it.

The terrorists boarded the planes . . .

Go from there.
<!-- / message -->
I will do no such thing because I don't advocate for this theory. However, I have seen the documentaries and information from the people who do-you?. If their suggestions, some of which are backed by evidence disturb you then perhaps you should look into it more. I know it isn't likely that you would. Personally If I'm going to flatly refute something, no matter what it is, I do my homework first. I posted what I find to be the crux of the theories and I posted a link to view one documentary-have you? My intention was to get some postive rebuttals of the theories points. Thus far I havn't seen any. I think for people to talk intelligently about the issue(the conspiracy-not 911) they need to have knowledge of the theories main points. For the record, I do not believe in the theory but I believe the gov needs to answer some of their simple questions and I see no reason why they don't. The 911 Commisions Report didn't do anything to refute any of the CT's arguments.

Has anyone watched the documentary? Feedback?

[TechnoPrincess]

I will do no such thing because I don't advocate for this theory. However, I have seen the documentaries and information from the people who do-you?. If their suggestions, some of which are backed by evidence disturb you then perhaps you should look into it more. I know it isn't likely that you would. Personally If I'm going to flatly refute something, no matter what it is, I do my homework first. I posted what I find to be the crux of the theories and I posted a link to view one documentary-have you? My intention was to get some postive rebuttals of the theories points. Thus far I havn't seen any. I think for people to talk intelligently about the issue(the conspiracy-not 911) they need to have knowledge of the theories main points. For the record, I do not believe in the theory but I believe the gov needs to answer some of their simple questions and I see no reason why they don't. The 911 Commisions Report didn't do anything to refute any of the CT's arguments.

Has anyone watched the documentary? Feedback?

I haven't watched this particular one...I'm at work and simply don't have the time. HOWEVER, I have seen several others that I am sure are similar, and I have seen documentaries that expose some of the fallicies of the documentaries.

The one that always got me was one that showed pictures of the Pentagon trying to refute that a plane hit it. I was at home watching it AS IT HAPPEND and there were parts of the plane strewn everywhere. What some of these people have done is selectively choose pictures that only show the part of the building they want to be seen. Sometimes they try to say that two different pictures were taken from the same spot, when if you look at them they weren't.

I saw the second plane hit the tower, I saw the fireball and I watched in horror as those towers burned. It did not surprise me in the least that they fell, or how they fell. I have seen buildings on fire fall much like that. The weight of the upper floors falling causes the lower floors to fall harder and faster as the weight builds.

What people thought were bombs could have been any number of things exploding from the fires above. Have you ever been in a burning building? All sorts of things explode from the heat and fire...sometimes in areas not even on fire because of pressure caused by the fire.

With the paper and other evidence, there is a lot that can be explained by the science of fire. More than I care to go into right now. If you had ever been in a fire, or in a building recently consumed by fire you would understand some of it.

You assume the government HAS the answers. There are far better experts on such matters that the government, and many of them have spoken out on the junk science behind some of these CT.

Do I think there are things the government knows that we dont? Yes, and I also believe that there are good reasons we may not know them.

[Rhino]

If their suggestions, some of which are backed by evidence disturb you then perhaps you should look into it more. I know it isn't likely that you would. I have. Those theories are horse crap.

The 911 Commisions Report didn't do anything to refute any of the CT's arguments.Non sequitur. They didn't refute the grassy knoll theory either. We don't pay our government to waste time chasing such ridiculous claims.

Has anyone watched the documentary? Feedback?I've seen some. Which one are you referring to? The link doesn't work too well.

Lots of this stuff has been discussed here before. Have you searched the archives?

[Lubbock]

Conspiracy of what?

" . . . I think for people to talk intelligently about the issue (the conspiracy-not 911) they need to have knowledge of the theories main points. . . . "

Conspiracy of what? Can you please explain to me what you believe someone --the government, I guess, is trying to cover up?

Can you tell me why the government would be covering it up?

There has to be a reason.

We saw the planes hit the Twin Towers. Because of the design of the buildings --no internal skeleton, the buildings collapsed.

Conspiracy of what? And why?

Muslim Terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon; one plane augered in when the passengers took control back from the terrorists.

3,000+ people died.

Muslims danced in the streets and passed out candy around the world.

The event started a war.

It's not any more complicated than that.

If someone can present me with one good example of WHAT there is to cover up, and then give me a reason WHY, I'll listen.

[ConspiracyBuff]

No I haven't. Listen folks, I don't wish to be the poster boy for this theory. I just want people to sound intelligent when they debunk such claims-on merits that is. Seems people attack the theorists but not the theory and that annoys me is all. I want to hear good, sound, logical refutations of the suposed evidence and not a bunch of "that's just plain crazy" because this isn't helpful.

It's rather late here and I'm headed to bed, gotta be up for work early. So I will respond tomm.

[Rhino]

I want to hear good, sound, logical refutations of the suposed evidence and not a bunch of "that's just plain crazy" because this isn't helpful.
http://www.911myths.com/

[Lubbock]

All you're telling me about so far is the CLAIMS.

I wan't to know why the CLAIMS are being made. To what end.

Conspiracy to do what?

For a conspiracy to have taken place in the events of September 11, 2001, it would have to mean that hundreds, if not thousands of people were in on it.

So, was it the "NeoCons" encouraging the terrorists to hijack the planes in order to take us to war?

Was Bush in on it? Did he help plan it in order for his Big Oil Buddies to make even more money?

Just how far are we willing to carry this Cynthia McNinny Crap?

[Rhino]

The Top Lies and Deceptions of Loose Change 1-10

Some of these are a bit redundant, since we have already covered many of the topics, but I wanted to produce a list of the top lies and deceptions of Loose Change. As you can tell from reading this blog and the Reader's Guide, there are literally hundreds of things wrong with the movie, but I wanted to compile a short (relatively speaking) list of the ones that really slap you in the face. I will probably post this up as a DOC or a PDF eventually. More to follow...


1. Claim: Charles Burlingame, an ex-Navy F4 pilot who worked in the Pentagon, participated in an exercise simulating crashing a 757 into a building in October 2000, before retiring to take a job at American Airlines,

Truth: Charles Burlingame started working for AA in 1979 and retired from the Naval Reserve in 1996, 4 years before these supposed exercises took place. Source (http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/cfburling3.htm)

2. Claim: Investors with prior knowledge of 9/11 made millions buying put options on airline stock.

Truth: Both the 9/11 committee and business journalists investigated this claim and found nothing unusual. Much of the investment also involved purchasing airline stock. Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/sell-sell-sell.html)

3. Claim: Plane crashing into World Trade Center was identified as a windowless cargo plane.

Truth: The man who claimed this, Marc Birnbach, was over 2 miles away at the time. Source (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=3&c=y)

4. Claim: An air traffic controller reported that they thought flight 77 was a military plane.

Truth: The full quote was referring to the unsafe way the plane was flying, not that it was impossible for a civilian plane to fly like that. "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane you don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe." Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/it-was-military-plane.html)

5. Claim, Flight 77 managed to tear 5 light poles completely out of the ground,
Without damaging either the wings or the light poles themselves.

Truth: We don’t know that the wings were undamaged, since they crashed into the Pentagon fractions of a second later. There are pictures of the light poles, however, which show them broken and twisted. Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/those-magic-light-poles.html)

6. Claim: The official explanation for flight 77 at the Pentagon is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane.

Truth: No official has made that claim, and in fact numerous pieces of the plane, including the bodies of the passengers, and the black boxes were found. Source (http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html)

7. Claim: A spokesman for Rolls-Royce stated that engine parts found at the Pentagon did not belong to any of their engines.

Truth: The spokesman stated specifically that he was not an engineer and was not familiar with the engine in question. Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/jet-engine-red-herrings.html)

8. Claim: Karl Schwarz President and Chief Executive Officer of Patmos Nanotechnologies LLC and I-Nets Security Systems, identified the engine as being a JT8D turbojet engine belonging to an A-3 Skywarrior.

Karl Schwarz is a proven fraud and conspiracy theorist, with no known background in technology or avionics. His companies are shell corporations with no employees or products. Furthermore, the A-3 Skywarrior never used a JT8D engine. The engine in question is consistent with that of the Rolls-Royce RB211 used by the 757. Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/who-is-karl-schwarz.html) and here (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml)

9. Claim: Employees at the Pentagon were seen suspiciously carrying away a large box shrouded in a blue tarp.

Truth: The blue tarp was a tent, used to aid in the crash response. Source (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/its-just-mistake.html)

10. Claim: The damage to the Pentagon was completely inconsistent with a Boeing 757?

Truth: Studies by NIST, the ASCE and Purdue University, including computer simulations show that the damage was perfectly in keeping with a crashing airplane. Source (http://www.pubs.asce.org/ceonline/ceonline03/0203feat.html)http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/top-lies-and-deceptions-of-loose.html

[Rhino]

Excellent point by point refutation, but it's long:

http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html

As I said before, these theories are horse crap

[DoctorDoom]

Oolon - the "F" in OMFG better not stand for what I think it does!It does. Foolon is an atheist troll. He doesn't care how offensive he is as long as he pisses us off.

[Oolon Coluphid]

It does. Foolon is an atheist troll. He doesn't care how offensive he is as long as he pisses us off.

I've seen you be way more offensive than I could ever dream of being. And don't even get me started on Wyatt_Junker

[Incident_command]

I've seen you be way more offensive than I could ever dream of being. And don't even get me started on Wyatt_Junker


Yea but we like Wyatt

[DoctorDoom]

And Wyatt isn't here to harvest out-of-context quotes for a board of immature heathen assholes.

[ConspiracyBuff]

Thanks to Rhino for providing some analysis of the documentary itself and the links. I will no doubt look at them.

But about the NWO.....:biggrin:

[Rhino]

My wife stated the obvious when I told her about this last night. "I don't care what the numbers are. That survey can't be valid, because there's absolutely no way that many Americans can be that stupid."

[Oolon Coluphid]

And Wyatt isn't here to harvest out-of-context quotes for a board of immature heathen assholes.

That's not my reason for being here.

[Oolon Coluphid]

My wife stated the obvious when I told her about this last night. "I don't care what the numbers are. That survey can't be valid, because there's absolutely no way that many Americans can be that stupid."

Maybe if we knew the exact wording of the questions, it'd explain something.

[Rhino]

Maybe if we knew the exact wording of the questions, it'd explain something.
We do.

http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/showpost.php?p=457004&postcount=12

[DoctorDoom]

That's not my reason for being here.Yep. Okay. Right. Sure. Gotcha. :rolleyes:

[ConspiracyBuff]

Rhino- 2 Things

The official story says that the "inferno" weakened the steel (means more than 2000 degrees), yet, after some struggle from US Gov secrecy the fire deprtment walkie talkie recording were released. Two firefighters managed to make it up above the 70th floor and they radioed back that there were two "very small pockets" of fire and that, "we should be able to kock them out" with regular hoses. Now, number one, the firefighters would never have been able to be that close the fire without dying if the heat was 2,000 plus degrees and number two if they could have relinquished the fires so easily and they were two isolated pockets then this is hardly a "raging inferno" strong enough to weaken metal and melt metal no less.

Also, there was a 2.2 richter scale reading of the ground before the buildings came down. Now, no falling building (imploded) has ever been recorded by an earthquake detector, however, the implosions have. Numerous people have said the ground shook and there is video recording of the building shaking, it's very clear in the video "loose change".

To see some other rather convincing evidence see:
http://www.cloakanddagger.de/_Grossmann/911%20REPORT/Fake_9-11_Government_Reports.htm

[Maggie_T]

My wife stated the obvious when I told her about this last night. "I don't care what the numbers are. That survey can't be valid, because there's absolutely no way that many Americans can be that stupid."

If that many Americans are liberals (which is possible), then they are worse than stupid. They are foaming-at-the-mouth, hate-filled traitors who'll believe anything as long as it puts the present administration in a bad light.

There was this "professor" on the Hannity show the other day. He went on and on about how 9/11 was all a conspiracy planned and carried out by Dick Cheney and other members of the Bush administration. I can't remember the other names he mentioned, but Karl Rove was among them, surpirse, surprise.

You could almost feel the hatred coming out of this man. Yeah, a "professor." You know. One of those commie, anti-American "professors" that lefties like Borgia and cerberus swear up and down do not exist. Uh-uh, no way. Just a figment of David Horowitz' imagination. :rolleyes:

[Peachdiane]

You could almost feel the hatred coming out of this man. Yeah, a "professor." You know. One of those commie, anti-American "professors" that lefties like Borgia and cerberus swear up and down do not exist.

Wow, if they don't exist, then my whole college education was imagined.

[Borgia]

MAggie:

I never said they did not exist. I am not sure why you insist on habitually mischaracterizing people's positions that disagree with yours.

Just so you don't keep making the same mistake, I will outline my position for you:

1. Liberals certainly do exist on campuses
2. There are liberal professors that do inject a consderable amount of liberal thought into their lectures
3. I have no idea how endemic this practice (#2) is and from my limited experience as a student, I never saw it.
4. Based on this, I question whether YOUR experience exemplifies the typical or whether you are operating under a false premise. Again, I don't know.

That is all, Maggie.

[Rhino]

Rhino- 2 Things

The official story says that the "inferno" weakened the steel (means more than 2000 degrees)No, it doesn't.

yet, after some struggle from US Gov secrecy the fire deprtment walkie talkie recording were released. Two firefighters managed to make it up above the 70th floor and they radioed back that there were two "very small pockets" of fire and that, "we should be able to kock them out" with regular hoses. Now, number one, the firefighters would never have been able to be that close the fire without dying if the heat was 2,000 plus degreesHow close were they? Nobody said it was 2000 degress. And yes, they can get quite close. I used to be a fireman.

"Fire by itself is bad news for structural steel, but a fire fed by jet fuel just makes it all the worse. The melting point of steel is about 2,800° Fahrenheit. However, steel loses about half of its tensile strength at only 900-1,100°, and at 1,400°, only 10-20% of its strength remains (Crosbie 2). The fires burned hotter than normal as a result of the fuel. They are believed to have reached temperatures of 1,500° (Carmichael 1). As a result of the heat from the fires, the structural members expanded, which consequently put stress on other elements. The heat caused the floor slabs and horizontal framing elements to sag into catenary action, which in turn made them tensile elements and led to the failures of end connections as they pulled on the bolts holding them on the columns (See Appendix A). The heat also caused columns to weaken and made buckling even more likely. This was most significant in the interior columns as they were not built as strong as the exterior columns because they did not have to deal with the lateral force of wind (FEMA 2.25)."

http://www.rit.edu/~smo5024/papers/wtc/

and number two if they could have relinquished the fires so easily and they were two isolated pockets then this is hardly a "raging inferno" strong enough to weaken metal and melt metal no less.In a fire, you can usually only assess what is right in front of you. That doesn't mean there aren't more fires.

Also, there was a 2.2 richter scale reading of the ground before the buildings came down. Now, no falling building (imploded) has ever been recorded by an earthquake detector, however, the implosions have.Not true. WTC 7 also registered, as have other buildings, presumably. Just because you haven't heard of them doesn't mean they haven't happened. And besides, the seismologists at Columbia University who reported those readings say they are not at all consistent with explosions, as the conspiracy theorists claim. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y

Numerous people have said the ground shook and there is video recording of the building shaking, it's very clear in the video "loose change".Yes. So?

To see some other rather convincing evidence see:
http://www.cloakanddagger.de/_Grossmann/911%20REPORT/Fake_9-11_Government_Reports.htmI see nothing convincing about it. Just more debunked crap.

[Naturalized-Texan]

How many people in the US claim to be radical Bush Hating Liberals? Wanna bet the number is around one third of the US public? :evilgrin:
Exactly!

[Peachdiane]

2. There are liberal professors that do inject a consderable amount of liberal thought into their lectures

A "consderable" amount? Try 100% indoctrination. Most of mine were staunch liberals (or progressives, as they called themselves).

The instructors are prohibited from discussing politics with students. Yet many broke the rule, and their Leftist political ideologies seeped through.

Check out a study here on extreme party bias. (http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/2002/october_2002_5.html)

[HooverWasRight]

Exactly!


NT are you related to RT :D

[Naturalized-Texan]

NT are you related to RT :D
Who or what is RT?

[ConspiracyBuff]

Right Turns.....member

[Rhino]

He's being a dick. LOL!

[heikediguoren]

No, it doesn't.

How close were they? Nobody said it was 2000 degress.


This link provides a detailed discussion of molten metal at the World Trade Center, with eyewitness accounts of liquid steel:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

[ConspiracyBuff]

Yes. This is what I was talking about. In order for steel to melt it has to be over 2,000 degrees.

[Rhino]

The molten metal claim was debunked. See the previous links.

[Borgia]

Hmm, was steel the only metal component in the WTC? Aluminum aircraft, computer components, etc... Plenty of other metals to go around, no reason to think any molten metal would have to be steel specifically, right?

[heikediguoren]

This page has other links of primary sources describing molten steel:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

For Borgia, this section of the BYU analysis (posted previously) shows that the liquid metal probably consisted of iron:


Even without a direct elemental analysis, we can rule out some metals based on available data. The photograph in the introduction shows a chunk of hot metal being extracted at ground zero. The hottest portion of the chunk is the lower portion, which was deepest down in the slag, and the metal is seen to be yellow-hot, certainly above cherry-red hot. The following table (see http://www.processassociates.com/process/heat/metcolor.htm (http://www.processassociates.com/process/heat/metcolor.htm) ) provides data regarding the melting temperatures of lead, aluminum, structural steel and iron, along with approximate metal temperatures by color. Note that the approximate temperature of a hot metal is given by its color, quite independent of the composition of the metal. (A notable exception is aluminum, which due to low emissivity and high reflectivity appears silvery-gray in daylight conditions, at all temperatures whether in solid or liquid forms. Aluminum does incandesce like other metals, but faintly, so that in broad daylight conditions in air, it appears silvery-gray according to experiments done at BYU.

[ConspiracyBuff]

The molten steel claim wasn't debunked. There is picture proof.

[Rhino]

Hmm, was steel the only metal component in the WTC? Aluminum aircraft, computer components, etc... Plenty of other metals to go around, no reason to think any molten metal would have to be steel specifically, right?
Right.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

And many of the reports didn't say "molten" at all.

[Rhino]

The molten steel claim wasn't debunked. There is picture proof.
Yes it was. Read the links.

[Federal Farmer]

Also, there was a 2.2 richter scale reading of the ground before the buildings came down. Now, no falling building (imploded) has ever been recorded by an earthquake detector, however, the implosions have. Numerous people have said the ground shook and there is video recording of the building shaking, it's very clear in the video "loose change".
I don't know where you got the 2.2 reading before the buildings came down. The first readings recorded show the plane impacts. Here are the readings:
<O:p

Information Based on Seismic Waves recorded at Palisades New York


Event origin time (EDT) Magnitude Duration
(hours:minutes:seconds) (equivalent seismic)

Impact 1 at North Tower 08:46:26± 0.9
12 seconds

Impact 2 at South Tower 09:02:54± 0.7
6 seconds

Collapse 1, South Tower 09:59:04±1 2.1
10 seconds

Collapse 2, North Tower 10:28:31±1 2.3
8 seconds

Collapse 3, Building 7 17:20:33± 0.6
18 seconds

[Borgia]

This page has other links of primary sources describing molten steel:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

For Borgia, this section of the BYU analysis (posted previously) shows that the liquid metal probably consisted of iron:

All right, so now where the pictures of these molten metals at WTC? Also, we are relying on a cuple of sentences and observations. How would those obervers know the color spectrum of metals and know whether they are looking at molten steel or molten aluminum? Casual observations on their part hardly seem much to hang conspiracy theories on.

[Rhino]

All right, so now where the pictures of these molten metals at WTC? Also, we are relying on a cuple of sentences and observations. How would those obervers know the color spectrum of metals and know whether they are looking at molten steel or molten aluminum? Casual observations on their part hardly seem much to hang conspiracy theories on.
Makes no difference. The supposed reports of molten metal were days or even weeks later. There is no explosive material that burns that long after an explosion. This is just more fanatical ranting.

[ConspiracyBuff]

W/E. As I have said before I could care less at this point. Unlike the theorists I have moved on. They do seem to want to cling, and I have begun to notice that the maker of Loose Change is a huge PCT who also theorizes about Bush, Kennedy Ass, and a boatload of other exhuasted theories.

I am tired of thinking about it to be honest.

[Borgia]

Words I live by:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I would qualify 9/11 as being masterminded by the govt as a rather extraordinary claim. Thus far, the evidence amounts to a lot of "could have", "it is possible", "3rd party 'expert' testimony says".

(And we have not even gotten to the manpower required to blow up the building. I mean, think of planting the TONS of explosives required. Think of the time cutting thru the girders as controlled demolitions always do. And all done while the WTC is open for business! LOL)

[heikediguoren]

All right, so now where the pictures of these molten metals at WTC? Also, we are relying on a cuple of sentences and observations. How would those obervers know the color spectrum of metals and know whether they are looking at molten steel or molten aluminum? Casual observations on their part hardly seem much to hang conspiracy theories on.

At the BYU site, the author describes the appearance and behavior of various metals at various temperatures. He notes the witnesses' descriptions of metal and uses that evidence to decide which metal they are describing. If, as described in the BYU analysis, molten aluminum does not turn red, but rather remains gray, then a pool of red molten metal will not contain aluminum as its primary constituent.

However, upon reference to the 911myths.com site, your assertion of the fallibility of "casual observations" becomes particularly significant. Most theories, whether of conspiracy or mainstream explanation, rely heavily on hearsay. One group of witness reports is pitted against another, with no clear winner in terms of reliability. It appears to come down to a matter of faith.

[Rhino]

Or you could review the science.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

I like Borgia's phrase, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is no evidence at all for these claims. It's just supposition, heresay and one helluva lot of imagination.

[DoctorDoom]

Why is there a fixation on molten steel? Steel softens at less than 2000°. It can be done with a propane torch. And weakened structural steel supporting tens of thousands of tons of building materials WILL collapse. Why do the conspiracy loonies think that the planes hit the middle floors? A: the planners understood the simple laws of physics.

The only thing that the loonies haven't done yet is to blame it on Martian heat rays.

[HooverWasRight]

The twin towers spoiled their view of the Soviet Socialist Repubic.

[Rhino]

The only thing that the loonies haven't done yet is to blame it on Martian heat rays.
"I believe that martians, undero orders from President Bu$h flew UFOs disguised as missiles disguised as planes into the World Trade Center so that the Illuminati and the Loch Ness Monster could steal all the oil in the world so that they could fund construction of a laser on the moon to hold the citizens of the world hostage."

http://www.agonybooth.com/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=2794

[kkkron]

I REALLY hope KevServo was joking when he said that. Although, looking at the thread, he may be serious...:rolleyes:

And 'UFOs disguised as missiles disguised as planes'? Really, WTF?

'Is it a bird? Is it a plane?'
'No, it's a missile disguised as a plane, dumbass!'
'No you fool, it's quite clearly a Martian UFO disguised as a missile disguised as a plane.'
'Well personally I think all the evidence points to a bird disguised as a Martian UFO disguised as a missile disguised as a plane.'

[Rhino]

I think he was joking.

[ConspiracyBuff]

LOL. Funny

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Part One:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: “Loose Change” director chuckles over Flight 93 (http://hotair.com/archives/top-picks/2006/08/02/video-loose-change-director-chuckles-over-flight-93/)

Parts Two & Three:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: “Loose Change” morons confronted by cop at Ground Zero (Update: Dylan Avery on talk radio ton... (http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/03/video-loose-change-morons-confronted-by-cop-at-ground-zero/)

Part Four:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: “Loose Change” moron calls Taliban “freedom fighters” (http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/04/video-loose-change-moron-calls-taliban-freedom-fighters/)

Very interesting.



As for me, I don't believe how reasonable people can believe in such a "conspiracy theory."

[Rhino]

As for me, I don't believe how reasonable people can believe in such a "conspiracy theory."
They don't.

[Borgia]

I think there is a minority of people who will believe these sorts of conspiracy theories for various reasons:

1. They hate the govt (whether Dem or Repub)
2. They think Bush is evil
3. They enjoy being rebels and/or outrageous
4. They like to belong to fringe thought groups as it makes them feel special
5. They like to feel like they have more knowledge and thus more intellect than the rest of us
6. Being privy to secret knowledge is like a modern day Freemason group and thus is attractive to them

[Rhino]

Right. They wouldn't be included in the group Homes mentioned, reasonable people.