911 dubunking the dubunkers

[jmacomber68w]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...aw/1227842.html

 

so i know this should in theory just go in the Zeitgeist thread, so if it gets moved whatev, i figure more people who are not interested in the zeitgeist thread could see this link if i gave it its own thread, but anyways, there is some quality debunking stuff here, i also know there is a book, but i just really hate it when people blindly follow "documentaries" like zietgeist or loose change , I just wanted to get this out there, ill leave my views at that since I love all wilco fans and i dont want to get in a forum quarrel over who is right or wrong on this issue

[Panther]

Im not saying I agree with this but I just thought people should know there is a debunking the debunking article to.

 

Popular Mechanics Debunked

 

9/11 Blogger /Jon Gold | September 27 2006

 

A few weeks ago, I went into a Barnes & Noble looking for Barrie Zwicker's latest book, "Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11."

 

Before I got to the counter to ask if they had it in stock, I saw several copies of Popular Mechanics' new John McCain endorsed book called, "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts." They had them prominently displayed so everyone could see them.

 

Holding back an "upchuck", I walked up to the counter, and asked the girl if they had any of Barrie's book in stock. As it turned out, they didn't. They were nice enough to order me a copy.

 

While I was there, I do what I always do in a book store. I looked for books by authors within the 9/11 Truth Movement. I was able to find one copy of Michael Ruppert's book, but nothing else.

 

Admittedly, I have never read Popular Mechanics' book. Wait a second. What's Jon pulling? How can he debunk a book without even reading it?

 

Here's how you do it.

 

If you're a frequent visitor to this site, you will know that there are several people citing Popular Mechanics's book as if it was the "holy grail" for 9/11 answers.

 

In Reprehensor's thread entitled, "Norman Mineta

[bobbob1313]

I'm not really sure what his points are. What hasn't the government answered regarding 9/11?

[Panther]

well for one the collapse of building 7 is left out of the 911 commision

[bobbob1313]

well for one the collapse of building 7 is left out of the 911 commision

 

Well, that's because George Bush himself blew it up. And he would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling bloggers, who, with their keen powers of insight, were able to do what the combined powers of the 9/11 commission, 500+ congressmen and women, and the entirety of the media were unable to do.

 

I mean, come on. Something this big would not be possible to cover up in today's day and age. The media is too all over things, and somebody would've said something.

[bjorn_skurj]

Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", or "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity".

 

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.

 

Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as a heuristic maxim (rule of thumb) that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity, often or especially in scientific theories.

 

Believe it or not, it is simpler to explain 9/11 by attributing it to a terrorist conspiracy of some complexity than to a government conspiracy to attack its own citizens. Unless you have truly gone through the looking-glass and think al-Qaida is a U.S. government creation.

[Panther]

I wouldnt even assume that I know why building 7 collapsed for I am a simple workerbee, the reason my mind ponders is that with all

the u.s intelligence there hasnt been an explanation. Thtas certainly confusing. Im not drawing to conclusion but I dont blame the people who do.

I mean what else can they do for answers.

 

well al quaeda is a western creation maybe not on purpose but they were funded by western powers during the cold war.

[TheMaker]

Building 7 collapsed because two big fuckin' planes decimated the area. I mean, Jesus...

 

I love 9-11 conspiracy wackos. My personal favourite are the wingnuts and their "BUT THE STEEL WASN'T HOT ENOUGH TO MELT!!!" panic explanation. No, it wasn't, but it was damned close to several thousand degrees, which is more than hot enough to reduce the structural integrity of steel to, oh, just about nothing...

[Panther]

if youve seen the collapse of building 7 the other towers being hit did not affect it,

the owner of the towers explanation was that he told them to pull it w.e that means.

I dont believe it was an inside job but building 7 always perplexed me.

[mathew]

truth is stranger than fiction

[Good Old Neon]

This just about sums it up for me, from the mouth of Noam Chomsky, a person who could be, in many quarters is considered the US

[John Smith]

Believe it or not, it is simpler to explain 9/11 by attributing it to a terrorist conspiracy of some complexity than to a government conspiracy to attack its own citizens. Unless you have truly gone through the looking-glass and think al-Qaida is a U.S. government creation.

 

It is also easier to think about 911 in terms of absolute incompetance on the part of the Bush adminsitration, than it is to think about them actually pulling off 911 on their own sucessfully without any leaks. If they really did it I woudl imagine that there is a possibility that someone somewhere in the so called plot would have a conscious and spill it.

[Good Old Neon]

Unless you have truly gone through the looking-glass and think al-Qaida is a U.S. government creation.

 

I agree with where you

[John Smith]

Building 7 collapsed because two big fuckin' planes decimated the area. I mean, Jesus...

 

I love 9-11 conspiracy wackos. My personal favourite are the wingnuts and their "BUT THE STEEL WASN'T HOT ENOUGH TO MELT!!!" panic explanation. No, it wasn't, but it was damned close to several thousand degrees, which is more than hot enough to reduce the structural integrity of steel to, oh, just about nothing...

 

They never understand or care to understand that the steel didn't have to melt it only had to soften up and become pilable/plastic thus rendering it unable to hold up the weight on top of it.

[NightOfJoy]

Believe it or not, it is simpler to explain 9/11 by attributing it to a terrorist conspiracy of some complexity than to a government conspiracy to attack its own citizens. Unless you have truly gone through the looking-glass and think al-Qaida is a U.S. government creation.

 

One might make the arguement that al-Qaida is indeed a US gov't creation (an unintended creation though)............isnt it a known fact that during the Afghan/USSR war, the Reagan admin supported the Afghan nationals and others (including bin Ladens fledgling group as well as factions that later morphed into the Taliban) with arms, money and military training? Without all of which, bin Ladens group never would have 'won' the minor battle against a Russian force that propelled them into greater prominence in the Islamic militant world, thus attracting more recruits and funding.................or maybe I am on the otherside of the looking-glass?

[bobbob1313]

What Bjorn is implying is that Al Queda was, up until the day of 9/11 and even now, funded and supported by the United States government, who knew everything they were doing and set it up themselves.

[Elixir Sue]

I agree with where you

[mathew]

"This just about sums it up for me, from the mouth of Noam Chomsky, a person who could be, in many quarters is considered the US

[mathew]

no need to go one memory

heres a video of the collapse which includes the owner of the building saying the explanation was that he order it to be pulled. and yes there were fires from debris but the building collapsed in seconds, not because of fires.

[bobbob1313]

What real truth? Jesus christ, what more do you want? Seriously.

[Elixir Sue]

no need to go one memory

heres a video of the collapse which includes the owner of the building saying the explanation was that he order it to be pulled. and yes there were fires from debris but the building collapsed in seconds, not because of fires.

 

He's talking about pulling the fire department's efforts out of building 7...says he got a call from the fire dept. commander or whatever who said they couldn't contain the fires, so they stopped trying to salvage it.

 

It collapsed not "in seconds" but after HOURS of burning...not until the evening of Sept. 11. You don't think that several floors of the building burning for hours could cause enough structural damage for it to collapse?

[Good Old Neon]

I

[mathew]

what sources? it was on cnn that Bloomberg said that, Im not saying he is corrupt Im just pointing out that he has political intrest not to waste his

time talking about 911 conspiracies ,

 

" He's talking about pulling the fire department's efforts out of building 7"

that makes allot of sense and shows how these videos take things completly out of context.

[Good Old Neon]

what sources? it was on cnn that Bloomberg said that, Im not saying he is corrupt Im just pointing out that he has political intrest not to waste his

time talking about 911 conspiracies ,

 

Interesting, as I

[Guest Jules]

Not sure if anyone mentioned this, but I have heard that it might have been Marines throwing dogs at the towers that actually brought them down.