CT belief= Faith

[jskowron]

Arguments with (attempt to convince?) CTers are always entertaining and frequently informative. However, they frequently end up with hard evidence presented, counter to the CT position, being labled by the CTer as being "faked." This tactic points out that the CT position is, in fact, quite like dogma- rather unfalsifiable- in that anything that is presented as being contrary that can't be refuted through their logical fallacies is simply deemed fake. Fake,to them, seems to mean "created by the all-powerful, all-controlling, us government/illuminati/Zionist Cabal/etc. This is quite similar to the arguments put forth in favor of intelligent design. IDers can always say to the other side "you're evidence is good because a god/higher power made it that way. CTers thus can say "of course there is evidenced of a plane crash in that field- it was planted their by people so powerful and devious that they will never be caught." Thus the unfalsifiability card has been played, and further argument is futile.

Killtown uses this argument frequently. After appeal to authority, ad hominen attacks, non-sequiturs, etc. fail to refute evidence contrary to his belief, he simply says that it was faked. Thus no, evidence contrary to CT belief is any good, and that which is good is not real.

[defaultdotxbe]

try asking them what evidence you would need to convince them they are wrong, see if that leaves you any doubts as to their religious beliefs

[Pardalis]

Welcome Jskowron!

It's nice to have a behaviorist on this forum. :) You will have plenty of interesting cases to analyse in this CT subforum!

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Guys now I am not a cter, but what caused the huge beam on the world trade center to leap into the air and sail out in an UN natural Manor?
Physicist say that it needs to be accelerated form its base not from the side, and they are right what force in the building could have done that?
Muslim physicist were the ones who started asking questions, and some of the question are good ones, but if an explosive were naturally in the building then that would answer a lot for both the engineers and the Physicist.
Plus it could save lives in the future.

[Pardalis]

Muslim physicist were the ones who started asking questions

Muslim physicists? Do they study a different kind of physics? Is that a different field all to itself?

Why make this distinction? :confused:

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Muslim physicists? Do they study a different kind of physics? Is that a different field all to itself?

Why make this distinction? :confused:

Basically because it was a group of them who brought the Idea to the French mag that first published about Controlled Demolition.
Because of some physical abnormalities in the collapse that physicist still are puzzled over.

Basically their are some genuine energy potential problems in the collapse that do not agree with Newtonian or Einsteinian Ideas in physics.
There seems to be another energy form at play, just like there is an energy form missing form Dr. Jones's experiments to form thermite.
If we can put all the energy forms together in one picture the picture is complete and almost everyone can agree on it.
The thing is that people are to narrow minded and only looking at things from the view of physics, or Chemistry, of engineering, what if we could put all of them together with one simple Idea and solve the whole puzzle.

Here is one, what energy form would have traveled though the buildings super structure before the plane hit?
What could have caused people to think that they heard a bomb in the basement before they heard the Impact, and fuel explosion, from above?
What energy form would not allow the use of explosives in controlled Demolition?
What energy form would Trigger thermite formation?
What energy form would cause Aluminum to burn in the towers and at the pentagon and in building 7?
What energy form is so simple that everyone has just about forgotten about it?
What energy form is produced in large fires?
What energy form makes it easier for metals to burn by causing the oxide coating to flake off?
Oh and what energy form can pulverise aluminum of an aircraft into micro particle so small they burn in air in a crash like flight 93?
What energy form was not used in Dr. Jones's experiments?
You know. I wish we could find just one common thread to this whole mess.
I wish there was something simple that no one has ever thought of that explains everything!

[Maxwell's Demon]

I think comparing CT believers to believers of religion is an excellent analysis. There are lots of parallels I can see with it; for example, the notion that everything was actually carried out by the
all powerful, all controlling government is always the theme in CTs, and yet this all powerful organisation, whilst being clever enough to plot the most daring and most audacious spectacle, was also stupid enough to leave behind evidence trails that could easily be spotted by a gang of internet weirdoes with too much time on their hands. This to me sounds similar to the idea of an omnipotent God who is all powerful and all knowing and yet is surprised when people misbehave and he needs to shower them with death and destruction.

The problem with most of the conspiracy theories are that they are nearly all so utterly fantastical and impossible to believe that applying logic to them is as futile as applying logic to the existence of God. It doesn't matter how much rationality you bring into it, because the facts you are arguing against transcend all notions of reality.

Personally I've almost given up arguing with CT-ers, there is almost no point. I once spent the best part of 4 hours arguing with my girlfriend's flatmate who is a resolute believer in the moon landings conspiracy. Despite the presentation of lots and lots of hard scientific fact, she would barely concede one point. Similarly I've just not bothered debating with people like Killtown - I know it would be a waste of my time and bandwidth.

Personally I would be more inclined to argue if the theories were less fantastical - with the 9/11 fantascists for example; if they argued simply that the guv'ment knew what was going to happen on 9/11 and chose to ignore it, or perhaps that they paid and trained the terrorist operatives to perpurtrate the crimes, then I could be tempted to start listening and attempt a rational debate. But when you are up against the sort of rubbish spouted by killtown and his ilk, then I know there is no point - rather like arguing with a Jehovah’s Witness - it will just raise my blood pressure and achieve little else.

[Pardalis]

Basically because it was a group of them who brought the Idea to the French mag that first published about Controlled Demolition.

Who are they? Are they called "Muslim physicists"? Is there a Muslim branch to physics? Or are they just Muslims who believe themselves to be physicists, or physicists who happen to be Muslims?

[Maxwell's Demon]

Ignoring my own last point now....

I wish there was something simple that no one has ever thought of that explains everything!

Don't we all - it's not going to happen. I've yet to hear of anything around the WTC collapse that can't be explained by Newtonian Physics (and I have no idea why Einsteinian physics would be required).
Please expand on the "energy potential problems" that you allude to, and please use mathematics and not handwaving and meaningless talk of energy forms. If I can't see Maths, I can't argue Physics.

[Pardalis]

Who are they? Are they called "Muslim physicists"? Is there a Muslim branch to physics? Or are they just Muslims who believe themselves to be physicists, or physicists who happen to be Muslims?

What I mean to say is, do physicists who happen to be Muslims have a particular reason to be more skeptical of the WTC collapse than any other physicists? Does religious faith have anything to do with the physics of the WTC collapses? Does physics work in a different way in the Muslim world?

[Loss Leader]

[snip]This tactic points out that the CT position is, in fact, quite like dogma- rather unfalsifiable.

I've noticed the similarity. I've had long debates with a very well-educated Catholic friend in which I ask her quite reasonable questions like why God would create energy out of nothingness to turn water into the blood of Christ in church but refuse to do it in a lab. She replies that it is a matter of faith. In no other area of her life would she accept anything without some sort of explanation, but in matters of religion it becomes a point of pride. In religion - and almost only in religion - belief without evidence is actually prized.

When the goal is not to learn more about the universe but only to adhere as lovingly to an idea as possible, no amount of information will sway anyone. Adherance in the face of conclusive proof against you is actually more esteemed than adherance after proof is presented in your favor.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What I mean to say is, do physicists who happen to be Muslims have a particular reason to be more skeptical of the WTC collapse than any other physicists? Does religious faith have anything to do with the physics of the WTC collapses? Does physics work in a different way in the Muslim world?

No but Muslims feel persecuted right now, and might be looking at things differently than others more closely, even some Physicist that are not Muslim have come out supporting them, but not in public. People tend to see what they want to see in thing not what is actually there, take Dr. Jones he could not get Aluminum to burn in his lab, he could not get it to react with water to form hydrogen so he says the hydrogen reaction is impossible.
In molten aluminum because the oxide coating will protect it.
He also says molten Aluminum would not burn in the twin towers, and that if it did burn that it would be white hot.
He clearly does not know what he is talking about.
However he supposedly proved it in the lab in peer reviewed experiments, but maybe Dr. Jones does not know how Aluminum burns and why.
Mine loves jackel the lumber Jack song, or the 1812 Overture with real cannons, do you get what I mean it shows its apreciation by burning quite well to those.
Maybe there is some thing missing that he has not thought of, maybe we are all missing something here.

[defaultdotxbe]

he says the hydrogen reaction is impossible.

thats funny, hydrogen reaction is impossible, but cold fusion, thats gonna happen!

lol

[Crazy Chainsaw]

thats funny, hydrogen reaction is impossible, but cold fusion, thats gonna happen!

lol


Ya that is what the experiments in his lab prove, that the Hydrogen reaction of aluminum and water is a myth. Or so he thinks, you want hydrogen, you drop Molten aluminum though a steel greeting suspended over the water line in a pan.

We got into this mess because no one knew what caused thermite to form naturally, I now know the mechanics of thermite formation in the twin towers and how aluminum burned in the pentagon and what happened to building 7.
I know the answers, because I discovered a new type of reaction, thermite does not form how we always though it did.
But I am not telling it is my secret, and I am keeping it for a while, because I enjoy people bitching when the answer is so simple for both sides.

[jskowron]

I'm not sure if Crazy Chainsaw is serious above, but let's assume (pretend?) that he is. This is a common CTer (and Free Energy proponent) extension of the appeal to authority logical fallacy. They declare themselves the authority(!), based on their sole possession of "The Answer." "The Answer," as is the case with Chainsaw, is often obtained through secret scientific processes that they invented, discovered, etc., despite the lack of any resources or knowldege to do so. You can't win, I say, when the rules are changed between innings.

[defaultdotxbe]

quick quiz:

CT website of relgious website?
No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field can be valid if it contradicts ****************.

[Pardalis]

No but Muslims feel persecuted right now, and might be looking at things differently than others more closely

I'm sorry, but I really don't get your point. Why would they see things differently because they feel persecuted? How does their feeling of persecution affect the science behind the collapse of the towers?

Aren't physics the same whatever your religion is?

ETA: do you think all the other physicists are biased because they are not Muslims?

[Bronze Dog]

Kind of reminds me of AmyWilson, in a way. (http://rockstarramblings.blogspot.com/2006/05/doggerel-2-youre-just-jealous.html)

By the way, CC, the worst kind of math is no math at all.

[Mr. Scott]

I thought this may have been missed in a stale thread so I'm repeating it here:

Carl Saga et al notwithstanding, the stuff people can make up is all too often more interesting, or more appealing* than reality.

Conspiracy Theories are, like religions, viruses of the mind.

Consider the definition of God. This all-powerful entity is intelligent, is powerfully motivated, and has infinite means to both make what it wants happen and to cover its tracks. It is omnipotent and invisible. And, although completely made up, can never be disproved.

Replace the word God with conspiracy (Globalists, or whoever we dream up) and we have the same thing. In practice, as CTers paint their pictures, the conspirators are intelligent, motivated, omnipotent, and invisible.

What is convenient about both God and Conspiracy Theory is their presumed invisibility and omnipotence makes it too easy to dismiss any debunking attempt.

Why hasn’t a single 9/11 conspirator admitted their role? Even some lowly demolition worker that may have installed one explosive charge in the WTC? A lot of people involved in a purported 9/11 conspiracy, and not one has come out? The predictable answer echoes the presumed God-like omnipotence of the conspirators. Potential squealers were either perfectly loyal, murdered, or otherwise immaculately suppressed. Indeed, my writing this must assure the theorists that I am in on it.

The stuff that we invent can be more compelling, or somehow better*, than reality to most people. And, if we invent it with a built-in shield from being disproven, then a virus of the mind is born.

*The idea that the USA walked on the moon is a blow to non-American’s national pride, hence the appearance and survival of moon hoax conspiracy theories, the believers of which seem impervious to logic and reason.

[juryjone]

quick quiz:

CT website of relgious website?

No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field can be valid if it contradicts ****************.

I'll take a stab - it looks familiar. Isn't that part of the Loosers' "Defend Dylan at all costs" manifesto?

Although I take your point that it could be either.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I'm not sure if Crazy Chainsaw is serious above, but let's assume (pretend?) that he is. This is a common CTer (and Free Energy proponent) extension of the appeal to authority logical fallacy. They declare themselves the authority(!), based on their sole possession of "The Answer." "The Answer," as is the case with Chainsaw, is often obtained through secret scientific processes that they invented, discovered, etc., despite the lack of any resources or knowldege to do so. You can't win, I say, when the rules are changed between innings.

Or maybe I actually found something that might link all of those,
http://chainsawsanders.com/P1000386.JPG

Thermite Alla Jhon Deere diesel tractor.


May be all of those might have a common link.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:czMI0sclWc4J:www.fluent.com/solutions/automotive/ex200.pdf+Cavitation+Damage+in+Diesels&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=8

PS. Who ever said I was a CTer, I did not, infact I do not think it is possible.

[jskowron]

Chainsaw-

Where else have you presented your "findings"? My guess is that the less than 300 people who have read this thread are not in a position to use your discoveries to change the world in the way that you think it needs to be changed.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Chainsaw-

Where else have you presented your "findings"? My guess is that the less than 300 people who have read this thread are not in a position to use your discoveries to change the world in the way that you think it needs to be changed.

To Dr. Greening, and Prof. Eagar I just can not open up on it because I am waiting for Henry Eagar to post the news we found something that can cause steel to burn easier, and themite to form and it is a common link to a lot of this. YOU Might be hearing it right now but we found aluminum likes what you can not hear best.
It is also known Science nothing new it just is so simple no one ever explored it before it is used in the pharmaceutical industry. They always wanted the numbers not the dynamics of a very dynamic situation and until you put he whole puzzle, everything together the pieces do not make since.
Leave out one small piece and the puzzle goes unfinished because the whole complete picture goes unseen. Check out sonochemistry.

[Bronze Dog]

I find "big picture" arguments entertaining. If you can't see the image until you've got all the pieces, how'd you know there was a big picture to assemble?

I also smell stalling.

[juryjone]

YOU Might be hearing it right now but we found aluminum likes what you can not hear best.

I know all the words, and they are all spelled correctly, yet I can make no sense of this whatsoever. Can anybody help me out?

CC, could you take a deep breath and calmly make a post that contains some sense? If English is not your native language then I apologize for my lack of comprehension.

[defaultdotxbe]

I'll take a stab - it looks familiar. Isn't that part of the Loosers' "Defend Dylan at all costs" manifesto?

Although I take your point that it could be either.

its from answers in genesis's statement of faith (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp)

No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.

i wouldnt be surprised if soemthing very similar appears in the 9/11 denier manifesto though (i havent seen the "full" text of that)




Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation.

The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of Creation.

The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.

The ‘gap’ theory has no basis in Scripture.

The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of Biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into ‘secular’ and ‘religious,’ is rejected.
i actually think alot of that can be used to define the truth movement (how long until infighting between LIHOPers and MIHOPers and planers and no-planers tears them all apart?)

[Pardalis]

To Dr. Greening, and Prof. Eagar I just can not open up on it because I am waiting for Henry Eagar to post the news


For someone who is supposed to keep it secret, you're doing alot of yapping about it. :rolleyes:

Also, can you answer my previous question, as to why a Muslim physicist should be more intitled to have more skepticism about the WTC collapse than any other physicist?

[jskowron]

At least the pictures from Ararat, presented as evidence of a big boat, sort of, kind of, just maybe, if viewed from the right angle look like the outline of a big boat. The picture of "John Deere Thermite", presented as evidence of a physics defying steel beam, looks like crumbled up aluminum foil. How about giving evidence of the shooting beam before giving evidence of what shot it?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

For someone who is supposed to keep it secret, you're doing alot of yapping about it. :rolleyes:

Also, can you answer my previous question, as to why a Muslim physicist should be more intitled to have more skepticism about the WTC collapse than any other physicist?

I did not say they had more skepticism, I said they might have more reason to look at the fine points of the argument form a different perspective.
Answers are sometimes like raw diamonds, mixed in sand, if you do not look close enough you might not see them.

Sorry about giving to much away it is just that people have been arguing for five years now how Aluminum burns wouldn't it produce white hot Flames, can it mix with Hydrogen, can it naturally form thermite.
How could natural thermite effect a building, what would make the beams in world trade center 7 react with sulfur that way.
The answer to those are so simple it is killing me to keep a lid on this I have to have some release.

[defaultdotxbe]

I did not say they had more skepticism, I said they might have more reason to look at the fine points of the argument form a different perspective.
Answers are sometimes like raw diamonds, mixed in sand, if you do not look close enough you might not see them.

Sorry about giving to much away it is just that people have been arguing for five years now how Aluminum burns wouldn't it produce white hot Flames, can it mix with Hydrogen, can it naturally form thermite.
How could natural thermite effect a building, what would make the beams in world trade center 7 react with sulfur that way.
The answer to those are so simple it is killing me to keep a lid on this I have to have some release.

the problem is physics doesnt have a "perspective" either it is or it isnt

1+1 is always 2, you cant look at it another way and interpret it as 3

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The answer to those are so simple it is killing me to keep a lid on this I have to have some release.

I know exactly how you feel.

It's driving me nuts to contain my thoughts and feelings on your secret theory routine knowing that I've risked the wrath of Lisa S. and Darat too much this week already.

[Yoink]

1+1 is always 2, you cant look at it another way and interpret it as 3

Well, you certainly shouldn't: but if Loose Change proves anything, you obviously can!

[Crazy Chainsaw]

the problem is physics doesnt have a "perspective" either it is or it isnt

1+1 is always 2, you cant look at it another way and interpret it as 3


Correct Physics does not but people do, one of the arguments that was used against Einstein's theory of relativity in the early days was that his views were clouded by his religion.
I forget the quote, but I remember that some one said that Einstein's theories were wrong because he was simply blinded by his religion and trying to reconcile it with the understanding of the universe as he understood it.
I think it was all a misunderstanding based on the question he posed
"Could God do anything he wants, or are there laws, Rules that even God had to follow?"
I believe that is close to the quote, I did not take the time to look it up.

My question is if I can burn Aluminum, and make Thermite in conditions close to those that were at the world trade center, why did Dr. Jones not get any in his experiments?
Why is the universe different in my back yard than in Utah, at BYU, or any of the other labs that reviewed Dr. Jones's paper?
I am getting 1+1=2 he is getting 1+1 = 1048.
Have the physical laws of the universe changed in some way I am not aware of?

[defaultdotxbe]

My question is if I can burn Aluminum, and make Thermite in conditions close to those that were at the world trade center, why did Dr. Jones not get any in his experiments?

if i had to hazard a guess id say jones didnt do any experiments to begin with (could you not clal him dr jones? makes me think of indiana jones, and steven jones cant hold a candle to indy lol)

[Pardalis]

I did not say they had more skepticism, I said they might have more reason to look at the fine points of the argument form a different perspective.


Why? Why would they have a different perspective? How does having faith in the Quran changes one's scientific perspective?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Why? Why would they have a different perspective? How does having faith in the Quran changes one's scientific perspective?

Check out the Miracles of the Quran site, I have actually had a couple physicists tell me they believed in them, and look at Dr. Jone's work in to early Mayan civilization.

Belief is a powerful force, and it can make people see things which the evidence does not indicated. It can also make people look harder to prove a point a non Bias approach is almost never found.

[Pardalis]

Check out the Miracles of the Quran site, I have actually had a couple physicists tell me they believed in them, and look at Dr. Jone's work in to early Mayan civilization.

Belief is a powerful force, and it can make people see things which the evidence does not indicated. It can also make people look harder to prove a point a non Bias approach is almost never found.

I'm afraid you have now stepped into the world of woo. :eek:

[gumboot]

Chainsaw believes the towers were brought down by natural thermite reactions caused by cavitations in liquid aluminium.

I just thought I'd let eveyone know that because Chainsaw tends to be a bit vague and circumspect and woo-ish in his posts.

-Andrew

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Chainsaw believes the towers were brought down by natural thermite reactions caused by cavitations in liquid aluminium.

I just thought I'd let eveyone know that because Chainsaw tends to be a bit vague and circumspect and woo-ish in his posts.

-Andrew

Actually gumboot you do not know the whole of it, so you only have one piece. That one piece is significant, but not the most relevant part.
Who said that I believe that the towers were brought down by cavitations in Aluminum stronger fluid motions were at play than those in the Aluminum.
I just think it might have helped an already dying building.

What do you think the substance was coming out of the towers right before the Collapse?

[gumboot]

Actually gumboot you do not know the whole of it, so you only have one piece. That one piece is significant, but not the most relevant part.


My apologies. In another thread you indicated this WAS your theory.



Who said that I believe that the towers were brought down by cavitations in Aluminum stronger fluid motions were at play than those in the Aluminum.

You did, in this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=61707) thread. Numerous times. You weren't very clear, of course, but you WERE saying that. Unless you've now changed your mind?



What do you think the substance was coming out of the towers right before the Collapse?

People? I'm sorry, but a lot of things came out of the towers right before collapse. You'll have to be FAR more specific than that.

If you're referring to Jones' "thermite reactions" they could be practically anything. I certainly see not reason to believe they are thermite reactions, given NIST did not find evidence of thermite reactions at ground zero.

-Andrew

[T.A.M.]

As far as the Thermite goes...

Did he find the Barium Nitrate needed. I know the sulfur was there, and found, but hey, between the paper, the gypsum, and the rubber, I am amazed more sulfur wasn't found. We know there was lots of iron, and aluminum...

What about the barium Nitrate...isnt it part of the Thermite Reaction?? or am I wrong.

[Hellbound]

As far as the Thermite goes...

Did he find the Barium Nitrate needed. I know the sulfur was there, and found, but hey, between the paper, the gypsum, and the rubber, I am amazed more sulfur wasn't found. We know there was lots of iron, and aluminum...

What about the barium Nitrate...isnt it part of the Thermite Reaction?? or am I wrong.

It's part of the Thermate reaction. Of course, sulfer is also part of the Thermate reaction (as opposed to thermite). Thermate referes specifically to the military formulation, that has about 10 times as much Barium Niotrate as sulfer (the sulfer only makes up about 2%, and acts as a binder). What you'd need to find are the reaction products of Barium Nitrate, likely some Barium oxides.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Basically all I saw that he found were trace elements used to manufacture steel, and left over from that manufacture.
He has provided no samples that show the compounds as mixed, just losely asociated. It looks like common slag from melted steel, so far.

[T.A.M.]

He found evidence of Sulfidation, which only requires, i believe, and Iron or Steel, Oxygen, Heat, and Sulfur, all of which were in great supply. It might possibly need aluminum (not sure) but that was also in large supply due to siding on WTCs, and planes.

[Loss Leader]

Chainsaw believes the towers were brought down by natural thermite reactions caused by cavitations in liquid aluminium.


I had thought the towers were brought down by virtue of their having been hit with airplanes.

Seriously, this is the best we can do against conspiracy theorists? Alchemy?

[T.A.M.]

LOL...this is far from "THE BEST" we can do. This is one point of thousands that we debate here. If you want the best that can be done, Check out some of the JREF "Loose Change" Threads, and look at the links they provide.

Since the CTers seem to be putting all their faith in Dr. S. Jones "Alchemy" of thermite and thermate, it might be a good place to start.

:)

[T.A.M.]

And that thought, that the WTCs were brought down "Solely" by airplanes is about 5 years old, and dropped by almost everyone who looks at this.

Combo of widespread fires (caused by jet fuel that poured out of plane and down elevator shafts and elsewhere), carried on by ignitables within the buildings, plus the large amount of damage done by the jets both to the buildings structure and integrity, and by removal of the fireproofing, which was the dripping "Spray-on" type...

Sorry if I sound antagonist to your comments/questions, but I intepreted the tone of your post as somewhat doubtful, or antagonistic of the proof against these things, which is solid and overwhelming IMO.

[Loss Leader]

. If you want the best that can be done, Check out some of the JREF "Loose Change" Threads, and look at the links they provide.



Honestly, trying to wade through it all gives me a massive headache. The basic turn-off for me is that I can't stop thinking about why it's so important for these people to believe in the conspiracy.

I'm also not too excited to learn the actual mechanism by which the towers came down. I mean, it took huge passenger jets going 450 miles an hour to bring them down - that, to me, shows they were pretty safe for day-to-day use. If it can make the construction of skyscrapers safer to create a better type of insulation or distribute load-bearing more evenly, that's fine. But, engineering won't make skyscrapers safe from terrorist attack. Only politics will, God help us all.

[T.A.M.]

A great, concise source for reading the evidence against the "9/11 truth" position, is 911myths (http://www.911myths.com)

Another is the Screw Loose Change Blog (http://www.screwloosechange.blogspot.com), and even at my little blog, 9/11 - You Judge (http://www.911yj.blogspot.com) has a pile of relevant links on the right hand side.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I had thought the towers were brought down by virtue of their having been hit with airplanes.

Seriously, this is the best we can do against conspiracy theorists? Alchemy?

It is not Alchemy it is science, and what do you make of Nist's first report that Burning Aluminum caused the collapse a report they back off of, because people believe aluminum would only produce white hot flames.

That led to prof. Jones's theory, but what if Nist was right the first time and I can prove that, what if I can find out that thermite which there is evidence of it being in the building, helped the buildings to collapse what if I found one common link between, the twin towers, Building 7, and the Pentagon.
For all we know right now, titanium engine parts might be the source of the Metal oxidizing reaction observed.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:6nKiKVqUMcoJ:www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/7aab5bad14f9417885256a35006d56b0/4adbff33f829acf7862569b3005d6a38/%24FILE/AC33-4.pdf+Titanium+combustion&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6
Scientifically there a still a lot of unanswered questions!
Can you even tell me what triggers thermite reactions, do you know the way they could have formed in the dynamic environment of the World Trade Center Fires?
If you do not know what forms them how can you discount them the compounds were all there in sufficient quantities.
Does not knowing something make it impossible, or can you open your eyes to the fact that some ligitmate questions have gone unanswered because we simply did not know enough about them?

[T.A.M.]

Hey, I am sure all the chemical components for a "Thermite" reaction could be found in the wreckage, no doubt, maybe even "Thermate" if the Barium Nitrate is there.

I am sure that there was evidence of sulfidation, NIST themselves found this. The stretch is in CONFIRMING that a Thermite reaction occured. That is likely going to be impossible to prove, so the rest is mere "possibility", not fact.

but if you can prove that a Thermite reaction could have occured simply based on the presents of heat, oxygen, and the chemical components that were there, than that certainly weakens the assumption made by Jones paper, and his collection of followers...

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Hey, I am sure all the chemical components for a "Thermite" reaction could be found in the wreckage, no doubt, maybe even "Thermate" if the Barium Nitrate is there.

I am sure that there was evidence of sulfidation, NIST themselves found this. The stretch is in CONFIRMING that a Thermite reaction occured. That is likely going to be impossible to prove, so the rest is mere "possibility", not fact.

but if you can prove that a Thermite reaction could have occured simply based on the presents of heat, oxygen, and the chemical components that were there, than that certainly weakens the assumption made by Jones paper, and his collection of followers...

I can not only prove that a thermite reaction can occur I can prove, that it is 99.9 percent probable, for it as well as burning Aluminum in Chimney effect fires because of the Fluid Dynamic effects of fires, and Aluminum.
The physics of fire make it form, they also burn steel, I have gotten thermite reactions to form from the materials in the twin towers several times.
I have also found a similar link between Diesel engines and fluid dynamics that can literally eat the steel in a building exposed to them, fire and sulfur at the same time and what fuel was burning in building 7, OH ya high sulfur diesel that naturally forms sulfur dioxide when burned, which forms sulfuric acid when exposed to moisture.
I am trying to get my (other day job) done so I can build a model, and show how both effects happened.
Also if anyone asks what happened to the plane at the Pentagon any Aluminum exposed to that strong a chimney effect definitely burned.
I am also looking into if confined thermite particles would have survived the effects of the fluid dynamics of the fireball explosion, from what I have seen they would have been venerable to it, and I do not think thermite devices could have survived bolted onto the beams unless they were suspended in near complete vacuums suspended by springs.
I do not have all the answers I know, but at least I am looking, on my own with what little resources I have. I am looking because if I am right it might save lives in the future.
Fire is the enemy of firemen, if thermite does form in fires, then that makes it a much more deadly enemy, and what I do today might give people a chance of figuring out how to defeat fire and stop thermite from ever forming.
Or at least tell people to run like crazy when they have the stuff in a building. That can form thermite.
I am looking into this because I am the only one I know who is, actually trying to figure it out.

[Bronze Dog]

Check out the Miracles of the Quran site, I have actually had a couple physicists tell me they believed in them...
Ye olde argument from authority. So, want to inform us why the physicists believed?

Belief is a powerful force, and it can make people see things which the evidence does not indicated. It can also make people look harder to prove a point a non Bias approach is almost never found.
True. That's why I insist that people point out my shortcomings in intricate detail. Good math is a preferred method.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Ye olde argument from authority. So, want to inform us why the physicists believed?


True. That's why I insist that people point out my shortcomings in intricate detail. Good math is a preferred method.


On the first question they were physicists and in that they were good, however they never studied the Great Greeks.
Most of the ideas they expressed to me were actually from the early Greeks, as for belief I think it was more their Family and Culture than anything else.

On the second I fully agree, you need to check on what can not lie the evidence. That is why I am interested in the thermite research, because the properties of chemical reactions are governed by the laws of physics and the laws of physics say that if it can happen in one instance it must happen again if the conditions are repeated exactly.

[Bronze Dog]

On the first question they were physicists and in that they were good, however they never studied the Great Greeks.
Most of the ideas they expressed to me were actually from the early Greeks, as for belief I think it was more their Family and Culture than anything else.

That's really not saying anything. A lot of the ideas in physics, like atoms, for instance, did originate with the Greeks, but it was empirical evidence gathered through the scientific method that demonstrated their existence.

Other Greek ideas like the four humors failed because of their lack of good evidence.

The origin of an idea has nothing to do wth its validity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy)

"Family and Culture" aren't good reasons to believe in something. Evidence is.