Why the 9/11 Controlled Demolition Conspiracy Theory is just rubbish.

Sniper

Given the gargantuan amount of very clear, specific and detailed rebuttals  of the lunatic WTC Conspiracy theories that form the first seven articles in this thread  - along with >70 footnotes - you are telling fibs if you pretend you're willing to look at rebuttal evidence.

I looked at the solitary website you linked to, and found fault in the first two pieces of supporting evidence (sic).

If you think anyone is going to watch a film when you can't be bothered to provide any links that support your claim, you really are deluded.

Do you believe in Creation? Intelligent design? 

@ Bruce Woodhouse - you and I have many differing opinions  but what I have done here is provide a wealth of links to rebut the WTC Conspiracy claims, and repeatedly asked for "evidence" of various claims, most notably that 1200 / 1900 / 2000 architects etc. said that the WTC could not have been brought down by fire.

They did not say that; I've shown as much above.

Why is it that you always include completely irrelevant topics into you line of argument TMP? Creation, looneys, green men on the moon. Just stay with the subject and cut out your patronising ways, you come across as a very arrogant and ignorant guy. But I guess you just have to live with that...

Marc,

I'm pretty sure most of us know this. But if it helps Sniper to overcome his loneliness by keeping him amused with this subject, them when I have a few moments to spare, i'm willing to help out.

After all, you do have to have some sympathy with an avatar who only "joined" the forum two years ago, but who has read (and probably re-read) that tedious (2,000+ post) Brain Teaser thread from more than twelve years ago.

Cheers

Don

You have done nothing really. All you've done is you've pasted text from somewhere in an effort to support your view that all is well and no one needs to ask any questions. Text and information that neither you or anyone here on this forum is able to verify. As I said before more text does not make it necessarily any more true. The questions outlined in the film remain and no amount of text posted by you will change this. It really is irrelevant whether information is published or voiced in interviews, if the people stating their assessment are experts in their relevant fields. Blimey, even the architects of the WTC came out on film saying that the towers were designed and built to withstand multiple 747 hits and that one plane could not have brought down either tower. But because it is on video you will not take a look at it. How stupid is this? There will always be two sides of the fence and plenty of arguments for both. At the end of the day everyone will have to make up his own mind as to where he or she stands. It seems thought that the majority of Americans have more doubts than you'd like to give room for. In a 2006 CBC/New York times poll 81% of Americans felt the US government is hiding the real truth when it comes to 9/11. The feedback was:

• Telling the truth 16%

• Hiding something 53%

• Mostly lying 28%

• Not sure 3%"

So why is it that so many people back then felt this way, I wonder?

"Text and information that neither you or anyone here on this forum is able to verify."

Pooh.

There are 91 footnotes and sources in the information I've posted above. I also saw, via live TV, the collapse of the WTC. No explosions heard, funny that.

How odd that you've not taken into account a single point or rebuttal made above. You're very keen to whine because people can't watch an entire two hours of lunatic video, though.

Funny, that.

On second thoughts, would you like to buy a bridge?

" In a 2006 CBC/New York times poll"

" Blimey, even the architects of the WTC came out on film saying that the towers were designed and built to withstand multiple 747 hits and that one plane could not have brought down either tower"

Source, please. Written, not crank video.

PS - they survived the hits. The collapse was brought about by fire, but lest not worry about pesky facts.

Marc,

For the avoidance of doubt, you are absolutely right.

Cheers

Don

The resemblance between Siper's avatar and that cartoon character is too close for comfort....

Cheers

Don

"you don't say why it is rubbish."

Sniper, my old fruitcake,

It’s so obvious why the first 30 minutes of that video are rubbish that (seriously) I didn’t want to disillusion any remaining traces of intelligence you might still posses. However, since there clearly aren’t any traces, it won’t upset you to learn it’s not much more than a lineup of self-deluded, attention-seeking “experts” verbalizing their CVs. One or two of them making it clear they are at variance with their professional colleagues (eg the American Society of Structural Engineers) and repetitive background shots of WTC7 falling down.

Since you are so dependent on the “Truth” organization and this video, I assumed you would have the wit to be able to highlight the bits of the video which you consider support your view that further investigation is necessary. But I now fully appreciate your difficulty.

I hardly think that my comment ' a full independent investigation MUST take place no matter what the cost' is the same as 'the entire global resources that Sniper demands' –

So, the rather more modest sum that with hindsight you now consider must be allocated for your cherished full independent investigation that MUST take place is £££ ?? (not lolliepops)

Cheers

Don

Good theory winky but...................................wot about No7 ??????????????

Cheers

Sniper Don

Don and TMP, 

You keep repeating the same crap instead of watching the film. You are not experts. You have to raise your game before I would consider helping you. Two half wits don't make a whole, so as of the moment I feel I'd be wasting my time explaining anything to either of you.

 You gave yourselves away a long time ago. You made up your minds before you looked at the evidence and you are too arrogant to admit it. You are not even remotely interested in exploring the issues you are only interesting in patronising crap which makes you look ridiculous. 

When someone who is highly qualified and experienced stands up to give their view in the full knowledge that they will be inviting the sort of ignorant scorn you have exhibited and possibly damage their careers in the process then you two, a couple of low achieving, halfway bright, armchair experts on nothing of any value ought to have a little more respect. When the number of real experts is 2,000 and rising you ought to begin to listen very carefully. 

When and if you can raise the bar a little I will examine the issues you with you but you will need to watch the film first and make a list of statements you believe you can refute but you will need to demonstrate that you have some critical thinking skills first and not just cheap shots about moon landings. I won't hold my breath. 

Toodle pip 

Don watched the film.

I've repeatedly asked you for credible evidence. You've not done so - because you can't. There is no "evidence".

No "experts" have said what you say they've said.

I've posted a great deal of overwhelming rebuttals, complete with 91 footnotes / appendices. You've posted a nutjob film. 

Hmmmm.

Would you like to buy a bridge?

Sorry old fruitcake, you've got things round the wrong way.

You have to justify allocating "whatever resourses it takes" (which could be the entire global productivity forever) to re-open and re-examine 9/11. So start explaining.

You could, of course, also start fundraising for the other fruitcases I saw in that little video you mentioned (again and again and again......) and then you and they could make your own arrangements to fund an independent investigation.

None of us are holding our breaths.

TTFN

Cheers

Don

Don watched 30 minutes and it made him uncomfortable because the truth is uncomfortable. The experts said exactly what I said they said and the film is proof of that. The fact is you are too cowardly to watch it. How do you know what you posted is a rebuttal if you have not seen the original film? Zzzzzzz.

So now they are fruitcases. Is that your carefully considered clinical opinion? Don't tell me you have an 'O' level in psychiatry to go with your 'O' level in structural engineering? Is there no beginning to your talents? 

Yep.

But you have not watched it, have you? Noooo. 

Interesting to note that the ad hom and personal insults come from the conspiracy theorists. 

None of whom have actually commented on the gargantuan amount of evidence posted above.

They keep telling Don that he hasn't watched their lovely and totally non-nutjob film, when he's clearly told them he has.

Its as if they're not noticing things they don't want to see.

Wonder why.

You're telling Don what he thought? That he feels the film tells the truth?

What he actually said is something totally different - to quote:

It’s so obvious why the first 30 minutes of that video are rubbish that (seriously) I didn’t want to disillusion any remaining traces of intelligence you might still posses. However, since there clearly aren’t any traces, it won’t upset you to learn it’s not much more than a lineup of self-deluded, attention-seeking “experts” verbalizing their CVs. One or two of them making it clear they are at variance with their professional colleagues (eg the American Society of Structural Engineers) and repetitive background shots of WTC7 falling down.

Don said nothing like that which you claim he said.

You big fibber.

Uncomfortable ? It made me laugh !. Nothing but a list of CVs as I described before. Keep up old chap !

cheers

Don

Yep ! .............even the nutcase who is a structural engineer and is at odds with the American Scociety of Civil Engineers. OMG, i've now gone and fallen into the trap of elaborating on one specific point and you will start picking, picking, picking...........

Cheers

Don

Sniper, my old fruitcake,

Did I miss your response ?

Cheers

Don

TMP, 

I have decided not to read your laughable rebuttals. It is far simpler to dismiss it all a-priori. The fact is I have some knowledge of structural engineering having played with Meccano as a kid. I think it is much simpler than having to think, don't you think? 

Don, 

A bunch of pilots are on record as saying that it would be extremely difficult to fly planes into the WTC towers at such speed at such low altitudes even for qualified and experienced airline pilots and impossible for people like M. Atta. But what do pilots know about anything? Another bunch of fruitcakes surely?