9/11 Truth: Was Extra Equipment Attached To Flight 175?
by What-A-Coincidence 53 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
wha happened?
I found a great pic of the underside, how do I post a pic
-
-
inrainbows
The problem with the conspiracist arguements that dispute the official version of physical events is the huge voids in their arguments.
They claim that the towers were domolished using explosives but in addition to no firm evidence do not provide any mechanism for how the charges were put in place; any research will rveal that tonnes of explosives and weeks of very noticable work would have been required.
They also ignore that the impacts of panes and or collapsing tower debris and the subsequent fires produce the collapses in computer models.
They claim that the planes had explosive pods on them. They credulity of this is quite outstanding; they don't ever wonder why the explosives were placed inside the plane (there is loads of room after all), instead they claim a pod was bolted onto the outside with poor evidence and no explanation of how this was done or how the planes were able to fly with this massive arodynamic modification. And they ignore expert evidence that shows the so-called-pod is infact a photographic artifact (check Popular Mechanics).
They insist a plane didn't hit the Pentagon when there are dozens of eyewitnessess on the Freeway who saw the plane fly over their heads seconds before the impact.
They don't address the faults in their arguments that are splashed all over the internet, the cunning and deceptive nature of conspiracist websites, the partial and selective argumenttation.
The pathological nature of their beliefs structures is such that even WITH a perfectly adequate factual and scientific explanation for what hit what and when and why what happened next happened next, they insist SOMETHING ELSE happended, which they cannot prove and which often requires a massive leap of faith and presupposition to believe in.
And of course, there is the egotistical eltists posturing that they are of an elite 'in the know', and everyone else is an ignorent dupe.
As their belief patterns are so deeply pathological reasoned debate is largely pointless; the only people it can help are those with no firmly fixed opinion who have been deceived by the conspiracist propoganda and the attractive eltism of the argument. By reading discussions between the conspiracists and those with a more reasoned and evidential argument they can see that the conspiracists have NOTHING to disprove the physical events of the day.
Please note I do seperate the competence of the US government, the possibility of deliberate negligence, the definate use of terrorist attacks to justify existing poltical aims, whole-sale deception of the public through disinformation and stealing elections from the physical facts of 9/11. All of the last paragraph are possible parts of a massive government/industrial conspiracy.
But planes hit buildings and they fell down, another ploughed into the ground, another building fell down because a falling tower damaged it; no extra explosives required, no remote control airplanes or bombpods. To believe otherwise runs against the evidence.
