[Winstonm]

A group of 7 scientists have published their findings about material recovered from the dust in the collapse of the WTC towers on 9-11. They found trace samples of nano-thermite. The abstract is here:

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content....0001/7TOCPJ.SGM

The PDF file can be downloaded for free.

[Al_U_Card]

Lets see now...

Oh you crazy CT nutjob.

Don't you see it was just a bunch of fanatical Islamic terrorists.

Please respect the dead and their memory.

Did I leave anything out?...oh yeah, just the truth.

Can you say:
WMD
Gulf of Tonkin
Pearl Harbor
Remember the Maine

and so it goes...

[vuroth]

It's generally a bad sign when you're trying to present evidence as scientifically sound and you're also involved in a war of words with the JREF.

[Al_U_Card]

Remember that Marvin Bush (yes, them again) was head of WTC security until Sept 10, 2001.

Also, Larry Silverstein had just "leased" the now re-insured against terrorist attack buildings and was undertaking "upgrading" of the computer network wiring system....in buildings that it was known would require a billion dollar clean-up to remove the asbestos fireproofing in the building.

Interesting confluence of events wouldn't you say?

[blackshoe]

I suppose it's interesting to those who see conspiracy under ever rock. Rational people, OTOH...

[Al_U_Card]

Just like covert actions are easy to see....aren't they? Oops, only when they are uncovered and did I mention plausible deniability?

[vuroth]

Al_U_Card, on Apr 15 2009, 10:25 AM, said:

Remember that Marvin Bush (yes, them again) was head of WTC security until Sept 10, 2001.

No, he really, really, really was not.

Based on your belief of that fact, I feel it is my moral responsibility to warn you that your Nigerian friend is, in fact, trying to steal your money.

V

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Apr 15 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

I suppose it's interesting to those who see conspiracy under ever rock. Rational people, OTOH...

My favorite part of saying stuff like that is they always come up with a reply that completely confirms it.

[Al_U_Card]

vuroth, on Apr 15 2009, 03:04 PM, said:

Al_U_Card, on Apr 15 2009, 10:25 AM, said:

Remember that Marvin Bush (yes, them again) was head of WTC security until Sept 10, 2001.

No, he really, really, really was not.

Based on your belief of that fact, I feel it is my moral responsibility to warn you that your Nigerian friend is, in fact, trying to steal your money.

V

My bad. He was a director of that company.


http://www.commondre...s03/0204-06.htm

[Al_U_Card]

jdonn, on Apr 15 2009, 03:09 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Apr 15 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

I suppose it's interesting to those who see conspiracy under ever rock. Rational people, OTOH...

My favorite part of saying stuff like that is they always come up with a reply that completely confirms it.

Here's another:

The nicest wool comes from the sheep that remain docile during shearing.

[rogerclee]

[quote name='http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm']Out of the 76 "experts" the most common academic discipline was philosophy, with 9 members, including a co-founder. Since 7 members did not even list an academic discipline, this was 1/7 of their credentialed membership. English/literature and psychology came in next with 5 members each. Even theology and "humanities" came in with 4 and 3 members respectively. Among actual scientific fields, physics was way in front, with 5 members, including the aforementioned Dr. Jones. I am not sure as to their academic credentials though, at least one of the "physicists", Jeffrey Farrer, isn't even a professor, he is a lab manager at BYU. One has to wonder whether Steven Jones' janitor is also listed as an associate member?

So how many engineers do they have? Out of the 76, a grand total of 2. Jean-Pierre Petit, a French aeronautical engineer, who despite the obvious handicap of being French actually seems to have a relevant qualification. Curiously enough though, he doesn't seem to have written a single word on 9/11. He has written though, on a mysterious plot by the US military to bomb Jupiter with anti-matter weapons!

The second engineer is Judy Wood, who has been mentioned in the comments here for her bizarre billiard ball from the top of the World Trade Center theory. OK, Ms. Wood is an actual Mechanical Engineer at Clemson, but thus far her work has been primarily focused on the stresses of dentistry. A fascinating field no doubt, but hardly relevant to planes crashing into buildings.

So how many structural engineers are listed? Absolutely zero. How many experts in Middle Eastern studies, or the Arabic language? Also zero. But they do have a professor of social work![/quote]
LOL

[jdonn]

Al_U_Card, on Apr 15 2009, 03:22 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 15 2009, 03:09 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Apr 15 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

I suppose it's interesting to those who see conspiracy under ever rock. Rational people, OTOH...

My favorite part of saying stuff like that is they always come up with a reply that completely confirms it.

Here's another:

The nicest wool comes from the sheep that remain docile during shearing.

I bet the crazy chickens are the first to get their heads chopped off...

[Al_U_Card]

jdonn, on Apr 15 2009, 03:33 PM, said:

Al_U_Card, on Apr 15 2009, 03:22 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 15 2009, 03:09 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Apr 15 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

I suppose it's interesting to those who see conspiracy under ever rock. Rational people, OTOH...

My favorite part of saying stuff like that is they always come up with a reply that completely confirms it.

Here's another:

The nicest wool comes from the sheep that remain docile during shearing.

I bet the crazy chickens are the first to get their heads chopped off...

Actually the last because the docile ones are easier to catch.

[helene_t]

I wonder why I am wondering if the same principle applies to sperm donors.

[luke warm]

rogerclee, on Apr 15 2009, 03:31 PM, said:

http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm said:

Out of the 76 "experts" the most common academic discipline was philosophy, with 9 members, including a co-founder. Since 7 members did not even list an academic discipline, this was 1/7 of their credentialed membership. English/literature and psychology came in next with 5 members each. Even theology and "humanities" came in with 4 and 3 members respectively. Among actual scientific fields, physics was way in front, with 5 members, including the aforementioned Dr. Jones. I am not sure as to their academic credentials though, at least one of the "physicists", Jeffrey Farrer, isn't even a professor, he is a lab manager at BYU. One has to wonder whether Steven Jones' janitor is also listed as an associate member?

So how many engineers do they have? Out of the 76, a grand total of 2. Jean-Pierre Petit, a French aeronautical engineer, who despite the obvious handicap of being French actually seems to have a relevant qualification. Curiously enough though, he doesn't seem to have written a single word on 9/11. He has written though, on a mysterious plot by the US military to bomb Jupiter with anti-matter weapons!

The second engineer is Judy Wood, who has been mentioned in the comments here for her bizarre billiard ball from the top of the World Trade Center theory. OK, Ms. Wood is an actual Mechanical Engineer at Clemson, but thus far her work has been primarily focused on the stresses of dentistry. A fascinating field no doubt, but hardly relevant to planes crashing into buildings.

So how many structural engineers are listed? Absolutely zero. How many experts in Middle Eastern studies, or the Arabic language? Also zero. But they do have a professor of social work!

LOL

i don't get it... aren't philosophers expert enough to help determine there was a conspiracy? if a jet, with cia foreknowledge and presidential approval, flies into a building and nobody's there to see it, did it really happen?

[helene_t]

Very similar to the question "if an elephant farts but nobody hears it, does it make a sound?". Certainly a philosophical issue.

[jdonn]

helene_t, on Apr 15 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

Very similar to the question "if an elephant farts but nobody hears it, does it make a sound?". Certainly a philosophical issue.

In this thread it's more like "If I can hear the voices in my head, are they really there?" And the answer, of course, is they are there if they tell you they are.

[PassedOut]

In 2004 a democrat insisted that I take and view a tape that would "open my eyes" about the plane that hit the pentagon. I watched it, expecting the worst. My expectations were correct, and the democrat didn't like what I told him about his critical faculties when I returned the tape.

Since then, I have found no need to examine more evidence on the whole topic.

[blackshoe]

Al_U_Card, on Apr 15 2009, 04:03 PM, said:

Actually the last because the docile ones are easier to catch.

Having actually done this once (long ago) I can confirm this. Mostly. See, the method the four of us used was:

1. Enter chicken house.
2. Place case of beer on table.
3. Drink beer.
4. Turn off lights.
5. Chickens go to sleep.
6. Put chickens into crate.
7. When crate is full, seal it.
8. Drink beer.
9. Repeat steps 6 through 8.
10. When the chickens finally figure out something's not right, turn on lights to catch the last few who are now running all over the place trying to escape.
11. Repeat steps 6 through 8 again.
12. When all chickens are crated, move to next chicken house.

As I recall, there were six chicken houses.

[onoway]

I find odd and quite sad that millions and millions of dollars were spent on pursuit of the question of whether or not Clinton was guilty of inappropriate sexual behaviour (between two consenting adults yet ), but there seems to be little curiousity about or appetite for finding some reasonable explanations of the anomalies surrounding 9-11.

It would not be the first time that the people in power had considered any number of their citizens to be expendable in pursuit of their goals, IF indeed that was the case. ( What else are most wars, after all?) If not, why don't they unmuzzle the group which was set to investigate the event and lay to rest the questions which are still rattling around? If so, surely it's best if the people know? It isn't just in religious issues that an open mind might be a good thing, however unpalatable the alternatives might be.

These sorts of questions are going to continue to have a life of their own if they are not met with more than a sniff of disdain.