What's your theory about 9/11?

Algebra34 said:
I don't remember claiming to know 9/11 was an inside job.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone claimed you know anything. What we do know is after 8 years is there's nobody actually paying any attention to this lame conspiracy. That's why you're here.
 
My theory is that rogue submarines surfaced inside the towers. They then did an emergency deep, which drug the towers down with them. My proof? The squibs. They look suspiciously like the vents on main ballast tanks when a boat dives, so therefore that's what happened.
 
My scenario is this one:

"Ha ha, Obama threatening us? ... He and what army? ... And even if, an attack would be great to get rid of Saddam".
 
I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...
 
tj15 said:
I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...
Click to expand...

It's not about being right. It is about the evil government and its mouthpieces being wrong.
 
NutCracker said:
It's not about being right. It is about the evil government and its mouthpieces being wrong.
Click to expand...

OK, you don't have to be 100% correct in your hypothesis... Just give a hypothesis that you think probably happened. Speculate. I'm not even asking you to PROVE your hypothesis.
 
tj15 said:
OK, you don't have to be 100% correct in your hypothesis... Just give a hypothesis that you think probably happened. Speculate. I'm not even asking you to PROVE your hypothesis.
Click to expand...

My hypothesis on 9/11? I think 19 brain washed, hate filled, Islamic radicals hijacked 4 wide body jets, succeeded in crashing 3 of those into buildings that symbolize the USA. Two of these buildings subsequently collapsed to the ground, triggering the collapse of a building not impacted by the airplanes, damaging surrounding buildings. The third building struck collapsed partially. All caused unspeakable sorrow and terrible loss of life.

It seems I should have added a smiley of some sort to my post.

To clarify my comment. I was just commenting on how Truthers think. Part of the reason I have been in the debunking bushiness is to figure out how denialism works. I believe that distrust serves as the substrate on which denialism feeds and that at least some of the individuals are in moon-hoax and 9/11 truther territory for the personal gratification they get from it. It allows them to think of themselves as "deep, independent thinkers" that take nothing for granted. Standing up to a powerful organization like NASA, the government or the NWO by seeing through its evil ways makes them significant and powerful.

Well, that's my working hypothesis in a nutshell on denialism.
 
Last edited:
JimBenArm said:
My theory is that rogue submarines surfaced inside the towers. They then did an emergency deep, which drug the towers down with them. My proof? The squibs. They look suspiciously like the vents on main ballast tanks when a boat dives, so therefore that's what happened.
Click to expand...

Interesting theory. I suppose it could be worked out. Just as the holograms crashed into the buildings, a SEAL team blows up the PATH tube, flooding the basements to allow the submarines ingress to their targets. Once inside, they deliver their payloads of nanotermites, smoke generators, and pyroclastic flow pods. Fogetting to kill William Rodriguez, the subs egress and disappear into the Hudson. Meanwhile, a fleet of freighters swing into action and deposit an exact replica of the PATH tube in segments,which are then put together by the SEAL team waiting below.


Brilliant.

JimBenArm did 9/11.
 
Last edited:
While this may not fit the spirit of the OP: There could me many "theories" (in reality, hypotheses) about 9/11, but they need to fit the facts. And the facts consist of the jets being hijacked and rammed into buildings, and the aftermath being due to these rammings. No proposal that fails to accept these as basic facts is credible.
 
AJM8125 said:
Interesting theory. I suppose it could be worked out. Just as the holograms crashed into the buildings, a SEAL team blows up the PATH tube, flooding the basements to allow the submarines to inX gress their targets. Once inside, they deliver their payloads of nanotermites, smoke generators, and pyroclastic flow pods. Fogetting to kill William Rodriguez, the subs egress and disappear into the Hudson. Meanwhile, a fleet of freighters swing into action and deposit an exact replica of the PATH tube in segments,which are then put together by the SEAL team waiting below.


Brilliant.

JimBenarm did 9/11.
Click to expand...

JimBenArm does everyone. :cool:
 
tj15 said:
I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...
Click to expand...

Having no basis in reality they can't come to a concensus. It's just a series of stupid questions.
 
NutCracker said:
My hypothesis on 9/11? I think 19 brain washed, hate filled, Islamic radicals hijacked 4 wide body jets, succeeded in crashing 3 of those into buildings that symbolize the USA. Two of these buildings subsequently collapsed to the ground, triggering the collapse of a building not impacted by the airplanes, damaging surrounding buildings. The third building struck collapsed partially. All caused unspeakable sorrow and terrible loss of life.

It seems I should have added a smiley of some sort to my post.

To clarify my comment. I was just commenting on how Truthers think. Part of the reason I have been in the debunking bushiness is to figure out how denialism works. I believe that distrust serves as the substrate on which denialism feeds and that at least some of the individuals are in moon-hoax and 9/11 truther territory for the personal gratification they get from it. It allows them to think of themselves as "deep, independent thinkers" that take nothing for granted. Standing up to a powerful organization like NASA, the government or the NWO by seeing through its evil ways makes them significant and powerful.

Well, that's my working hypothesis in a nutshell on denialism.
Click to expand...

Oops... I think I misunderstood your earlier post. Sorry.
 
Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.
 
aggle-rithm said:
Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.
Click to expand...

That is a very good question.I wonder what our resident truthers scenarios would look like? Not that I'm expecting an answer from them,they have nothing .
 
aggle-rithm said:
Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.
Click to expand...

I doubt even Olivier Stone could make a believable movie out of the no-plane theories.
 
Algebra34 said:
My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to. How? With stundies, laughing dogs, cats, trolls, and personal attacks. Always asking someone else for a theory instead of just validating what they claim to know is the truth. The truth about a story that when pressed the debunker doesn't really even seem to know much about.
Click to expand...


How odd that you would post this a few hours after my above post and 20 minutes after carlitos response to it.

One could take away from this that you simply ignore more substantive posts from debunkers in favour of concentrating on shorter posts and/or ones which focus on derision of the TM.
 
Last edited:
tj15 said:
I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...
Click to expand...

jaydeehess said:
In post 135(click the arrow).
Click to expand...
I outlined a somewhat more probable conspiracy than faked planes, faked live, and other, videos, bombs and thermite.

carlitos responded, able and ready to discuss this. No truther touched it.

Whereas a LIHOP senario is, IMHO, much more probable than the Rube-Goldberg-ish machinations of the TM's MIHOP senarios, it is instructive of the mindset of the TM in general that they almost exclusively eschew a LIHOP contention.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
While this may not fit the spirit of the OP: There could me many "theories" (in reality, hypotheses) about 9/11, but they need to fit the facts. And the facts consist of the jets being hijacked and rammed into buildings, and the aftermath being due to these rammings. No proposal that fails to accept these as basic facts is credible.
Click to expand...

My own nit pick---

Unless a senario includes concrete evidence to bolster it I prefer the word 'contention' as opposed to 'hypothesis'.

'To contend' connotes, to me, that this is purely the opinion of the person and not neccessarily bolstered by any evidence. A hypothesis, again to my mind, connotes a senario designed to reasonably mesh with all available evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom