True, it's also what orthodox truthers do too though. I was just viewing a thread in this very forum where cult members were continuing to contend that Larry Silverstein admitted to a controlled demolition of WTC7 in an interview ( the old "pull it" canard). They will twist and distort to push their anti-government agenda.
Funny enough there's actually a cult sect that contends there were no people in the towers either. They say that the footage was fake because some of the people hanging out of the windows don't look right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_EP4fZcYkY
Here's a fun comment left by a fanatic:
This is conspiracy occultism at it's worst. As depraved as the "truth" cult is, I don't think it gets much worse than that.
What we see here is the same formula for any 9/11 "truth" cult myth. Theyfinddelude themselves that they've found something that "doesn't look right" and then flood the internet with their delusions:
- hole in the pentagon isn't big enough...(where's the rest of the plane?)... must have been a missile shot by the government at their own building in broad daylight.
- the towers shouldn't be collapsing the way they are...must be a super duper top secret hi tech nano-thermite hushabomb controlled demolition.
- there isn't enough plane debri in shanksville...must have been blown to pieces in the air.
- the phone calls from the planes don't sound right, the people aren't scared enough, they sound "too calm," and the altitudes are too high... they must be paid actors for the NWO gov. made to sound like the missing people with voice morphing technology.
- the plane hitting the towers doesn't look right...must be military, not an airliner
- the plane is moving too fast for such a low altitude...must be fake.
And Superman can't stop the crook's getaway car by standing in front of it and stretching out his arm in front of the car while the tires spin futilely. Oh, wait - that is true!
By Newtonian mechanics, the forces are exactly equal and opposite. Same as when you fire a bullet at a paper target, the paper exerts the same force on the bullet as the bullet exerts on the paper. So the bullet should bounce off, right?
Likewise, a horse can never pull a wagon. No matter how hard the horse pulls on the wagon, the wagon pulls equally hard on the horse!
Basically, yes - but it's not necessarily true that they are doing this deceitfully. It's just that they have no understanding of physics and have no business arguing the physics of 9-11. Many people have mistaken notions of Newtonian Mechanics. Let's go back to the bullet and the paper target. Now let's set up three targets at the same distance:
1. First target is the paper target.
2. Second target is a sheet of wood.
3. Third target is a thick block of wood.
You fire one round each at each target. Obviously, the energy and momentum are the same for each, but is the force the same?
Bullet #1 easily penetrates the paper target and is found buried in the sand berm backstop.
Bullet #2 penetrates the sheet of wood but is found just beyond it lying on the ground.
Bullet #3 penetrates into the thick wood block but instead of exiting, it gets embedded in the wood.
Was the force the same for all three, or different? Some might guess that since the energy and momentum are the same, so is the force. Others might guess that since the bullet easily penetrated the paper target, it exerted the most force.
Actually, the bullet exerted the least force on the paper target. Just enough to penetrate the paper. In return, the paper exerted an equal force on the bullet and slowed it ever-so-slightly. The bullet exerted the greatest force on the wood block, enough to penetrate it deeply, and the block exerted enough force on the bullet to bring it to a halt, and probably, to grossly distort the bullet. The sheet of wood falls in the middle.
Ite, physics lesson est.
(Oh, and Steven Jones and others with science credentials who misuse Newtonian Mechanics are deceitful little [expletive deleted]s. Except for Judy Wood, who is a lunatic.)
1. First target is the paper target.
2. Second target is a sheet of wood.
3. Third target is a thick block of wood.
You fire one round each at each target. Obviously, the energy and momentum are the same for each, but is the force the same?
Bullet #1 easily penetrates the paper target and is found buried in the sand berm backstop.
Bullet #2 penetrates the sheet of wood but is found just beyond it lying on the ground.
Bullet #3 penetrates into the thick wood block but instead of exiting, it gets embedded in the wood.
Was the force the same for all three, or different? Some might guess that since the energy and momentum are the same, so is the force. Others might guess that since the bullet easily penetrated the paper target, it exerted the most force.
Actually, the bullet exerted the least force on the paper target. Just enough to penetrate the paper. In return, the paper exerted an equal force on the bullet and slowed it ever-so-slightly. The bullet exerted the greatest force on the wood block, enough to penetrate it deeply, and the block exerted enough force on the bullet to bring it to a halt, and probably, to grossly distort the bullet. The sheet of wood falls in the middle.
Ite, physics lesson est.
(Oh, and Steven Jones and others with science credentials who misuse Newtonian Mechanics are deceitful little [expletive deleted]s. Except for Judy Wood, who is a lunatic.)
