Debunking Popular Mechanics

I knew this would be the kind of flaming I would receive.

As a truth seeker, I am not required to have all the answers.

This is why we're calling for a fresh investigation.

When one makes a claim, especially an extraordinary claim, evidence must be shown. You are not being flamed, you are merely being asked to provide evidence. That's all.

Nobody expects you to have all the answers. We do expect you to give us some evidence once in a while. Evidence that can be looked at and scrutinized, not mere innuendo and speculation.

Who are you calling upon for an investigation? Have you written your elected officials? Have you contacted all the media outlets?
 
This must be the big offensive LC was planning!

I knew this would be the kind of flaming I would receive.

Well, it would seem you certainly have more than your share of preconceived notions! And this isn't flaming, mate. Flaming would involve personal attacks.


What exactly are "conspiracy theory" websites?

They're the ones that not only blame 9/11 on the US government, but say the Moon landing was faked, the Holocaust never happened, and that the Masons or Jews control the world, all based on little more than the web site's author's personal lunacy.


The NIST and FEMA sites giving everyone's beloved "debris and fire" hypothesis - those themselves are CT sites! They back up the "official" conspiracy theory.

Maybe because the "official conspiracy theory" passes all the science, history, logic, and laugh tests.


Popular Mechanics uses the 911-commission.gov as a source to back up its claims. That right there completely discredits it as "nonpolitical!"

Maybe because the 911 commission did its job reasonably properly, with qualified experts who had the actual evidence and background to study the situation. And the guys at PM had more of the same, and probably a bigger budget and more time, too.


As a truth seeker, I am not required to have all the answers. This is why we're calling for a fresh investigation.

You don't seem to be required to have any background, experience, learning, or quals in the subject, either. More importantly, who's going to do this "fresh investigation?" A crackpot who also believes the Holocaust didn't happen?

Besides, why should I have to do YOUR term paper? You're asking the questions, go do the research and present your theory, backed up by better evidence than the "Loose Change" website.

It always cracks me up that CTers want someone else to do their work. I guess you guys think we're the WPA or something. Wrong, we're the NWO.


The amout of swift responses I received here means I must have ruffled some feathers!

Cheers!

No, it's just that you haven't studied this outfit too well...we're a bunch of irreverent and smart folks who can recognize a stupid bill of goods and a lazy and hackneyed argument when we see one. You should go through this particular section of the site and see all the other folks we've carried off in the tumbrels, like 28thKingdom. You present the same old nonsense and act as if you're the first person to stumble on to it in human history, so we just burst out laughing, and then give the same answers we've given the other suckers...I mean applicants.

So, I'm more interested in your pathology than your theories...how did you become a conspiracy theorist. What's your grievance against the government? What do you think about Jews? Masons? NASA? How old are you? Can you give me any evidence that the US has launched any previous "false flag" attacks on its own citizens? Why would a democracy engage in such measures? What line of work are you in? Have you ever been out of your parents' basement? Do you know what the Zimmermann Telegram is? If the government is able to launch such massive conspiracies and control everything so neatly, how come the war in Iraq is such a mess, and the Republicans lost the 2006 Congressional elections? Do you know anything about chance and random event theories? How about Occam's Razor? Have you studied any philosophy besides Nietzsche? Are you familiar with Kant and Descartes? Do you think the FBI and CIA have wiretapped your phone? Do you regard yourself as the leading fighter against world conspiracies? Do you think that the Communists and the capitalists are working together to destroy the world? Why are they doing so? Why haven't they done it before?

Have fun!
 
However, there is a very strong contingent of Americans who react emotionally, rather than rationally, to any argument suggesting government complicity on any level, let alone outright orchestration.

There are certainly some that fit that description, but you're just fooling yourself (in a self-congratulatory way) to think that's an accurate description of any substantial part of the resistance to the "9/11 truth movement." The major problem I have with the "inside job" hyptheses I've heard so far is lack or rationality in them, starting with the premise all the way through the details.

Why would anyone plan such a huge, ridiculously elaborate and complicated, and extremely risky hoax (in terms of failure and getting caught), when they could have done something much simpler, with fewer people required, with far less risk of either failure or being caught, and didn't need to involve any sort of incredible illusion -- it could be exactly what it appeared to be except for who did it -- and still achieve the same objective that you claim? For example, why not just park a few huge truck bombs around and set them off simultaneously, then just blame it on al Qaeda? (For that matter, why blame it on al Qaeda if they were looking for an excuse to invade Iraq? This is one gigantic hole in the entire premise, since it's pretty clear that the Bush adminstration wasn't too concerned with al Qaeda, bin Laden, or Afghanistan.)

This is, of course, not any kind of evidence that it wasn't an "inside job," but it is the basic reason, I think, that most rational people find that hypothesis to be highly implausible, to say the least. Which simply means, if you want rational people to accept your highly implausible hypothesis over one that seems far more plausible, then you definitely need some very convincing evidence. Got any?
 
Last edited:
Maybe we should set up CT Bingo.

I bet we will shortly see mention of "Northwoods" and "USS Liberty", followed shortly by "Patriot Act" and "Black Ops CIA".
 
Not smart enough?!?! Hello? Alderaan?


I thought people would be happy I didn't use a Star Trek reference this time.

It's like bringing me McDonalds and saying you thought I'd be happy you didn't bring me Burger King. Let me say it one more time: Battlestar Galactica, Stargate or Farscape references only.

Now, if your example had been about Ba'al blowing up WTC7 from a Go'auld mothership in orbit, I would be happy.
 
pfft, it was the Emperor's idea, and Tarkin (sp?) carried it out. Vadar was just their to do his "make it so" impersonation. :D
Yeah but didn't Darthy "let" Luke and Friends "escape" from the Death Star so's they could follow 'em and then blow up the rebs on that moon? He even sacrificed some Imperial fighters to complete the ruse. Of course Leia saw right through it. But still - the Darthster definitely showed some chutzpah with that little trick...
 
It's like bringing me McDonalds and saying you thought I'd be happy you didn't bring me Burger King. Let me say it one more time: Battlestar Galactica, Stargate or Farscape references only.

Now, if your example had been about Ba'al blowing up WTC7 from a Go'auld mothership in orbit, I would be happy.

Sorry, but I am a Deputy Admin. See that? Deputy Admin. And I say, Star Trek, Star Wars and Doctor Who.
 
We're getting away from the subject.

It's not about whether Kameelyun is a bad CTist, it's about whether Kameelyun is a bad reviewer of books.
 
We're getting away from the subject.

It's not about whether Kameelyun is a bad CTist, it's about whether Kameelyun is a bad reviewer of books.

Quite right LL. I'd like to see his review of Catcher In The Rye, just to "compare and contrast" or maybe Day Of The Triffids. (Do kids still read those books at school these days?)
 
I look forward to you "ruffling some more feathers", kameelyun. :rolleyes:

:popcorn1

Incidentally what do you reckon happened on 911?
 
True, true, true indeed....

We're getting away from the subject.

It's not about whether Kameelyun is a bad CTist, it's about whether Kameelyun is a bad reviewer of books.


Well, all CTers are bad CTers, so there shouldn't be much debate there. But as for his book reviews...that one stank, but I'll reserve judgment on the rest until he shares them with us. I'd like to see his views on the movie "Capricorn One," next. I still say OJ Simpson did it! :D
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom