Debunking Popular Mechanics

As always, I find it interesting that every time a new person shows up with the latest, greatest case for doubting the "official story," for some reason they come out with the same old crap that we've seen hundreds of times as if they are showing us something we hadn't seen or considered.

Wow, the old "WTC7 wasn't really damaged and obviously a controlled demolition" claim.

The 67 intercepts nonsense is so common that it is addressed as part of 911 myths.

Of course, we do get to see Pardilis's standard response to the "I'm not an engineer and even I can see it was a CD" claim. I always like that one.
 
pgwenthold said:
As always, I find it interesting that every time a new person shows up with the latest, greatest case for doubting the "official story," for some reason they come out with the same old crap that we've seen hundreds of times as if they are showing us something we hadn't seen or considered.
Click to expand...

It's one of the reasons we here at JREF deal with all the woo topics. This is exactly like Christian missionaries trying to convert atheists. They act as if we simply must not have ever heard of the Bible, or Jesus, because if we had, we'd obviously be believers. It seems to completely boggle their minds to consider the possibility that someone may be familiar with the best of their arguments, but still be unconvinced.

Really, none of the woos have any new tricks. It's all part of the same non-rational continuum. Only the details of the particular woo changes.
 
kameelyun said:
Another outright lie concerns the thoroughness of our air defense system. PM claims that only one airplane (Payne Stewart's ill-fated private jet) was intercepted in the decade prior to 9/11. Not true. Sixty-seven of them occurred in just the one year before 9/11 alone. The 'one intercept' lie serves to back another one of PM's lies: that the Airforce was previously only trained to handle foreign attacks, coming from beyond our borders, and that the U.S. continental mainland was a defenseless donut-hole. Blatant falsehood.
Click to expand...
Why did you post this, don't you realize it was thoroughly debunked as CT nonsense ages ago? Are you stuck in some sort of 2005 tin-foil time warp or something?

Anyways I know gumboot has already explained why you are wrong but here is a quote from an excellent article about the ADIZ and TFR before and since 9/11...

Plane & Pilot said:
Terms like Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) and temporary flight restriction (TFR) quickly came into widespread use among the general-aviation pilot group. Those terms had been around for years. Military fighters and the ADIZ protected American coasts from intrusions by Russian Bear Bombers throughout the Cold War. TFRs were used for presidential security and other extraordinary events. But they weren’t part of a pilot’s everyday life. You didn’t get intercepted and forced down if you flew through a TFR.

Today, things are different. There’s an ADIZ that surrounds Washington, D.C. In the four years after 9/11, it was violated over 1,000 times. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has scrambled fighters for intercepts within U.S. borders over 1,600 times. In the year previous to 9/11, NORAD intercepted airplanes in the ADIZ only 67 times, none of which occurred within the U.S. borders. In 2003, the prohibited area that surrounds Camp David in Maryland was violated over 80 times, and the prohibited area called P-49, which surrounds the Bush ranch in Texas, was violated more than 140 times. For each violation, a standard 60-day suspension awaits the transgressor.

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/2005/oct/busting_tfr.html
Click to expand...
Worth a read if you haven't seen it before.
 
Last edited:
kameelyun said:
I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."
Click to expand...
So he recognized he failed to provide any evidence for his claims. Then proceeds to make more without any evidence.
 
Kameelyun said:
Smearers of 9/11 Truth love to call us "twoofers," a name intended to spread derision and even waves of hate.
Click to expand...

I call you Twoofers, Troofers, Troothers and 9/11 Deniers. I do not do so to spread derision or cause offence. It's just that the word truth, correctly spelled, has no association to anything your movement says or does.
 
kameelyun said:
I am a concerned citizen.
Click to expand...

I would like to add to my post to you kameelyun.

If you were a concerned citizen you would not spread lies about this dreadful event. You would educate yourself, you would read the reports that many independent experts have put together for you. This has been done for you for your future safety and security.

If you were a concerned citizen you would not indulge in paranoid fantasies and accuse your fellow countrymen of mass murder.

You would not stand shoulder to should with a group of individuals that laughably call themselves the truth movement. A movement so devoid of any form of humanity it openly mocks the final messages from victims to their families.

If you were a concerned citizen you would condemn totally people when tell you the passengers did not exist, that drone planes hit the Towers, that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon and the Flight 93 was not real. You would condemn totally idiots who try to tell that all the evidence is fake, crash sites are faked and that human remains and DNA was planted. You would dismiss this rubbish out of hand and you would roundly condemn the ghouls and idiots that profit from this dreadful event by promoting such lies.

If you was a concerned citizen you would not promote your unsubstantiated claims that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition, but rather would read the NIST interim report and wait for the final report, which is being prepared for you by independent experts. You would read the accounts of the fire men that were there and you would take onboard their accounts of this building and what happened to it

You are not concerned; you simply want to spread complete lies about this event. This is not what concerned citizens do; this is what internet kooks do.
 
Last edited:
kameelyun said:
I just had a normal away-from-the-monitor life after 6 p.m. yesterday.

I have no idea what James Randi's views are on 9/11, but one thing is pretty clear. This forum is for true believers of the official conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...
Well most here believe the "official" explination because it has scientific evidence backing it up. If there is irrefutable scientific evidence to show that the "official" explination is incorrect I think you would see opinions here change rather quickly.

I will admit I was wrong about one thing... most of the initial first few responses to my thread were not "flames" as such. However, even those posts were of a "Provide evidence, and I bet you can't, haha."
Click to expand...
Well "provide evidence" is pretty much the standard response around here. It only stand to reason when some one is making a claim.
The "I bet you can't, ha ha" is either due to the requisite persecution syndrome most CT'rs have or the irritation that some of the veteran posters here have due to the same argumnets being rehashed over and over again.

However, dare I leave my computer for a few hours, and the flames do start to pour on. "May I pull a Penn and Teller on this guy?" Smearers of 9/11 Truth love to call us "twoofers," a name intended to spread derision and even waves of hate.
Click to expand...
As does the term "shill" likewise.

As a "twoofer," my mission is to educate as many people as I can about the existense of the collapse of WTC 7. Outside this forum, most people who know about WTC 7 are of the "inside job" belief, but most people I talk to in real life still haven't heard of WTC 7. I don't see my "mission" as one of converting OCT true believers. .
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with having a mission, just be sure about your info.
I clearly am not going to change the minds of anyone on this board who disregard Steve Jones' work, who is a physicist... Oh, I'm sorry, his specialty is cold fusion, which makes him totally unqualified to talk about the collapse of buildings
Click to expand...
Well you would'nt expect an astrophysicist to have exactly the same knowledge and experiance as a nuclear physicist would you?
You wouldn't let a pediotrist do heart surgery on you would you? I mean, they're both doctors and everything.

The first Popular Mechanics article was before Steven Jones burst on the scene. Was Popular Mechanics interested in studying Steven Jones' findings? No, as soon as Jones gains traction, PM simply expands their article into a book, summarily dismisses Jones' work as misguided and inaccurate.
Click to expand...
Probably because they read Jones's stuff and found the glaring errors in his work.
Just because you get people to believe you does not mean that you are right.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.
Click to expand...
I hope you see what's wrong with your last two statements. Observing an event without having special knowlege of the mechanics of that event means that your not getting the full picture which can lead to misinterpretation. A non-scientist observing an event can only make an interpretation based on his/her limited knowledge.

Many years ago people thought the sun orbited the earth because that is what they observed when they applied "common sense" to thier observation. They had no special knowlege of what they were seeing. It wasn't untill people who gain that special knowlege discovered that the truth was not what "common sense" made us believe was happening.

So, what is obvious to a non-scientist may not be the truth.


I'm not an expert on fire or smoke either. Maybe the black stuff emanating from the WTC wasn't really smoke. It just "looked" like smoke. You know the "air pressure" coming from WTC 7 as it collapses? MAN, they look like blast points!
Click to expand...
"looks like" may not be "what is".
magicians "look like" they are defying the laws of physics.

Looks like us "twoofers" have our opinion and the JREF members have theirs. This probably will be my last post in this thread. Cheers!
Click to expand...
True, just be sure of what your basing your opinion on.
 
kameelyun said:
I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.
Click to expand...
This sentence is so wrong. Yet, I've seen many conspiracy theorists use this angle. This is so revealing.

Tell me, what's more plausible? That your ignorance stops you from analysing the collapse of the WTC7 objectively, or that the vast majority of professionals who have studied the subject, including very credible publications such as PM or groups such as NIST who have access to vast amount of resources and expertise somewhat missed what appears "obvious" to the layman?

This is so incredibly, so amazingly arrogant.

Maybe you should read this, and reconsider your whole approach to Epistemology:
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf
I can't resist from copying here a portion of the summary:
People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in the domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it.
Click to expand...
 
kameelyun said:
Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.
Click to expand...

What a very strange thing to say.

It appears obvious to me that the earth is fixed and unmovable and that the sun orbits around us. There is not the slightest feeling of motion as I stand on the earth but the sun clearly and obviously moves through the sky, disappears for about the same amount of time, and then shows up on the other side.

Moreover, I have no drect knowledge that this is not true. Sure, I've been told the earth revolves around the sun and I've been shown diagrams of how that is supposed to work. But all of those sources were experts. I have never seen the earth moving. And if these experts are so stupid as to just disregard what is obvious to the rest of us ...

Your point that your lack of expertise makes you a better judge of the events of 9/11 has no logical foundation ... unless you believe the earth is unmoving at the center of the universe.

Oh, and be sure to disregard anything your doctor tells you. He's an expert and if it's obvious to you that those sores are normal, you probably don't need the AZT.
 
Well kameelyun -

You certainly can't say I didn't warn you. What I told you is what I tell everyone on the Randi Rhodes Message Board: If you really want to run your theories by the professionals, the JREF forum is the place to do it. I was right, wasn't I? I always mention that JREF is the place where conspiracy theories go to die. A fitting end, applied by logicians and professionals.

Background: The Randi Rhodes Message Board spawns from the NYC-based Randi Rhodes radio talk show, one of the few that is NOT rabid right-wing talk in this country. I like Randi's show immensely, and post frequently on her message board. Probably 2,000 of my posts have been dedicated to fighting the 9/11 woo factor, and that is where I saw kameelyun's post of his Popular Mechanics review.

I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.
Click to expand...

No, we don't get your point because it is couched within a statement that is overflowing with absurdity. The arrogance you project is astounding. Essentially what you are saying is: The less I know, the wiser I is. Memorize these 3 words: Knowledge is power. Get your knowledge and expertise on controlled demolition together, make your case, set it out on the back porch and see if the cat licks it up.
 
kameelyun said:
I knew within a few posts I would get the "what are your engineering qualifications?" My answer is: none, other than that I am a concerned citizen. Also, having no engineering qualifications actually makes the MIHOP case stronger: If the demolition is so obvious that even a non-scientist can call on it with certainty... you get my point.
Click to expand...

I look out the window, and I can see with my own eyes that the Earth is flat. If it's so obvious that even a non-scientst can see it...
 
ConspiRaider said:
Memorize these 3 words: Knowledge is power. Get your knowledge and expertise on controlled demolition together, make your case, set it out on the back porch and see if the cat licks it up.
Click to expand...

Okay, this may be me showing my ignorance, but here goes:

Is the cat licking it up supposed to be a good thing, or a bad thing?!?!?

These quaint regionalisms can be so confusing!
 
Horatius said:
And now you try the old "everyone's opinions are equally valid" schtick. Nope, not going to fly here. People like R.Mackey, Architect and others (like all the guys at PM) really do know more than you about these issues. Their expert opinions, and our opinions based on their expert analyses, really are better than the twoofer crap.
Click to expand...

That earned a square on my play-at-home scorecard!

1253245bf877da60b8.gif


The argument's not dead till I say "Bingo", durn it. Come on, Kameelyun.
 
kameelyun said:
They believe our government would never murder its own people (even though they have NO trouble believing OTHER govts would kill THEIR own people), and anyone who thinks as such must be paranoid and even anti-American.
Click to expand...

Above is the only thing I object to. Otherwise it's alright.

It is generalizing, a cognitive distortion to say, "our government" and what it does is removes the ideals behind this nation from the peoples grasp. Those ideals are to be found through "our government". How are we to do this if we believe they are killing us?

Our government has been infiltrated. Many governments have been infiltrated.

In the below thread there are clues as to how this infiltration is conducted.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69171&page=6
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

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