Or do they? (I created this thread to continue the conversation and hopefully derail it from my Holiday Dinner Table thread!)
P.S. For the record, I do believe they exist. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki aftermath are primary evidence, and I take Penn’s take on it: I don’t believe any government is so well organized and capable of pulling something like that of 9/11 off and therefore don’t see their involvement as a viable possibility.
There, prove me wrong if you must, gentlemen!
I’m not sure I’m ready to call myself a “truther” or “denier” either, but as others have pointed out to be, Dresden looks awfully like Hiroshima/Nagasaki, and bombs can be made to be dirty.
But then again, as Penn said, this government couldn’t even cover up a guy having his you-know-what getting you-know-whated. At times, I do believe it’s strange that many libertarians accuse the government of pulling off some massive secrecy, when they say that everything the state does is a crappy job and could be handled better by individuals.
Exactly. Do I believe the government knows exactly how 9/11 happened? No. There are too many unanswered questions. But to maintain that they had holographic imaging used in a well-organized plot where no insiders have come out and said it was fake and so forth is ridiculous. The government, federal, state of local level, can barely wipe their mouths after dinner much less pull off a huge plot as such.
As for the Nukes (and everyone, please keep on topic of the Nukes and not 9/11 [unless it’s very brief, please!]), I have never heard of a denier before this forum. It’s like doubting the moon landing when there is tons of video.
what does it matter if they exist or not?
we still have weapons with massive distructive power, whether they are nuclear or not does not matter much i would think.
if the bomb was from non nuclear, it’s still a bomb that caused the damage the bomb caused.
And if these weapons did not exist what would be the benefit of fooling your people there was in fact such a thing?
I suppose, if anything, it would be the mentality. Whenever you think of nukes, you think of the world practically going up in flames. But standard bombs? You kind of just think, “yeah, they’re pretty destructive, but not even close to nukes.”
Well I think before discussing the topic in that way some distinctions need to be made:
The non-existence of nuclear weapons vs. non-existence of nuclear weapons as they are popularly perceived. Those who argue against the official line on nukes needn’t say that they are completely impossible or non-existent, but that the ease in their use is vastly overstated, and that militaries cannot in fact use them as they claim.
On Penn’s argument: there is a difference between governments overall (which contain a mix of sociopaths, egotists, narcissists, and useful idiots) and the particular groups who are believed by some to stage events such as 9/11. Just because governments are often incompetent does not mean that those who are said by some to act in those ways are also incompetent.
Dresden took 3 days and over 1,000 bombers to drop almost 4 thousand tons of explosives on the city.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were each accomplished in minutes with 1 bomber dropping 1 bomb.
“Dirty bombs” do not emit thermal radiation and cause flash burns.
This threads going to be intense as soon as Clayton gets here.
I find the Hollow Moon theory more plausible than this.
Why hello Neodoxy. It’s me again, SkepticalMetal.
I have to admit, I’m eagerly waiting LOL. I thought the same thing.
Actually, it makes me nervous to talk about it too much. Let’s just say it’s a private hunch.
Clayton -
+1 Aristippus. Whatever the case in fact is with real or hypothetical massively destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons are supposed to be, there is a high probability that the public is massively and purposely misinformed about them. In fact, the government assures us that it will do everything in its power to decieve, misdirect, obfuscate and confuse penetration of its most valuable capabilities (“sources & methods” in the intel community). So, even supposing that governments have weapons that can do as much damage as a thermonuclear explosion, there is no reason to believe that any of the footage or any of the scientific “facts” we are given about these weapons have any basis in fact.
Clayton -