Top Ten Photos 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts Hate

From www.layscience.net:

"Ever since the twin towers came down, conspiracy nuts have gone to town, poring over photos and youtube videos in an attempt to prove that the global Salafi Jihad movement wasn’t responsible for the attacks, and that some unspecified agents - usually the government, Jews, CIA or some combination of the above - were. In spite of all the conspiracy websites in existence though, not one has managed to come up with any definitive evidence that contradicts the official story.

I don’t really want to go through the whole 9/11 nonsense here, but inspired by my general annoyance at the topic, I thought I’d present a little run down of the top ten photos conspiracy theorists don’t want to deal with (click the photos to see larger versions). I don’t claim that this page somehow proves the official story to be right, nor that it proves conspiracy theories wrong, but it gives some neat examples of why it’s hard to take some of these people seriously.

1. Flight 77 wreckage (from the landing gear) at the Pentagon. Conspiracy theorists used to argue that no plane ever hit the Pentagon, claiming that there was no visible debris at the site. They seem to have retreated from this claim in the last couple of years.

2. Debris from the Twin Towers falling onto WTC7. Many conspiracy theorists still believe that fires and debris couldn’t have reached WTC7 (the tall building lower-right) to inflict significant damage, claiming that WTC7 must have been subjected to a controlled demolition.

3. WTC6 lies in ruins. Conspiracy theorists have also argued that WTC7 couldn’t have been struck by debris since WTC6 - which lies between the twin towers and WTC7 - “wasn’t that damaged”. Note that the center has entirely collapsed. In spite of evidence like this, and reports from fire-fighters, who used instruments to measure the gradual movement and distortion of WTC7’s structure over several hours up until its collapse, Truthers still prefer to believe that a controlled demolition occurred.

4 & 5. Fires rage in WTC5 and WTC6. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that fire could have spread to WTC7, even though fires clearly raged across much of the WTC complex.


6. Plume from the Flight 93 Crash. As witnesses looked on, Mrs McClatchey took this shot from her porch. Ever since, conspiracy theorists have harassed and threatened her, even anonymously posting her phone number and photos of her home on blogs. They claim that the evidence must be faked, as it is inconsistent with their theory that a missile brought down the aircraft. (which would have resulted in fragments of the plane coming down over a wide area), and have subjected Mrs McClatchey to a torrent of abuse.

7. A seatbelt from the wreckage of Flight 93. Hundreds of volunteers spent days and weeks combing the area, collecting wreckage amounting to virtually the entire plane, now in the possession of the airline (with the exception of the black boxes which are held by air safety officials. Some conspiracy theorists believe that all of the local residents in the area are liars, along with all the airline workers, local police and emergency services, coronors, and air safety experts involved in the operation to recover the aircraft, and the analysis of flight data and materials recovered.

8. Sagging floors in WTC2. As the heat in the towers increase, steel supports were weakened causing buckling, as evidenced by the sagging floor visible here. This weakening led to the structural failure of the building. Conspiracy theorists claim that the buildings should have survived these structural failures, and believe that thousands of explosive charges were rigged inside the building, with a control system to detonate them somehow surviving the impact and fires.

9. Workmen cutting beams in the wreckage. Conspiracy theorists are for some reason obsessed with the idea that thermite was used in 9/11, in spite of the fact that thermite is used for cutting and welding, and never in demolitions (indeed, it would be practically impossible to set it up). They cite neatly cut beams as evidence of thermite being used, but ignore the fact that beams were neatly cut up by workmen operating after the collapse.

10. Debris out-paces the collapse of the tower. Many conspiracy theorists claim that the World Trade Center towers fell equal to (or ludicrously faster than) free-fall speeds. Many photos clearly show falling debris out-pacing the collapse of the building, proving that the structures fell at well below free-fall speeds.

Ultimately this sort of blogging is an exercise in futility. There is no evidence, no matter how convincing, that will ever be accepted by the 9/11 “Truth” Movement’s hardcore evangelists. The irony is that the people who claim to be searching for the truth are so willing to ignore evidence and react angrily to those with conflicting evidence and testimony.

A bigger irony is that if there is a conspiracy, truthers with their deluge of disinformation are doing more than anyone else to help cover it up.

Calling someone nutty, delusional and evangelical (etc) is not conducive to convincing that person.

Why would I possibly have a serious discussion with you? Do you appear to be reasonable?

If you want to stand on the side of the truth (whatever that may be), you should learn to act like you’re knowledgable of it.

I use to be pretty interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories, so I’ll go ahead and point out some mistakes you’ve made.

1. Flight 77 wreckage (from the landing gear) at the Pentagon. Conspiracy theorists used to argue that no plane ever hit the Pentagon, claiming that there was no visible debris at the site. They seem to have retreated from this claim in the last couple of years.

I don’t remember ever reading that no plane hit the Pentagon. It was what kind of plane hit the Pentagon. They don’t believe the same type of jet that hit the WTC would have hit the Pentagon given the amount of damage the Pentagon did have. They believe it was something else smaller.

2. Debris from the Twin Towers falling onto WTC7. Many conspiracy theorists still believe that fires and debris couldn’t have reached WTC7 (the tall building lower-right) to inflict significant damage, claiming that WTC7 must have been subjected to a controlled demolition.

3. WTC6 lies in ruins. Conspiracy theorists have also argued that WTC7 couldn’t have been struck by debris since WTC6 - which lies between the twin towers and WTC7 - “wasn’t that damaged”. Note that the center has entirely collapsed. In spite of evidence like this, and reports from fire-fighters, who used instruments to measure the gradual movement and distortion of WTC7’s structure over several hours up until its collapse, Truthers still prefer to believe that a controlled demolition occurred.

4 & 5. Fires rage in WTC5 and WTC6. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that fire could have spread to WTC7, even though fires clearly raged across much of the WTC complex.

!(http://loveforlife.com.au/files/911 12.jpg)

If I remember correctly, there is video of the owner of WTC 7 discussing the controlled demolition of building 7. Your pictures seem to be in conflict with the ones I’ve posted. I think the conspiracy side of it is that they called in the collapse to the news before the building fell (see the news shot above). It was a controlled demoltion.

The points you address in 6 and 7 about Flight 93, I haven’t heard those accusations from the conspiracy side (about harrassment, and so forth), so I won’t bother to address them. Sounds like a strawman is trying to emerge…

8. Sagging floors in WTC2. As the heat in the towers increase, steel supports were weakened causing buckling, as evidenced by the sagging floor visible here. This weakening led to the structural failure of the building. Conspiracy theorists claim that the buildings should have survived these structural failures, and believe that thousands of explosive charges were rigged inside the building, with a control system to detonate them somehow surviving the impact and fires.

9. Workmen cutting beams in the wreckage. Conspiracy theorists are for some reason obsessed with the idea that thermite was used in 9/11, in spite of the fact that thermite is used for cutting and welding, and never in demolitions (indeed, it would be practically impossible to set it up). They cite neatly cut beams as evidence of thermite being used, but ignore the fact that beams were neatly cut up by workmen operating after the collapse.

Yes, floors are sagging, and the point is? There’s a lot involved with this (can the jet engine fuel become hot enough to melt the beams without actually causing widespread fire that could be visibly seen - as there is video of someone standing in the wreckage hole from the plane crash, the amount of impact, etc). The buildings were designed to collapse vertically, which they did. They are engineered to fall that way. The question is, was there help? The thermite argumuent goes into this. They believe thermite was used not exactly on the bottom beams, but where the impact was (correct me if I’m wrong on this).

This doesn’t disprove the theory of cut beams and controlled demolition, as there is footage of firefighters talking about hearing explosions in the basement before the building collapsed. You say thermite is used for cutting and welding, never in demolitions, but the theory of the collapse involves both. They are not trying to neatly cut some beams for some maintenance work, they are trying to destroy the building by any means.

10. Debris out-paces the collapse of the tower. Many conspiracy theorists claim that the World Trade Center towers fell equal to (or ludicrously faster than) free-fall speeds. Many photos clearly show falling debris out-pacing the collapse of the building, proving that the structures fell at well below free-fall speeds.

The picture doesn’t really prove or disprove anything, seeing how it’s a still shot, and not moving. They are basing this on the actual point of the collapse to the bottom compared to that of something falling within a vacuum.

I will believe the “truthers” if they had the balls to knock on some family that lost a relative in one of the planes and say “oh, your relative is not really dead, for realz!”

@Bert,

(1) is that news photo of the reporter lady with WTC7 in the background for real?

(2) is that WTC7 .gif for real?

I’ve never followed this 9/11 conspiracy stuff at all—never thought there could ever be anything to it…until I learned more and more history & econ, that is. Still, even then, I haven’t cared much one way or another re: 9/11 conspiracy true or false.

But, WTC7…wow.

Not that I NOW care much one way or another re: 9/11 conspiracey true or false.

But still…damn…those images are hard to argue with.

I would believe Austrian “economists” if they had the balls to knock on a poor family’s door and say “oh, your welfare check is actually hurting the economy, for realz!”

I would believe the anti-war activists if they had the balls to go up to a soldier and say “youre a murderer, for realz!”

Wow, I just proved that welfare and warfare are good things!

Seph, let’s suppose it weren’t planes, so where all the dead folks went? To the island of Lost?

The truthers should stop playing pseudo-enginering with pictures of an extremely chaotic system (remember the pretense of knowledge in complex systems?) and try to find what happened to all the people that were in the planes. Whatever they find, could prove them right or debunk them.

People who believe the government’s conspiracy theory are the real nuts. Especially when they claim to oppose the government. If you believe the government’s conspiracy theory, you’re a statist.

I have no idea where they went, what happened to them or any other intimate details on the matter.

So what? Do I need to describe to you exactly how I think a suspect of murder killed his victim, where he killed him, what he used, where he went after, why he did it, etc, before we can even consider officially investigating the matter?

@Nielsio, I think it’s pretty much impossible to have a serious discussion with a Truther.

I don’t know which topics I despise more… religion vs atheism or 9/11 conspiracy… :smiley:

Do you all believe the government conspiracy theory that voluntary action and not the government is the cause of recent economic problems? I guess you should support a war on the free market then.

I posted this to see what kind of responses I’d get. I myself have not followed the 9/11 thing carefully. I don’t know who is telling what or what is photoshopped and what isn’t. But I do know that the government has taken full advantage of the outcome regardless.

My view has always been that;

There is some good evidence that the job itself was not just the terrorist attack front. But it is mostly anectdotal.

There is good objective evidence that it may have been an inside job (the general shitty response by the military, and all the military exercises, project for a new american century, etc)

There is a great amount of evidence that the administration at the very least knew it was happening and remained willfully apathetic.

It is clear, at least to me, that the official analysis is crap.

bcyclwutztht, as far as I know those pictures are real.

There’s a lot on just WTC 7. Whether or not you agree with the 9/11 conspiracy theory, you can’t debunk it with just a few statements or photos. I have a bunch of 9/11 documentaries on my computer, some Alex Jones stuff and other stuff from people who probably had way too much time on their hands. I swear I watched a video that went over like 100 points in it being a conspiracy mainly focusing on WTC itself, and it was in the most monotone voice with hardly any music. There’s a lot to be said, and a lot to take into consideration. I don’t think bashing them is going to help anyone though.

I find it odd when people (those who have a distaste for the state in general) get upset over people who believe that it was an inside job. Sometimes those who are trying to disprove the Truthers are just as stubborn as the Truthers themselves. The only difference is that the Truthers are trying to show who really orchestrated it. Their enemy is the state and their lies. Those disproving them only have one objective, to disprove them. Their enemy is a theory put forth by a lot of people.

Speaking of this, around the 11th of this month, someone ripped/cut “9/11” off her “9/11 was an inside job” bumper sticker on her car that was parked infront of her house. Pretty pathetic.

I haven’t read hardly any 9/11 conspiracy theory, why would the government create 9/11, power expansion?

Zeitgeist Part II: All The World’s A Stage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J37jQLIPuqY

(30m54s)

This is a great article by Eric Margolis. Perhaps the 19 highjackers were planted but the towers really did fall from the planes and there were no demolitions?

A 2006, a Scripps Howard/Washington Post poll found that 36% of the 1,000 Americans sampled believed the US government was behind 9/11. Many Americans still do not believe the official version of 9/11.


Faked bin Laden videos and audio tapes. Planted anthrax. An intact Koran implausibly found at ground zero. Evidence in a hijacker’s bag that had somehow failed to make his ill-fated flight. Immediate claims that al-Qaida was behind the attacks. Those amateur kamikaze pilots and collapsing towers.


So what, in the end, can we conclude? 1. We still do not know the real story about 9/11. 2. The official version is not credible. 3. 9/11 was used to justify invading strategic Afghanistan and oil-rich Iraq. 4. The attacks plunged America into wars against the Muslim world and enriched the US arms industry. 5. 9/11 boosted pro-Israel neoconservatives, formerly a fringe group, into power, and with them America’s totalitarian far right. 6. Bush’s unprovoked war against Iraq destroyed one of Israel’s two main enemies. 7. 9/11 put America in what may turn out to be a permanent state of war with the Muslim world – a key goal of the neoconservatives .

"Truther
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=truther

Noun- One who rejects the accepted explanation of the events of 9/11. Truthers generally believe the U.S. government committed the acts of terrorism against itself."

That describes me.