Penn & Teller : 9/11 Moonbats

The US government flying remotely controlled planes into the WTC is a reasonable argument how, exactly?

Sounds definately like you're you're own fool!

So the most tortured, elaborate plan must be the truth?
Nasa didn't land on the moon, and aliens made the pyramids too?

Huge organizations can keep earth shattering secrets hidden but the most secret documents always can be found in a dumpster or blowing across a berry field somewhere. North Korea and China can get details of nuclear weapons using sex or money, but aliens walk among us and no one wants to make money off that? You conspiracy theorists have more faith in people keeping secrets than I ever had.

Hold that thought when the Mikey Moore movie on this comes out.

Sorry, but I don't think the Penn and Teller clip did the anti-conspiracy theorists any favours. Instead of actually disproving or addressing any of the questions raised by those that think things don't quite add up, he just yells "aaasshole" a bit lounder, witty lines like "did you do that research in your butt?" and uses that typical con line "you are insulting the memory of the dead by even asking these questions." Not sure that this "argument" holds any water myself.

In fact, this video was so utterly empty of anything except aggressive bluster, I think he might have convinced me that there IS something to this conspiracy lark...

It's because, despite the engineering reports (ie, the assessment by people qualified to talk about failure modes and behaviour), these nuts continue to drag this issue out. Read this if you want a valid assessment. It very competently addresses any argument by conspiracy theorists.

Of course, you could ignore this and assume the government conspired with the the largest civil engineering society in the world and forced them to break every oath they have to society and their profession.

Did you see that movie Loose Change?

Sure a lot of thing don't add up about the 911 official story. But if you believe in magic then anything is possible. Sure you can melt tonne of steel with kerozene ( that what they found at the base of the twin tower) BTW I'm a foundry metallurgist there is no way in hell you can melt steel that way! or according to the official story that second boeing engine that no one could find was vaporize!?!? yeah right ? jet engine are made of Titanium and super alloys steel (High nickel alloys design for there high temperature resistance) yeah if anyone has a credible aswer for those "official" explaination then I'll stop being a sceptic.

Yeah I seem to remember the points that stood out for me was that the temperature at which the steel girders woudl melt was much much higher than could have been acheived by the exploding jet fuel. That penn & teller video guy saying "it was the chairs and tables burning up that raised the temperature enough to melt the building", well, I'm not completely convinced by him to be honest.

And there were lots of witnesses in the building who described explosions lower down in the building before the towers collapsed. A close look at video and sound footage seems to show a series of small explosions dotted around the towers, which correspond to controlled demolition explosions. And the way it fell, just straight down. Well, that looked alot like a controlled explosion to me, I would have imagined that the thing would be more likely to tip over from the point that it broke, or at least collapse more unevenly. Not that I'm a buildings explosion expert, perhaps someone else can enlighten me.

There were a bunch of other remaining questions, many of which were bizarre, or may be red herrings or have perfectly reasonable explanations. I'd be interested to know if people who have seen the film still feel as confident about dismissing the questions, even the physics questions about heating temperatures and explosion patterns. If you do, please do share.

You don't know what you're talking about, Elvis. You're not an engineer, and you don't know the details of the assessment. Neither do idiots ogling grainy videos and claiming they "saw something" that isn't explained by the report.

It would be virtually impossible to keep something like this under wraps, given the shear number of people that would have to be involved. That alone is enough to be confident that it's not a conspiracy, given none of these "experts" have any actual evidence.