But if you like to believe this guy then apparently it is.
This is Debunking 9/11.
I guess since PNAC's website is (as of 1/7/08) suspended it must be proof.
At least in conspiracy theory land.
Take this interesting snippet for example:
"debunking9/11.com is a very sophisticated, extensive and professionally put together website that clearly has had a lot of expensive expertise poured into it. It goes to extraordinary lengths to attempt to debunk the evidence that has presented itself on the internet over the last seven years as an alternative to the US government’s version of the events of 9/11, but – and this is where the site gives itself away – it doesn’t attempt to debunk just some aspects of the new evidence that has been presented, but it tries to debunk every bit of it. It is that characteristic that defines it as a propaganda site rather than a site that is scientifically objective with its arguments."So according to this Mr. Lataan, (the name given on the profile) the evidence that makes Debunking 9/11 a shill propaganda site is:
- Looks professionally done
- Debunks all of the "evidence" given by "truthers".
It really seems that the NWO and PNAC have gone downhill, what with PNAC not having the money to keep their website going, and making a propaganda website that seems to have been made from a template.
Funnily enough Debunking 9/11 doesn't debunk everything. It only debunks the more common claims. It doesn't cover Judy Wood's space beams, or really anything from Christophera.
But I guess, if I start up a website (hypothetically) somewhere near the start of all this rubbish, I would have been able to write quite a bit since the "truth" movement is a very static one with little new information entering into it.
Or this bit:
"But what really gives it away is the rhetoric and tone of the narrative, which is presented in a pseudo-technical pseudo-academic way, but which is transparently intermingled with outright neoconservative propaganda which has nothing to do with the events of 9/11."Which he decides to give an example:
"Take, for example, this on the ‘Osama bin Laden’ page of their website:Oh dear.
“Conspiracy theorists like to say ‘Some Arabs with box cutters couldn't have pulled this off.’ Let's forget for a minute how racist that statement is”.
Firstly, of course, one needs to ask; what conspiracy theorists like to say ‘Some Arabs with box cutters couldn't have pulled this off’? Trying to cast those that doubt the US government’s official version of the events of 9/11 as ‘racists’ is a classic neoconservative tactic used because of the connotations of the word ‘racist’ has with ‘anti-Semitism’."
I wonder how logically sound it is to argue "he's making strawmen" by using an argument from ignorance.
Once again we go to the Debunking 9/11 FAQ:
"Q: Most of your arguments seem to be strawmen. Why do you attack arguments I'm not making?But to answer my fellow croweaters question, why not take a look,Comment 8 here, here, or here.
A: There are arguments some web sites make which others do not. Just because you haven't seen the argument on your favorite conspiracy site doesn't mean there aren't those who make it. (Read: logical fallacy) If the topic doesn't apply to you, then just skip it and go on to the next. "
As you can see, quite a few conspiracy theorists like to say that. Just because you don't or your specific group don't does not, as the FAQ extract pointed out, does not mean that nobody else does.
To be honest, the rest of the post in question is nothing more then complaining, wild accusations (how is he attacking Jones or Griffin?) and the standard "the webmaster is being paid to do this".
Honestly, if there is such an all powerful government, then why haven't they taken out all of the "truthers" in the US? Why would they have to pay people to make sites like this when they could just as easily and cheaply take down the sites?
This is another thing that I don't expect any "truther" to answer.
Update: Welcome people from Debunking911.com. If you have read this far then please take the time to look at some of my other 9/11 related posts through the tag, or take a look at some of the other stuff on here.
Update 2: There is a response to some of the comments posted below. The post may be found here.
21 comments:
Nice ^post. It's always easy to poke holes in Lataan's arguments but you've done a fairly comprehensive job here. Lataan is well known for peddling his anti-Semitic rants and 9/11 conspiracy theories in the Australian blogosphere. The guy's a racist loon and, if it wasn't already obvious, posts like yours confirm it for readers.
Why thank you anonymous.
I'm not afraid, tool...it's called PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY...
If, for example, InfoWars or What Really Happened disappeared, or was taken down, it would be blatantly obvious that he had posted something that COULD NOT GET OUT...
How's that for a response?
Somewhat surprising actually.
But what if they made it look like the people just hadn't paid their bills?
Good post Wildy, Mr. Lataan needs to be called out for what amounts to pernicious fabrications cloaked in pseudo-intellectualism (simply character-assassination). The veracity of his claims can be easily assessed by the framing of every single one of his suppositions by words such as "seems", "almost", "perhaps" (all contained within the first six-line paragraph), which clearly demonstrate that the author has no proof, and actually doesn't even believe his own claims.
The post in itself is utterly useless; it is in the comments where things get interesting... 'truthers' coming out of the woodwork with such irrational gems as "GET AMERICA BACK FOR AMERICANS!!!" (lol, what?); "America , without a doubt, is the war whore the bible warns mankind to watch out for"; "we have a fifth column installed in our government, our media and our lives, who live to subvert our great nation" (*laughter fades, replaced by look of concern*); "Whatever this New World Order wants, be it to harvest souls or try to re-live the fantasy that it is all powerful." (ummm); "jews seem to enjoy terrorizing christians, and God is gonna put a stop to that." (oh dear... oh, fuck me!)
Alright... I shouldn't act so surprised, I did find Mr. Lataan's blog after following a link-trail from a blog claiming (with no evidence at all, of course) that there were no gas-chambers in Auschwitz... another link trail started from the comments section in the Lataan blog leads back to similair places.
To be honest, I'd not been aware of quite how out-of-hand these paranoid fantasies concerning 9/11 had become; the virulence of the idea that the whole event was orchestrated by 'the jews' (apparently some kind of monolithic cabal with it's fingers in every conceivable facet of society, sound familiar? It reads like a 21st century Mein Kampf) leads me to suspect that the 'truth' movement has been co-opted by holocaust-deniers. An attempt to update their tired and unfounded bigotry to the 21st century? Did they tire of bashing their vacuous skulls against many thousands of eye-witnesses and mountains of primary documents?
Mr. Lataan seems utterly impervious to logic, and blissfully unaware of the irony contained within his statements... "One must always be aware of those that attempt to detract from objective argument in order to push derisive propaganda and rhetoric." LOL, I agree with you on that one Damian...
Whatever your political leaning, dangerous anti-intellectualism like Lataan's must be opposed wherever it is found, keep up the good work Wildy - never mind the censorship :p
Nice post. There is still to much evidence out there that answers aren't being given for. I've been studying the event since the day it happened but keep up the good work your doing an awsome job
The worldtrade center have been demolished with explosives ,there is no doubt about this fact ,I agree with you we must impeach george w bush , as soon as possible and send him fast to the electric chair
Yes I agree george w bush is a killer we must impeach george w bush and send him to letal poison injection in a jail prison as soon as possible Please
Regards Eric
Chuck Boldwyn
Retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor says:
The internet repeatedly established weight of a single Twin Tower is 500,000 Tons.
DL(110) = 500,000 Tons
The weight of the 16 Floor alleged falling block is much less than 73,000 Tons, as the steel is only .25 inches thick at the top, but we will consider the whole Tower to be of uniform thickness.
DL(16) = 73,000 Tons or less
The weight of the lower WTC 94 floor block is 430,000 Tons or more as the steel gets progressively thicker and thicker,until it reaches 4 inches thick toward the bottom floors.
The top alleged falling 16 floor block is less than (1/6) the weight of the lower 94 block.
Even though the top block was very massive, on a comparitive scale to the lower 94 floor steel, highly intact block, according to the laws of Physics, it could never collapse the topmost 94th floor, floor 94, with its gravity weight of force alone, much less the entire 94 floor steel tower below.
The Tower could support 20 times its Live Load (LL)weight.
CL = Collapse Load
CL(94) = 20 x LL(94) (via John Skilling, WTC Cheif Enginer, deceased, but published everywhere)
The Live Load is confirmed by NIST 911 Commision Report Science Guy, Ronald Hamburger to be:
LL(94) = 5 x DL(94)
therefore:
CL(94) = 20 x LL(94)
and therefore:
CL(94) = 20 x (5 x DL(94))
and therefore:
CL(94) = 100 DL(94)
According to the above, the very unique Safety Factor is the Collapse Load Factor, whis is:
100 x DL(110)
It is not 5 DL(110)
It is not 20 DL(110)
It is 100 DL(110)
& it is 20 x 5 x DL(110)
Get over it OCT misguided dupes and misguided PHDs.
This means the the lower 94 block of steel could support 100 blocks of 94 floors before possible total collapse could occur.
This also means that the lower 94 block of steel could support 588 blocks of 16 floors before possible total collapse could occur, since one 94 block is equal to 5.88 16 floor blocks.
588 Vector Force units of upward support (stressed Normal Force)against 1 Vector force unit of downward gravity weight force, all by its lonesome.
Now apply Vector math Addition to opposing Forces to find that the top block could never in one's wildest dreams totally collapse the lower 94 floor block of powerfully strong and very thick,
4 inches, steel.
588 Force units of upward support
minus
1 force unit of downward weight Force
gives 587 force units of non-collapsing support.
1 Force Unit(FU) = 1 DL(16)
(588 FU up) - (1 FU down) = 587 FU up.
No collapse can possibly occur...
CL(94) = 588 DL(16)
That is crushing and most devastating news for the Original Conspiracy Theorists in the Government and in the Mass Media.
They no longer have a lying and deceitful or ignorant leg to stand on.
Amen, story over using Vector Forces Physics. the Ultimate Truth and Proof.
That is the Final & Ultimate answer as to why the twin towers could never, ever collapse under the conditions offered by NIST, the Government, the Mass Media, and the big name University and corporate PHDs.
Since the confirmed discovery of the red and gray nano Thermite active and explosive particles in the WTC dust samples, there is no leg to stand on by the NIST, government and all the "quack" PHDs hired by the Government to do their lying diry work with the Mass Media.
Game over. Get the Gallows and Guillotines ready!!
Here is a little bit of shocking information for you OCT people and non physicists to digest.
You would have to raise the top 16 floor block, the alleged falling block, to a height of 120 miles above the 94 floor block and then drop it. The 16 floor block would drop for 200 seconds and collide with the top of the lower 94 block at a velocity of 4,500 miles per hour with a colliding energy of 1.5 x 10^14 Joules of energy before total collapse could occur.
That collision energy, 1.5 x 10^14 Joules, is the energy equivalent of 2.4 Hiroshima Atomic bombs or the equivatlent energy of 36,000Tons of TNT or a very large number of mini nuclear devices.
This is attained only if there is no air resistance, in ideal conditions of Free Fall. Because there is air resistance, the Terminal velocity of about 1200 miles per hour will prevent the top 16 floor block from attaining the required collision velocity and the required collision energy to totally collapse the botton 94 floor steel tower.
In other work, under any conditions it will be impossible to totally collapse the lower 94 floor tower.
Amen....End of the Official Conspiracy Unscientific Theory of NIST, the Government, the Mass Media and the retarded PHDs from the Universities and Industry.
All of those PHDs are shot down in flames, becoming the laughing stock of their students and peers. They all need to retire and spend the money they got for writing and supporting tnose stupin and foolish ideas and theories they have corruptly put forward. Their careers are doomed.
Chuck Boldwyn
Retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor.
cboldwyn@bellsouth
You may request my detailed PDF research report to be emailed to you if you send me your email address at cboldwyn@bellsouth.net.
You will be amaze and shocked when evaluating my blockbuster research findings.
Bring on the debunkers, if they are brave and foolish enough to try their foolish best...
Who is going to be the brave and knowledgeable person to attempt to scientifically debunk this ass-kicking Thesis of Chuck's.
Proverb:
"Knowing that you are a fool,
that is the beginning of your Wisdom"
This applys to all potential government and NIST supporting allies. You are all pathethic puppets of the Terrorist Man or Terrorist Men who really and truly run the USA Government, Politics, Elections, Finances, Banks, Education, Media of all kinds, and on and on. They orchestrated the 911 WTC Twin Towers "False-Flag" demolishments or obliterations.
Thay all will be investigated, indicted, arrested, incarcerated, tried in court, and publicly, on world wide TV be executed. That is my ultimate wish and desire, for the Traitors, Murderers, and Mass Falsifiers of evidences.
They will never publish my finding in the Mass Media for the sheeple to see and understand. That would be mass suicide of themselves.
When will they ever publish the finding of the scientific proofs for the explosive nano thermite in the WTC dust samples?
follow this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
This is also an Ass Kicker death sentence for the 911 Traitors, killers. The evidence is absolute and conclusive and final, it is the bringer of damnation for the Bush Administration's top level criminals who financed and supported the 3,000 911 murders, assissinations...
Chuck
American Patriot and 911 solutions solver and a Hero of the "Truth Movement"
Come one, come all, and try your hand at debunking, using quantitative science, my ass kicking, blockbusting 911 Twin Towers Conclusions.
Chuck Boldwyn
I have written something of a response to your comments. It may be found here.
Without a proper elementary background in Physics & Math, you will not be able to see nor to understand the revolutionary Citizen forces that will be unleashed against the Government and Mass Media, once my researched quantitative findings are distributed and reviewed and accepted by the masses of scientists, politicians, educators, students, soldiers, policemen, firemen, and ordinary citizens in the internet world and the underground newspapers, like the American Free Press and talk show interviews, starting this week.
If you have even a reasonable mind you should be able to understand the basic derivation of my Thesis Equation, even if you can not understand the rest of the presentation.
I simply can not teach you all of the necessary physics and vector math you need to understand and comprehend my analysis of the WTC TT.
Read this cut & paste from one of my email sendings to those who request to see my MS Word Research Document.
No one has been remotely able to scientifically and mathematically debunk the quantitative analysis and conclusions of my 911 WTC TT Thesis and I am looking forward to their attempts, especially if they are a professional scientist. They should easily be able to see the correctness of my scientifically reasoned out conclusions. thier bebunking rebuttals wil only show how deeply entrenched thier "incompetence" really is.
Most scientists will simply read my paper and see its totally correct logic and become a supporter, especially if they are already a "Truther".
My work debunks the Official Theory into shreds, into refuse, into incompetent unscientific quackery, putting them on the same scientific level as Alchemists of long ago.
My quest now is to scientifically destroy all of Theses of all of the supporters of the government's and mass media's false postulates and theories and hypotheses, and thier "fairy tales" that hopelessly try to assert thier bogus-scientific authority in the area of credibility and real-world "Truth", all of those big University PHDs, especially Shyam Sunder and the others named below:
Thomas Eagar
Zdenek Bazant
Yong Zhou
Ronald Hamburger
Richard Ebeltoft
Daniel Scarpitano
Hyman Brown
Eugene Samuel
Damian Carrington
Sheila Barter
Chris Wise
John Knapton
Matthys Levy
Eduardo Kausel
Henry Koffman
Tom Mackin
Benjamin Chertoff
Popular Mechanics Staff
911 Commisions & Report
Others.....
None of them are aware of my Skilling advocated and supported evidence, derived directly from his singular most important quote.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A design procedure that will be used for structural framing of the 1,350-ft high twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City gives the exterior columns tremendous reserve strength.
"Live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs. "
Precise, word for word, Mathematical translation is:
Live-Load(110) x 2000% = Collapse-Load(110), failure
Additionally,
Live-Load(110) = 5 x Dead-Load(110), per NIST Science Guy, Ronald Hamburger
Now make a substitution into the Thesis Equation
& Therefore,
CL(110) = 20 x (5 x DL(110))
and therefore,
CL(110) = 100 x DL(110)
= (100 Mass(110)) x g x h(110), in Joules, Mgh = PE(max) = .5Mv^2(max) = KE(max) = Work(max) = F x d = Mgh = PE(max)
= 2.0 x 10^14 Joules
= 3.2 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs of equivalent energy
= 48,000 Tons of TNT
= many, many mini nukes... Plus explosive nano Thermite cutting encendaries
Where 100 is scientifically concluded to be the Reserve Support Factor, not 5 and not 20, as some misinformed persons will advocate. The WTC TT had super- collasal, with massive redundancy, reinforced strength and a very large and otherwise unheard of value for its Safety Factor, unheard of in previous normal building construction, not super-normal construction, as in the the Twin Towers. Skilling stated it all, the incredibly powerful support safety factor of 100, due to the extra safety, overbuilt, features, amen...
The procedure calls for proportioning of columns in each story for the same unit stress under gravity loads, regardless of the grade of steel in the columns. Thus, all columns will shorten the same amount, and differential shortening will be eliminated as a possible cause of floor warpage. The reserve strength of high strength steel members will also then be available to resist wind stresses. The Towers can accept vastly extreme stress and Forces from any direction and any combinations of directions simultaneously.
And I will add,the Towers will easily resist super high gravity loads throughout its structure.
_____________________________________________________________________________
We will see what their responses will be once they are exposed to my "rock solid" analysis of Skilling's researched and experimentally established statement content. What will be their comeback defense, their chessboard-like strategic move?
They will have to attack Skilling's facts and findings, not mine. They will have a mountain to climb.
If I sound arrogant, it is only my confidence and competence speaking and the most simple correctness of my John Skilling derived Thesis Equation, which will be a Monster Mountain for them, OCT hit men, to overcome.
When there is no real evidence from the crime scene, they can tweak computer cartoon simulations and make up disasterous Engineering scenarios that Engineers & non Engineers find difficult to overcome, but their scenarios have no basis in reality. They use "Fudge Factors", boost up or down, however they are required to support their chosen false scenario. Most people accept whatever the government pontificates and propagandizes, especially when the controlled mass media is boot-licking their whim.
If you can, even vaugly, understand this blog, you should now be a starnch "Truth Movement" revolutionary devotee. If not, then go back to school to learn the basics contained in science and math textbooks, or buy some eslf-help science books from Amazon.com.
The following statement is specifically aimed at the owner of this blog site:
"Knowing you are a fool, that is the beginning of your wisdom"
Accept this fact and resolve to reform you brain-washed thinking, logican, and analytical processes, so you will be able to see the "Truth" in the "Truth Movement"
I will pray that your brain-functions connect to the proper electrochemical circuits, that the Almighty Devine One will allow you to view your 911 WTC TT world in an unbiased, mind controlled manner.
Your next contact with me should be to inform me that you finally reached a correct understanding of my Physics Research and are in total agreement with me. That would mean that you understand what I have been putting forward to the 911 world wide phenomenon.
I hope your mind is savable!!!
There is no need for pseudo-scientific ranting of vectors or Newton's Laws of Motion. The JREF forum has debunked Newton countless times. He also has not taken the million-dollar challenge. It is quite evident that 2+2=5 as shown on the JREF forum(a place to discuss pseudo-skepticism, denial, the obvious in an unfriendly and ridiculing way)This is the link to the debunking of the conservation of momentum...http://www.peaholmquist.com/bullshit/images/bullshit_pile.jpg
The towers fell the way they did because energy and momentum are never conserved. Newton was a delusional pseudo-scientist who refuses to debate on the forum. Some kooks and lunatics claim that he is no longer living without providing the link to the source. Without the link, we cannot deny, ignore, and ridicule the evidence presented, which are the three steps in the JREF debunking process. Let us put an end to these nonsensical discussions of the conservation of energy/momentum(both have been debunked, and shown to be religious beliefs) and move on to proving and disproving claims without the use of mathematics.
If any fellow pseudo-skeptics enjoyed this ranting, then please do not open this link… http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM
This article debunks the 9/11 conspiracy theory.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/911-truth-conspiracy-theory/
Reagan did it.
Can't get any video links to work! Can't find a contact us option to write to. I'm not fooled- not then/ not now.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/06/24/12-food-additives-to-avoid.aspx
I wasn
Review the strange details of the JFK autopsy and watch the Zapruder film, look up all the carcinogenic crap in our food supply, Remember Tuskeegee
Hey Chuck, if it takes 3.2 hiroshima bombs worth of energy to bring down the towers, then how did they fall down at all? It took fire, heat and time for the steel to lose strength. Your conclusion is based on a single, sudden impact force. That's not what happened - it took TIME to weaken the structure.
Why did this thread just stop? Chuck was owning! , where's the rest?
Someone doesn't understand the difference between a static load and a live load. Here's an easy experiment for anyone to do to understand the difference:
Stand with your hands extended over your head. Have someone place a 45lb plate in your hands (25lbs will do if you're not strong enough for 45). I'm guessing you're able to hold that plate more or less okay. Now, while still standing with your hands above your head, take the same plate, and drop it from about 10-15 feet over your head. Now, how did those same arms (which were able to hold the weight just fine when it was placed on them) hold up to the weight being dropped on them?
@Chuck Boldwyn
"Bring on the debunkers"
Your entire comment is fatally flawed for one reason: It assumes that the towers were fully intact before collapsing. But as we all know, they weren't intact. Some of the (load bearing) beams were broken or damaged by the fact that a plane was rammed into the building. And after that, the remaining beams were weakened to varying degrees by the fires that were created afterwards.
And I didn't have to do any deep analysis, just skimming through your comment was enough to make this apparent.
Also, here is a riddle for you: Why did WTC 2 take 56 minutes to collapse, whereas WTC 1 needed 102? The obvious answer is that 2 was struck lower down, meaning that the damaged parts had to bear more weight, which meant that the beams didn't need to be weakened as much to catastrophically fail.
Not to mention that your comments are absolutely riddled with illogical reasoning. Here are just the first 4 I saw:
"The internet repeatedly established"
Appeal to Authority and Reification fallacies. The internet is not a person. Also, you didn't identify the people on the internet who established anything, nor did you cite the proof that supported this establishment.
"OCT misguided dupes"
Ad Hominem fallacy. Name calling people as "dupes" does not disprove any of their claims.
"misguided PHDs"
Ad Hominem and False Dilemma fallacies. Same as above, and you have failed to demonstrate that any PHD that doesn't agree with you is automatically misguided.
"a lying and deceitful or ignorant leg"
Proof by Assertion fallacy: You have not presented any proof that everyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liar/deceitful and ignorant.
False Dilemma fallacy: You have no rational basis for claiming that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a liar/deceitful and ignorant.
Ad Hominem fallacy: Mocking people as "lying/deceitful or ignorant" doesn't disprove any of their claims.
Also, you say you're a "Retired Physics & Chemistry Instructor". Not surprising, considering how elementary your error was.
Yours sincerely,
An Electrical Engineer (not that it matters, since qualifications don't automatically make someone's claims correct).
Post a Comment