A whole host of Architects, Engineers & Scientists, among many, many other professionals can prove that you don't know your laws of physics. News flash: a closed mind won't change them.
not a single credible, independent source backs any of those claims. until scientists from outside the truther movement - i.e. people who don't start with the viewpoint that it was an inside job - back up those claims, i'll keep dismissing them.
to understand people clinging to "9/11 was an inside job" type arguments, we need to turn to psychology. 9/11 was such a traumatic experience that the brain can't make sense of it all, so it starts filling in gaps with whatever it can. in a twist of irony, scientist use science - i.e. what they know best - to explain the trauma in terms that they understand. it's a case of a conclusion in search of facts.
"Linguist Noam Chomsky stated that, regarding US government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, "the evidence that has been produced is essentially worthless" and while the American government stood to benefit from the incident, "every authoritarian system in the world gained from September 11th." He argues that the enormous risk of an information leak, "it is a very porous system and secrets are very hard to keep", and consequences of exposure for the Republican party would have made such a conspiracy foolish to attempt. He dismisses observations cited by conspiracy proponents saying, "if you look at the evidence, anybody who knows anything about the sciences would instantly discount that evidence," arguing that even when a scientific experiment is carried out repeatedly in a controlled environment, phenomena and coincidences remain that are unexplained"
"... In response to Steven E. Jones publishing a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eager said that adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement would use the reverse scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, as they "determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion."
"In a research paper written in 2008, Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule conclude that theories supported by 9/11 truth movement members "typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy...those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology..."
"Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers", Bill Moyers states they "...threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right's sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the "truthers" cherry-picked a few supposed "anomalies" to build an "inside-job" story line"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movement#Criticismbelieving bad science doesn't make one edgy or "a free thinker". it makes one gullible.
Those in power (who are equally part of the past couple administrations) keep changing their stories faster than a child caught lying after being caught with their hands in the cookie jar. That's because they aren't getting away with so much crap anymore like they use to though they sure as hell keep trying; hence all the quick changing of the lies.
Btw, how do you explain Madeline Albright, Walter Cronkite, Sybil Edmonds and the #2 man under Henry Kissinger who claimed back ~2003 that Osama was dead from Marsans syndrome and that he was being kept on ice to be rolled out before Dubya's re-election to drum up support? Because of some other crap they got caught faking, they then nixed that idea. Now that Obama's world is falling apart, they decided to roll him out of the freezer for same said plan. Still not working because too many of the people aren't buying it and pointing out their crap. Why do you think they keep changing their stories? Oh, and Leon Panetta recently said that the cameras were turned off just before they entered the compound so even that part of the story is yet another big fat lie. The people are sick of their crap and don't want them around anymore because they can't be trusted and are ruining the country.
1) come up with a conspiracy ("osama was dead years ago")
2) if lacking proof, conveniently claim that it's part of the conspiracy ("Because of some other crap they got caught faking, they then nixed that idea").
3) repeat step 1 as needed ("Now that Obama's world is falling apart, ...")
thanks, got it.
panetta et al. claim the cameras were turned off before entering the compound, IMO, b/c 1) there are security concerns (dont' want to give away techniques), and 2) they don't want to show that they murdered an un-armed osama. i'm willing to bet they had orders to kill on sight but don't want that fact known, hence all the back and forth about osama being armed - i mean i was reaching for a weapon - i mean he was moving in a threatening way - i mean he didn't immediately put his hands up - i mean...
