Thursday, November 10, 2005

conspiracy theory

I hadn't heard anything about this until I read this article this morning.
The theory is that it wasn't the planes hitting the World Trade Center Towers that caused them to collapse. It was supposedly bombs that had been planted beforehand. The planes were a 'distraction'.
Ohhhhhkaaaaaay, now that I'm done laughing, this is the biggest bunch of hogwash I've seen in quite awhile (politics aside).
Part of the theory is that fire alone couldn't bring down these buildings. Hello? Did you watch the same live images I did on the morning of 9/11? 2 huge jetliners slammed into the middle of these buildings and there was a huge explosion each time. Looked an awful lot like a bomb going off to me.
This is where scientists really annoy me. Scientists are not very good historians. If they took the time to look 'back' and see that time and time again the currently held belief about any scientific principle, pick one, has changed and been reset, then maybe they wouldn't be so blinded and focused on what they 'currently' believe that the idea that they could be WRONG seems to escape them. In this case maybe these yahoo scientists are wrong about what it takes to collapse a building. Here is an example. Take this quote from the article, "No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns." Hmmm, well lets look at a comparison. Lets look at all of the other steel and glass skyscrapers that have been hit by jetliners. Oh, what? There aren't any others? Well then how do you know that a jetliner hitting a building couldn't bring it down? And, it just goes on from there. I'm embarrassed that this 'theory' is being perpetrated by a 'scientist' from my alma mater.
Read the article, it will give you a good laugh.

2 Comments:

At 10:00 PM , Blogger R. Jeffrey Davis said...

My brother-in-law who works for Homeland Security sent me the article this morning. I read it too and had a
good laugh. I actually too a class from this yahoo. Sometime, I'll have to tell you about my conversation with my advisor (whose name is also Dr. Jones). Very funny story.

Too sad that this crap comes from BYU.

 
At 10:10 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...


Take this quote from the article, "No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns." Hmmm, well lets look at a comparison. Lets look at all of the other steel and glass skyscrapers that have been hit by jetliners. Oh, what? There aren't any others? Well then how do you know that a jetliner hitting a building couldn't bring it down?


The problem with your logic is the inconvenient fact that three buildings collapsed, not just two (these were the two towers plus a 47-story building nearby, known as WTC-7). And though of course the two towers were hit by the jet airliners up high, the 47-story building was not hit, yet collapsed in the similar manner

Spend a few minutes at http://www.wtc7.net/ and then revisit your hasty conclusions.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home