# 9/11 Conspiracy Theories! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 26, 2006, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948 "2006-03-26T10:02:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/422 "2006-04-11T19:05:40Z")
> [@](#): > > He experiences at least 3 explosions after he arrives and the lobby elevator doors are already blown out. One of those is the collapse of the other tower. What are the other two? Gasses from medical equipment that fire has reached? Debris that has fallen down elevator shafts and jammed on the floor above him? Paint cans, thinner, and cleaning fluid on the floor under reconstruction? There are many things in the world that can explode and firemen are no more put through special training to recognize the sounds of explosions than anyone else. (Read the stories of soldiers and sailors during various wars hearing a lot of explosions–even after months of service–and failing to recognize the specific causes of different explosions.) As to his “treatment” by the inquiry panel, since we do not have a tape of it, we only know his emotional response. A lot of people are offended by the ways the inquiries work. (Try reading the inquiry into the sinking of the _Titanic_). People who have never watched an actual inquiry (or who have emotional attachment to the way they have shaped the story) are often offended by what appears to be “grilling,” but the committees are generally trying to be sure that they get the details (facts) right while the witnesses are trying to convey their _experience_ (which is not an attempt to twist the facts, but is a separate motive than simply narrating facts they know). ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/423 "2006-04-11T22:07:26Z")
Did you actually read the version of events presented by Cacchioli in the article you referenced? How is that consistent with a “controlled demotion”? If it was a controlled demolition you’d have one set of explosions. Not an explosion, then TWO MINUTES LATER another explosion, then who knows how much longer as everyone runs down the stairs to get out of the building, but it’s gotta be a couple of minutes at least, THEN the tower collapses? Makes no sense if the conpirators had planted demolition charges. They blow the charges and the building collapses. Done. Random explosions that don’t bring down the building aren’t consistent with a controlled demolition, instead they argue the opposite, that the building is failing, random stuff is burning, god knows what small fires of burning office supplies and furniture and explosions of random junk are going off, and finally the structure is weakened past the breaking point and goes down. You ever see a controlled demolition where they set off the charges at random, then waited while the building sways in the breeze, until a couple minutes later it collapses? No, they blow the supports all at once and the building goes down. You just blew your theory to hell. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/424 "2006-04-11T22:17:55Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > You just blew your theory to hell. Don’t say h-e-l-l. There are Italian angels nearby, or something. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/425 "2006-04-11T22:21:29Z")
As I said way, way back on the first page: not even the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc believes this was a controlled demolition. ---
**Author:** ![rayh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@rayh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rayh)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2006, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/426 "2006-04-11T22:58:36Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Can you prove to me (OBJECTIVE proof mind you! 😉 ) that this hasn’t already happened? Maybe we are living in some kind of after life since 9/11. Has anyone checked to see if the dolphins are still about or if they have all boarded spaceships to another planet…thanking us kindly for all the fish first of course. > > -XT Shit, we’re in _The Matrix_. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2006, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/427 "2006-04-12T21:15:54Z")
There is another obvious fact the CTs refuse to believe. Crazy unexpected stuff happens during big disasters. Sometimes this is the reason for the disaster in the first place. Common events (i.e. house fires, car crashes, etc) are reasonably well understood, rare catastrophic events (i.e large passenger planes hitting multistory buildings) are not. You CAN’T talk about what you would ‘expect’ to happen when a plane hits the WTC the same way you would about a heater catching fire in appartment. A good example of this is the 1987 [King’s Cross Fire](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Cross_fire) in which 31 people died. This fire in a London underground station was probably started by unlit match falling into an escalator. The fire did not appear to be dangerous, but suddenly flashed over, turning the escalator into a flame thrower and turning ticket hall into a furnace (over 1100F). The fire behaved in a completely unexpected and non-intuititive manner (laying down at the bottom of the escalator, moving horizontally rather than vertically). It took years of anaylsis and “tweaking” the computer model, (as well as a complete new theory of fire behaviour, [The Trench Effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_effect) ) to explain the fire. Does this mean the King’s Cross Fire was a conspiracy too ? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/428 "2006-04-13T02:12:35Z")
> [@Sent](#): > > It has to do with the fact that people go onto message boards in different moods. Some people just like to argue for the sake of arguing. Other people have a purpose in what they are doing. I’m not just words on a page, I am person. So I am trying to call you out as a person, not a post on a message board. Particularly those of you who are Americans and value this country and the freedoms you currently enjoy. To me, I have seen enough evidence to show me that I am being lied to about the events of that day, so I am looking at everything I can find trying to determine for myself, from square one, what did happen. Not just scientific papers but what happened, and who said what, and why I believed what I believed about what was happening in the world and in my country. I don’t really need to tell you how it would effect your life, or anyone you care about, if I am right. It would indeed be a road to tyranny. I am using what free speech I still have in the way that it is supposed to be used, to stop the loss of freedoms that we currently still enjoy as of this day. I don’t believe that freedom is a given, I think people have to be vigilant in keeping it or else it can be lost because of those who are basically psychopaths but appear to me normal people. > You don’t really know me. I don’t change my opinions easily, I am a skeptic. I believed the official account for almost 4 years. I thought that people who were questioning it were doing it because they just didn’t like the President (can’t say I ever liked the guy either but I was not about to even consider that someone in office would go that far). Certain unanswered questions led me to do more and more of my own research on various subjects related to the events of 9/11. The more I’ve been reading, the more I can see that I was greatly deceived. For example, are you aware of the EPA cover-up that is going to result in probably more deaths from toxic dust than there were total deaths on 9/11? The people of New York were lied to and now many people will die because of it. This is only scratching the surface. If you know anyone who worked there, you should implore them to research what happened so they can get medical attention, and join the lawsuit. > > For me it is no longer a matter of finding out whether there has really been government complicity, but of finding out what exactly did happen and how did they do it. I of course realize what the implications of this are for me personally and everyone in this country, so that is why I am through various means trying to alert people to what I believe is happening. For example I’ve written to every major news outlet in this country imploring them to reexamine what they’ve been told about that day, and giving them the evidence I had at the time. I am doing the work of a researcher, or someone gathering evidence for a case. I know the basics of what didn’t happen but I’m not as clear on the details of what did. I’m pooling resources with others, sharing information and ideas. Excellent post. It is helpful to step back and note that there are alternatives other than: 1. Uncritically accepting the government’s word, or 2. Giving credibility to crackpot theories which assert that a massive conspiracy and coverup was somehow engineered and yet undetected by anyone other than one Heroic and Ingenious Investigator. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/429 "2006-04-13T04:17:34Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > How is that consistent with a “controlled demotion”? Good luck getting him to answer this. I think I asked the same thing back on like page 4…referencing a ‘cite’ (a.k.a. the propaganda film by a CT organization served up as if it were hard data) by the other guy who has now been banned. If you listen to the interviews the firefighters are talking about explosions that happened even before they entered the building…as well as some that happened while they were in the building (what they TOOK to be explosions I should say). 50 MINUTES later the building falls down. Who ever heard of a ‘controlled detonation’ that takes 50 minutes (or even 5 minutes) to bring a building down?? Thus far the CT’s haven’t even tried to hand wave this away…they haven’t even acknowledged the question. -XT ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/430 "2006-04-13T13:23:10Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Does this mean the King’s Cross Fire was a conspiracy too ? Now you’re getting it. In’s all interweaved. ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/431 "2006-04-13T13:39:50Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Doing some renovation in my basement today, I had to knock down an old wall. In the process, I hit some old nails with a hammer and got a nice lovely spark, without any added accelerant, electricity or explosive. Considering the amount of force of a collapsing building is quite a bit greater than me with my little ol’ hammer, couldn’t momentary flashes be due simply to metal hitting metal on a larger scale? Not really, no, since the flashes were considerably below the collapse area–no metal hitting metal. > [@PBear42](#): > > Here’s a link: Top 15 Reasons Why the 9/11 Conspiracy is Absurd. 1. Which “guys”? Lemnitzer? He was fired before the existence of ON was known. And what has that got to do with anything? 2. How is that an even an argument? 3. What? Why? 4. Says you. 5. See #4 6. Since we don’t know the alleged plan, it’s hard to say. Would they be risking that Bin Laden would deny having planned the attacks? 'Cause that’s what he’s been doing all along, you know? 7. How do you come to this conclusion and what has that got to do with anything? 8. That’s… true. What has that got to do with anything? 9. What? I don’t quite understand what this is supposed to mean. 10. Why indeed. 11. What does that matter now? The “evidence” being brought forward can be debated but why do you insist on these outlandish “what-if” games? 12. That’s just guessing… I have no idea but wouldn’t attacking the Pentagon give the whole operation a stronger feel of an “act of war”? Not really important as such. 13. See #11 14. What evidence? The paper trail? 15. Who? What? You are aware Bin Laden has denied having anything to do with this on several occasions, right? What did you miss? Quite a lot, apparently. The facts remain: there was molten steel in the ruins of the buildings that fit with the temperatures achieved with controlled demolition. If anyone can explain to me how the fires got so hot, I will consider it thoroughly. WTC7 fell too fast. You can see it on any video of its collapse, even if the building is partly covered by clouds. Just measure the top 100m and you can see that wtc7 falls 100 meters in 4.5 seconds. Considering air resistance, that’s just too fast. If you still disagree, I’ll try to find a java applet on-line that demonstrates this (a lot of schools have them but I can’t really be bothered). There are a lot more problems I have with the whole thing but these two lead the pack. Since the trial over that nutjob Zacharias… Doodyhead will soon be over, the tapes showing the jet hitting the Pentagon should be released (the trial was the reason for not releasing them), which, in turn, should result in a LOT of the conspiracy theorists cooling down (or just claiming the tapes to be fake…). What I, for one, can’t understand, is why there isn’t a full investigation into this, considering the possibility of explosives having been used. I’m sure we can at least agree that the FEMA and NIST reports are nowhere near being complete, considering the magnitude of the event in question, right? …right? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/432 "2006-04-13T14:07:25Z")
> [@UselessGit](#): > > The facts remain: there was molten steel in the ruins of the buildings that fit with the temperatures achieved with controlled demolition. If anyone can explain to me how the fires got so hot, I will consider it thoroughly. So far, the only “evidence” that I have seen of “molten steel” has been a couple of selected quotes, provided without context or provenance, from one not particularly reliable conspiracy theorist. And the temperatures reported by the same source are far lower than required to melt steel. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/433 "2006-04-13T14:13:06Z")
> [@UselessGit](#): > > I’m sure we can at least agree that the FEMA and NIST reports are nowhere near being complete, considering the magnitude of the event in question, right? …right? Wrong. ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/434 "2006-04-13T14:22:52Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > So far, the only “evidence” that I have seen of “molten steel” has been a couple of selected quotes, provided without context or provenance, from one not particularly reliable conspiracy theorist. And the temperatures reported by the same source are far lower than required to melt steel. Seriously? > [@](#): > > ‘They showed us many fascinating slides’ [Eaton] continued, ‘ranging from molten metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch thick steel plates sheared and bent in the disaster’. (Structural Engineer, September 3, 2002, p. 6; emphasis added.) > [@](#): > > Sarah Atlas was part of New Jersey’s Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue and was one of the first on the scene at Ground Zero with her canine partner Anna. She reported in Penn Arts and Sciences, summer 2002, see also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11\_conspiracy\_theories](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories) There’s also video footage confirming the molten steel, if you would need that. Also, I believe there was a lecture at the Utah Academy of Science last week dubbed “Molten metal, flowing and in pools, on 9/11”. To what source do you refer? ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/435 "2006-04-13T14:24:24Z")
> [@](#): > > Sarah Atlas was part of New Jersey’s Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue and was one of the first on the scene at Ground Zero with her canine partner Anna. She reported in Penn Arts and Sciences, summer 2002, Danged coding… ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/436 "2006-04-13T14:25:36Z")
> [@](#): > > ‘Nobody’s going to be alive.’ Fires burned and molten steel flowed in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet. (Penn, 2002; emphasis added.) An “edit” function would really help… preview is my friend, I know, I know. ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/437 "2006-04-13T14:28:05Z")
> [@D\_Odds](#): > > Wrong. Seriously, you think that a report that doesn’t even explain why WTC7 collapsed is complete? Have you read the reports? ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/438 "2006-04-13T14:34:31Z")
> [@UselessGit](#): > > The facts remain: there was molten steel in the ruins of the buildings that fit with the temperatures achieved with controlled demolition. > > [then later a comment about how red-hot molten metal was observed…] Are you aware that molten steel is not red? > [@](#): > > WTC7 fell too fast. You can see it on any video of its collapse, even if the building is partly covered by clouds. Just measure the top 100m and you can see that wtc7 falls 100 meters in 4.5 seconds. Considering air resistance, that’s just too fast. Were you aware that a free-falling body falls 100 meters in 4.5 seconds, neglecting air resistance? Or are you saying that air resistance would have an appreciable effect on something that heavy in just 100 meters? If that’s not it, please explain what you mean by “too fast.” ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/439 "2006-04-13T14:34:41Z")
> [@UselessGit](#): > > WTC7 fell too fast. You can see it on any video of its collapse, even if the building is partly covered by clouds. Just measure the top 100m and you can see that wtc7 falls 100 meters in 4.5 seconds. Considering air resistance, that’s just too fast. If you still disagree, I’ll try to find a java applet on-line that demonstrates this (a lot of schools have them but I can’t really be bothered). How does a building “fall too fast”? Even assuming for a moment that it was brought down with explosives, how do they get it to fall faster than the pull of gravity? Unless Galileo was in on it too. ---
**Author:** ![McRib\_is\_Back](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@McRib\_is\_Back](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/McRib_is_Back)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/440 "2006-04-13T14:49:57Z")
While the anti-CT’s put up a fight, I believe that there are just too many mysteries surrounding the collapse of these towers. It’s hard to imagine that the heat would be allowed to accumulate to such an extent when there were so many broken windows to allow it to vent. The internal components and outer wall shouldn’t have been subjected to such a massive heat treatment relative to a reasonable time which should have been required to cause _any_ significant collapse. Yet I read from Popular Mechanics site that “NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.” From what I understand, these temperatures are based off computer simulations that were adjusted to the point where a collapse was finally initiated, and not actually off of solid evidence. ---
**Author:** ![UselessGit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/74df32/32.png) [@UselessGit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UselessGit)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2006, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948/441 "2006-04-13T14:54:18Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > How does a building “fall too fast”? Even assuming for a moment that it was brought down with explosives, how do they get it to fall faster than the pull of gravity? Unless Galileo was in on it too. Well, if the building was collapsing in the way that one floor fell onto the next, each floor would provide a little, albeit lessening, resistance, slowing the fall down. You are quite clever to realise the aptitude of involving Galileo in our global conspiracy, but the case for CD would be that the main structure is taken down from under the collapse, forming a vaccum that pulls the building down into its footprint (as in “pulling” a building). Also, since all the fires in WTC7 were supposed to have been on the south side, one would think that the building should have toppled south had the collapse been due to a fire, something even FEMA conclude has a “low probability of occurrence”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-conspiracy-theories/349948.md?page=23)