# Skyscrapers on fire, not collapsing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2010, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541 "2010-09-12T22:53:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**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:** [September 22, 2010, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/282 "2010-09-22T02:41:22Z")
Let’s assume we are indeed dogpiling on Mozart and calling him a nutter and whatnot. How does that prove he’s right about anything? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/283 "2010-09-22T03:05:40Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Let’s assume we are indeed dogpiling on Mozart and calling him a nutter and whatnot. > How does that prove he’s right about anything? Sometimes a [fallacy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity) is all people have ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/284 "2010-09-22T04:06:41Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > Ok, here you go: > > Have you studied much science? If you have, then you know that the debate over the line of demarcation (what is and isn’t science) raged in the early 20th century. When the dust finally cleared, one of the few things that everybody could agree on was that science is falsifiable. If it can’t be falsified, it is not science. That’s why Freud’s theories are no longer accepted as scientific; how could you prove he was wrong? > > What can falsify your claims? What facts, observations, or data could be introduced to the argument that would invalidate your claims? And while we’re at it, why don’t you - clearly and concisely - state your claims. You’re probably confusing him with the concept: [From wiki:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability) \*\*Falsifiability or refutability is the logical possibility that an assertion could be shown false by a particular observation or physical experiment. That something is “falsifiable” does not mean it is false; rather, it means that if the statement were false, then its falsehood could be demonstrated. \*\* What Cisco and every other poster wants from you is an actual theory of what you think happened supported by some train of thought backing it up. You’ve already thrown a number of things on the wall and so far nothing as stuck. and before I forget, you cited a reference to Larry Silverstein making an insurance killing as one of the conspiracies behind 9/11. Per your own cite, he doesn not own the WTC buildings. They belong to the Port Authority. He leases them and then makes money subleasing individual offices. He is still paying $102 million dollars a year in lease payments to the Port Authority. At 9% return on investment he’s losing $307,500,000 annually in lost opportunity costs and this will be fully realized in 11 years against the insurance payout. The building will take 12 years before tenants can move in. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/285 "2010-09-22T04:30:48Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > and before I forget, you cited a reference to Larry Silverstein making an insurance killing as one of the conspiracies behind 9/11. Per your own cite, he doesn not own the WTC buildings. They belong to the Port Authority. He leases them and then makes money subleasing individual offices. He is still paying $102 million dollars a year in lease payments to the Port Authority. At 9% return on investment he’s losing $307,500,000 annually in lost opportunity costs and this will be fully realized in 11 years against the insurance payout. The building will take 12 years before tenants can move in. So he loses a bit each year, he will make it up in volume. Wait, what? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/286 "2010-09-22T04:51:41Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > So he loses a bit each year, he will make it up in volume. > > Wait, what? 😕 “It’s a write-off for them.” “How is it a write-off?” “They just write it off.” “Write it off what?” “Jerry, all these big companies, they write off everything.” “You don’t even know what a write-off is.” “Do you?” “No, I don’t.” “But they do. And they’re the ones writing it off.” “I wish I had the last twenty seconds of my life back.” - Kramer and Jerry, in “The Package” ---
**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:** [September 22, 2010, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/287 "2010-09-22T14:49:07Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > How about you just ask whatever question you seem to think I’m avoiding again. Otherwise, Bite me. > > You demanded that he re-post the question. > He re-posted the question. > Now you are pretending that he did not ask the question again, while being inappropriately rude. > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > He should stop acting like one. Move on. > > You are now claiming that a poster who has simply sought your (odd) opinion in straightforward language is “acting like a Republican” when the most brief survey of his opinions would indicate that he is not–and you are again doing it rudely. > > These CT threads do have their amusing moments, but eventually, we always seem to get to the point where the CT adherent begins to stop even pretending to have a point and begins to make wild accusations about other posters, generally in an inappropriate fashion. > > You have now entered that (predictable, because so often repeated) stage. If you continue in this fashion, you will probably be banned. > > For now, simply answer the question from post #153 Which was repeated in #253. ---
**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:** [September 22, 2010, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/288 "2010-09-22T14:57:43Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > and before I forget, you cited a reference to Larry Silverstein making an insurance killing as one of the conspiracies behind 9/11. Per your own cite, he doesn not own the WTC buildings. They belong to the Port Authority. He leases them and then makes money subleasing individual offices. He is still paying $102 million dollars a year in lease payments to the Port Authority. At 9% return on investment he’s losing $307,500,000 annually in lost opportunity costs and this will be fully realized in 11 years against the insurance payout. Which he would never even see becuase, as noted in the cite, the payout is being used for rebuilding. Which costs more than double the payout amount and rising. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/289 "2010-09-22T16:12:39Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > So clearly you think the people who reinforced the Pentagon, the people who organize military training drills, and the hijackers were on the same side. As was Larry Silverstein, which makes no sense because he has no evident interest in destroying the Pentagon. Clearly, Larry Silverstein realized that if he destroyed just the WTC, everyone would look at him as a suspect\*, so he had the Pentagon attacked as well to throw everyone off. (I assume he was inspired by Agatha Christie’s “The A.B.C. Murders” in which the killer perpetrates a string of alphabet-inspired killings to hide his/her victim among.) \*After all, he gets to lose millions of dollars and thus has a strong financial incentive! ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/290 "2010-09-22T16:17:10Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > Clearly, Larry Silverstein realized that if he destroyed just the WTC, everyone would look at him as a suspect\*, so he had the Pentagon attacked as well to throw everyone off. And also went after the Capitol Building. ---
**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:** [September 22, 2010, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/291 "2010-09-22T16:18:34Z")
Well, now Silverstein _has_ to be in on it, even if he wasn’t before - he’s in too deep! ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/292 "2010-09-22T16:26:12Z")
**Mozart1220** , please answer the questions in: > [@begbert2](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > I think that Silverstien was involved. I do NOT think OBL had much, if anything to do with it. If he had, we’d have gotten him. I DO NOT think our government planned or carried out the “attacks”. I don’t even really think they “allowed” them, though Bush’s reaction in the Florida classroom is curious if not frightening. > > > > Like I said. I don’t need to know what the square root of two actually is, to know for certain it ISN’T five. > > What I am CERTAIN of, is that the government lied to us about what REALLY took place, WHO was responsible and WHY. The explainations just don’t fit the facts. > > > > The devil is in the details, just like the Kennedy assasinantion. They got it about 90% covered, and as for the other 10% they just ridicule and shout down anyone who asks questions. They know they have enough people who buy everything they say to help them out. > > How do you think Silverstien’s plan worked? Which of the following do you hypothesize were involved/hired/used: > > 1. muslim hijackers > 2. black ops demolition agents > 3. airplanes > 4. bombs > 5. missiles > 6. thermite > 7. fire > 8. gravity > 9. other > > And what do you hypothesize was the purpose of attacking the pentagon, and was there any possibility that the government allowed that attack? I’m reposting it in its entirely so that you aren’t troubled by having to go back and look at it. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2010, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/293 "2010-09-22T21:08:49Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, now Silverstein _has_ to be in on it, even if he wasn’t before - he’s in too deep! And, according to the Truthers, because he’s a Jew. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/294 "2010-09-23T03:46:34Z")
Don’t forget: It’s PROVEN FACT that all the Jews (except for a few sacrificial lambs) were ORDERED to leave the Twin Towers upon SECRET instructions from MOSSAD. [http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.religion.misc/2008-10/msg00007.html](http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.religion.misc/2008-10/msg00007.html) This further implicates Silverstein. And Speilberg, for that matter. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/295 "2010-09-23T14:49:52Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > > [@42fish](#): > > > > Clearly, Larry Silverstein realized that if he destroyed just the WTC, everyone would look at him as a suspect\*, so he had the Pentagon attacked as well to throw everyone off. > > And also went after the Capitol Building. There is no evidence whatsoever concerning the actual “target” of the last plane. There is no actual provable evidence of the “let’s roll” scenario either, but it makes for an inspiring story. Good thing the guy didn’t say “Let’s get those towel headed MF’ers”, it would not have looked good on a Christian’s bumpersticker. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/296 "2010-09-23T14:54:21Z")
> [@Cisco](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > Tell you what…ask the question again, or please let it go. > > Ok, here you go: > > Have you studied much science? If you have, then you know that the debate over the line of demarcation (what is and isn’t science) raged in the early 20th century. When the dust finally cleared, one of the few things that everybody could agree on was that science is falsifiable. If it can’t be falsified, it is not science. That’s why Freud’s theories are no longer accepted as scientific; how could you prove he was wrong? > > What can falsify your claims? What facts, observations, or data could be introduced to the argument that would invalidate your claims? And while we’re at it, why don’t you - clearly and concisely - state your claims. > > Put up or shut up. Don’t ask us to keep playing Calvinball with you. Give us the rules to play by and we will more than gladly play. So you are saying that if science is involved, it MUST be falsified, and thus you want me to prove myself wrong? Wow. Go back to college and tell whatever professor that taught you that way of thinking that Fox news is hiring. I have stated all the “claims” I’m going to make, other than if the governments story involves science, it could also be “falsified”. Are you claiming that the government’s explaination is NOT based on science? Wow. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/297 "2010-09-23T14:56:03Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > There is no evidence whatsoever concerning the actual “target” of the last plane. Other than the testimony of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the thing. (I know his testimony is compromised by torture.) But even if you disregard that, a target in Washington DC is logical. > [@](#): > > There is no actual provable evidence of the “let’s roll” scenario either Other than the phone calls. And really, this is not relevant to the collapse issue or to your implications about Silverstein and so on, so I’d prefer you address those. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/298 "2010-09-23T15:00:34Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > So you are saying that if science is involved, it MUST be falsified, and thus you want me to prove myself wrong? NO. He is saying that science relies on _the concept of falsifiability_: if you make a claim that cannot theoretically be proved false, then what you are saying is not scientific. For example, if I said I thought the towers were brought down by an earthquake, that would be falsifiable: we could look at seismic records and see if an earthquake hit New York City at that time, for starters. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/299 "2010-09-23T15:01:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > There is no evidence whatsoever concerning the actual “target” of the last plane. > > Other than the testimony of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the thing. (I know his testimony is compromised by torture.) But even if you disregard that, a target in Washington DC is logical. > > > [@](#): > > > > There is no actual provable evidence of the “let’s roll” scenario either > > Other than the phone calls. And really, this is not relevant to the collapse issue or to your implications about Silverstein and so on, so I’d prefer you address those. So now the last target is a “logical ASSUMPTION”. Nice. And I don’t believe any cell phone calls were actually made from a plane going 600 mph at 37,000 ft, which would have been quite a trick in 2001. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/300 "2010-09-23T15:03:28Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > Wow. Go back to college and tell whatever professor that taught you that way of thinking that Fox news is hiring. I remind you of what **tomndebb** said earlier: > [@tomndebb](#): > > These CT threads do have their amusing moments, but eventually, we always seem to get to the point where the CT adherent begins to stop even pretending to have a point and begins to make wild accusations about other posters, generally in an inappropriate fashion. > > You have now entered that (predictable, because so often repeated) stage. If you continue in this fashion, you will probably be banned. > > For now, simply answer the question from post #153 or declare that you will not answer it and stop playing games. In the meantime, dial back your hostility and pay enough attention to the other posters to be able to refrain from trying to insult them by making wildly inaccurate guesses about their political affiliation. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2010, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/301 "2010-09-23T15:09:05Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > _ **No, actually I made that up on my own, and it has nothing to do with math.** _ I agree. > [@](#): > > \*\*\*Where did I suggest the government was involved? \*\*\* In the posts I quoted. > [@](#): > > \*\*\*No, it means he didn’t care if he was. \*\*\* Why didn’t he care? > [@](#): > > \*\*\*It means he had no power to do anything about it. \*\*\* Why was he powerless? (This at least implies he was aware of a conspiracy.) > [@](#): > > _ **No, it means whoever hit the Pentagon with whatever it was knew where to hit it so as to do the least damage.** _ Address the issue about planning the training drills, please. You clearly said someone did that to get the military out of the way. And this comment implies somebody wanted to hit the Pentagon but didn’t want to do too much damage - which again implicates the military. > [@](#): > > \*\*\*Deflection my dear sir…deflection. \*\*\* This is a lazy excuse that allows you to explain away logical inconsistencies and nonsense. > [@](#): > > _ **Not anymore, no…but at the time…** _ Nope. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=16)