I see no reason to think that the "official" story is, for the most part, correct.

Neither do I... ;)

Lost in your own many many many words of wisdom, eh?

Oops, thx for spotting the error Jeffrey.

"While that remains the case I see no reason to think that the "official" story is not, for the most part, correct. "

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

If you see no inconsistencies in the official story, there are only two possible reasons for it.

Umm

1) There are none to see
2) You missed them
3) You choose not to see them when they are shown to exist

There could be others. I do not believe I am in the third group. I could easily be in the second, and if somebody can show me what I've missed please do, but I've not seen any posted on this page that stand up to more than a moments critical thinking.

If you see inconsistencies in the official story:

1) There are inconsistencies to see
2) You misunderstood what you saw
3) You choose to see them where they do not exist

As before, there could be others. I suspected for a long time that you fell into the second group, but the more you post the more I believe that you are in the third, like the narrator in Foucault's Pendulum, too invested in the conspiracy theory to realize it is fantastical. For the moment that's the only reason I can think of why you persist with the notion (amongst others) of a collapse at free fall speed, when the video evidence clearly shows us that the speed was less than free fall.

Right or wrong is a false dichotomy, like being "with us or with the terrorists". There are usually more possibilities.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

Not sure who you are addressing but what is your position on the matter?

You don't need to be an engineer to share a link to a website created by a large group of architects and engineers.

Full house beats one of a kind.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Will it was intrigue plan from Bush government?
Something maybe the structure and materials itself,a Boeing767plane can be compared with large size missile.From a few version of video in (youtubÃ…),the situation look like when a old building being demolish with deflagrate process!!!

---

愛﹐仁﹐忍﹐善﹐勇
Any people can sense their die just a couple of their live

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

Not sure who you are addressing but what is your position on the matter?

You don't need to be an engineer to share a link to a website created by a large group of architects and engineers.

Full house beats one of a kind.

Again with the idea of truth being a popularity contest. Just as it didn't matter how many people believed the Earth was at the center of the Solar System, it doesn't matter how many architects or engineers believe WTC 1, 2 or 7 fell due to a controlled demolition, the currently available evidence shows otherwise.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

Not sure who you are addressing but what is your position on the matter?

You don't need to be an engineer to share a link to a website created by a large group of architects and engineers.

Full house beats one of a kind.

Again with the idea of truth being a popularity contest. Just as it didn't matter how many people believed the Earth was at the center of the Solar System, it doesn't matter how many architects or engineers believe WTC 1, 2 or 7 fell due to a controlled demolition, the currently available evidence shows otherwise.

Opinion.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

Not sure who you are addressing but what is your position on the matter?

You don't need to be an engineer to share a link to a website created by a large group of architects and engineers.

Full house beats one of a kind.

Again with the idea of truth being a popularity contest. Just as it didn't matter how many people believed the Earth was at the center of the Solar System, it doesn't matter how many architects or engineers believe WTC 1, 2 or 7 fell due to a controlled demolition, the currently available evidence shows otherwise.

Opinion.

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.

I'm an architect with 30+ years of experience. Are you an architect, engineer or scientist of any relevant field?

But surely the truth is out there.

Not sure who you are addressing but what is your position on the matter?

You don't need to be an engineer to share a link to a website created by a large group of architects and engineers.

Full house beats one of a kind.

Again with the idea of truth being a popularity contest. Just as it didn't matter how many people believed the Earth was at the center of the Solar System, it doesn't matter how many architects or engineers believe WTC 1, 2 or 7 fell due to a controlled demolition, the currently available evidence shows otherwise.

Opinion.

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

Have any evidence against those two points?

Round and round we go with no homework being done. Just the same old pointless short cuttings. Motive? Transparent.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

Have any evidence against those two points?

Round and round we go with no homework being done. Just the same old pointless short cuttings. Motive? Transparent.

You make the claim, you supply the evidence. As I have stated ad nauseum, it is not up to me to supply evidence against the claim of purple and green zebras in my zip code, and, to be absolutely honest, I couldn't, but as I'm not making the claim (one way or the other) I don't have to, see how that works? Did you watch any of the vids from Youtube I linked earlier in support of my position?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

Have any evidence against those two points?

Round and round we go with no homework being done. Just the same old pointless short cuttings. Motive? Transparent.

You make the claim, you supply the evidence. As I have stated ad nauseum, it is not up to me to supply evidence against the claim of purple and green zebras in my zip code, and, to be absolutely honest, I couldn't, but as I'm not making the claim (one way or the other) I don't have to, see how that works? Did you watch any of the vids from Youtube I linked earlier in support of my position?

Your position is generic and full of holes you refuse to address on your own, for yourself. I don't care if you believe anything at all. I don't have to prove anything because those who do the research will know for themselves.

Arguing wastes time we don't have.

Ad Nauseum.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

Have any evidence against those two points?

Round and round we go with no homework being done. Just the same old pointless short cuttings. Motive? Transparent.

You make the claim, you supply the evidence. As I have stated ad nauseum, it is not up to me to supply evidence against the claim of purple and green zebras in my zip code, and, to be absolutely honest, I couldn't, but as I'm not making the claim (one way or the other) I don't have to, see how that works? Did you watch any of the vids from Youtube I linked earlier in support of my position?

Your position is generic and full of holes you refuse to address on your own, for yourself. I don't care if you believe anything at all. I don't have to prove anything because those who do the research will know for themselves.

Arguing wastes time we don't have.

Ad Nauseum.

Opinion.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

About truth being a popularity contest? Or about the currently available evidence? If the former, I don't know what to say. If the latter then please provide something other than a 70 vid subtitled from German in which the interviewees posit straw man arguments about the impossibility of events that never happened (e.g. a passport being found on top of ruins of the collapsed towers). If there's something pertinent contained in that vid, give me a time offset, as I may miss it otherwise.

Funny thing about that passport is the guy wasn't on the flight log of passengers and was discovered to still be alive.

Really? Got any evidence for either of those points?

Have any evidence against those two points?

Round and round we go with no homework being done. Just the same old pointless short cuttings. Motive? Transparent.

You make the claim, you supply the evidence. As I have stated ad nauseum, it is not up to me to supply evidence against the claim of purple and green zebras in my zip code, and, to be absolutely honest, I couldn't, but as I'm not making the claim (one way or the other) I don't have to, see how that works? Did you watch any of the vids from Youtube I linked earlier in support of my position?

Your position is generic and full of holes you refuse to address on your own, for yourself. I don't care if you believe anything at all. I don't have to prove anything because those who do the research will know for themselves.

Arguing wastes time we don't have.

Ad Nauseum.

Opinion.

Now your starting to catch on,

Don't ask some stranger about truth and evidence. Look for it yourself.

Post data and/or links to your data and move along. Each will find truth the only way possible: By working on it.

All else can only be opinion.

.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Watched an item about this on tv the other night:

From Popular Mechanics:

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report


Conclusion:

"In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history."

Please read all 9 pages.

---

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense.

Everything about 911 defied 'common sense'... ;)

(Personally, I liked the 10mph wind that blew aircraft debris 1.5 miles... Defying gravity now are we?)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Jesse Ventura at a Ron Paul rally questions why Usama Bin Laden has not been charged for 911 even though we are fighting two wars and have the Patriot Act on the books because of Usama. He says the FBI says they don't have enough evidence. What the bleep ... I just looked at the FBI posting on Usama and no mention of 911!!! Bin Laden Wanted

two minute vid

Bin Laden has not been charged for 911 [snip]
the FBI says they don't have enough evidence.

Funny how that works... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense.

Everything about 911 defied 'common sense'... ;)

(Personally, I liked the 10mph wind that blew aircraft debris 1.5 miles... Defying gravity now are we?)

Not defying gravity, though comments such as that defy my ability to understand rationale. Popular Mechanics deals with this misunderstanding thus:

FACT: Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. "Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion," says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater — not 6 miles — easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest — toward Indian Lake.

i.e. a plane crashes nose first into the ground at high speed, and oddly enough some debris is thrown up into the air, the lightest of which gets carried a little distance by the wind before it falls to the ground.

And if you're thinking, well maybe United 93 was shot down, where are the eye witness statements from those seeing a plane already crippled/damaged/on fire before it hit the ground? Here are some from the day after the attack, notice a complete lack of comments about the plane looking damaged before hitting the ground? Maybe the folks of Shanksville also received a payout as part of the US sponsored conspiracy? That makes sense, the folks of Shanksville were part of the conspiracy, but the investigators that found the debris (proving beyond reasonable doubt that the plane was shot down?) were not.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...