Could not have said it any better myself…these people are part of the problem because of their close mindedness…

The simple fact is that a of “firsts” happened on 9/11. Among them three building collapsing due to fire. It’s never happened before, and hasn’t happened since (I’ve seen some of the lame examples the self anointed debunkers have tried to thrown out there so spare me that.)

Of the three buildings that fell, WTC 7 wasn’t even hit by a plane, yet somehow this building collapses into it’s own footprint 8 hours later. Aside from the half baked reasoning provided self anointed debunkers, no logical explanation has ever been provided.

If you’re ready to deal in facts, send me a reply….if not, spare the insults because they don’t change the truth….

No one has spoken out since, but yet we have Bush Jr. and Kerry both hailing from the Skull-and-Bones, and the obvious lack of representation from both political parties in the White House and Congress.

But yet the purveyors of this site and ones like it have neither and balls or honesty to question the Official Version.

You Deniers would make me sick if you weren’t so damn funny. Carry on!

You are not applying critical thinking. You are not placing the burden of proof on those that make the proposition. You are asserting a proposition and then assuming it to be true placing the burden of proof on others to disprove it and dedicating all of your thoughts to discrediting any challenge in order to maintain your conclusion. You have your reasoning process backwards which is why you are getting it wrong (which is why people are posting articles like this mocking you, although not YOU specifically). When huge chunks of multi-ton concrete and steel hit building 7 at terminal velocity it caused a great deal of damage. The fires quickly spread in the office building (where the sprinklers were not working because the pipes were cut off from the damage) in which paper and various hydrocarbon based plastics began to burn. The fire heated the steel which reduced its structural integrity and the expansion of the steel under heat reduced the structural integrity of the concrete it was reinforcing.

Now the area wasn’t quarantined after the building collapsed, they were looking for as many volunteers as they could get. Where are the blasting caps? Where is the evidence of explosives? Who crashed the planes into the buildings? We have evidence for who crashed the planes into the buildings. We have confessions from the terrorists themselves and from coordinators of the attack like Osama Bin Laden who are still at large (while others like Khalid Sheik Mohammed have been captured).

The fact that other weird (and offensive) conspiracy theories exist does not disprove another weird (and offensive) conspiracy theory, but the conspiracy theory doesn’t have to be disproved, IT HAS TO BE PROVED! The conspiracy of 19 muslim terrorists finances by Osama Bin Laden and coordinated by Khalid Sheik Mohammed has been proven with evidence. The 9/11 truther conspiracies do not have to be disproven logically, but they have been by this website (Skepticism), Popular Mechanics (Science), and even popular shows like Penn & Teller: Bullshit! which typically express not just skepticism and science, but contrarianism as well. Look at who is refuting these claims, break out your baloney detection kit and look at your beliefs, look who is refuting them. It is not absurd to be suspicious? You’re on a website called Skeptic friend with a bunch of woo-woo debunkers and atheists, do you really think there is a person here who doesn’t share that point? Don’t just think about your conclusion, think about your thinking. Are you looking for confirmatory evidence to reinforce your current beliefs or are you seeking out evidence that might contradict your current beliefs? Are you seeking objective truth or are you trying to win converts? Are you defending a conclusion or are you defending a reasoning process?

You need to focus on the reasoning process because if you got that wrong then you will never come to the right conclusion.

Useless article. Zero facts, no arguments, no science, no logic, no viable theories. Total trash.
Fail harder.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

If you jumped off the roof, air resistance would slow your fall by about a second. Yet millions of pounds of concrete and steel only slowed the fall of the roof by about a second.

The floors in these buildings were demolished at the rate of one floor every one tenth of a second. Ten floors per second. ”

Terminal velocity varies directly with the ratio of drag to weight. More drag means a lower terminal velocity, while increased weight means a higher terminal velocity! Lets look at the Penthouse shall we, Did it hit absolute bottom when it stopped? No, in fact it landed on 109 stories of rubble. Lets look at camera distance of the videos, from their vantage point could you see the ground? NO.

Here is one fact… 9/11 destroyed many lives, families, dreams and raped the very core of America.

Just food for thought

The Centres For disease Control have identified the illnes as Extensively Lie Resistant TB, or Lie Resistant Truth Bacteria.

Everybody exposed to this new form of TB will never believe the official story. And the most resistant strain is carried by Physics Professor Steven E. Jones ( Ph.D. in physics, Vanderbilt University, 1978) who was forced out of Brigham Young University for his research suggesting the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition.

Learn more about this deadly illness in this video before it is too late to wake up:

http://www.fknnewz.com/view/76/deadly-lie-resistant-911-truth-bacteria/

When you get into an argument with these people who call themselves “skeptics” about the science of the some of the government’s claims about 9/11, you’re wasting your time.

No amount of critical thinking, scientific facts or logic will convince these people. I mean they cite to tour bus drivers as their authorities and gurus. The real question of interest was posed by one of NASA’s top-flight engineers in a very recent article where he expressed the hope that we will see a return to honest science in the new Administration:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-it-Science-or-Honesty-t-by-Dwain-Deets-090304-781.html

With regard to the obvious junk science that Bush’s NIST and the so-called “skeptics” peddle regarding 9/11, his question was:

“Is it a lack of understanding of science – or a lack of honesty that is the problem?”

With Bush’s NIST – I think it is clearly a lack of honesty, but I think very few of the scientists are involved. Administration lawyers and agency chiefs were notorious for editing the scientists.

But with the “skeptics” it is a tougher question. I mean there is not a one of them that has any significant background in physics or engineering or such disciplines. You have a lot of magicians and psychology and some bio-science even. So maybe they are just ignorant. But that’s the real question – ignorance or dishonesty?

It’s a tough call.