I found out where all the 9/11 skeptic-skeptics hang out

[spooked911]

Here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=247

Skepticism, Science and Pseudoscience Group


Looks like one of their major past-times is to make fun of 9/11 skeptics!


I say-- food-fight!!!!!!!!

[LARED]

1. Thanks, (nt)

[laruemtt]

2. this "big tent"

is way bigger than i had imagined...........................

[stickdog]

3. There aren't even 5,000 total messages in that forum.

That barely qualifies as a circle jerk.

[SidDithers]

7. But almost 80,000 makes for a great big daisy chain!...nt

:toast:

Sid

[HughBeaumont]

4. Good.

Let the self-righteous flamethrowers all gather in one place and stop implying there's something wrong with me because I refuse to spin for BushCo and his paid fanatics.

[Ufomammut]

5. If one spends time in the general forum...

You quickly pick up on the pattern of a few certain posters who clearly prefer to see themselves as "above" examining the questions and evidence ..or more to the point, they don't see themselves as being above snide jabs toward anyone who does. Oh well, fuck em; when the shit really hits the fan in this country, they'll still be the usual apologists and deniers, it's just the way some people are.

An example: I've seen many filmed lectures of dissident Noam Chomsky, who is simultaneously praised as one of the worlds leading intellectuals/linguists, yet vilified as a "conspiracy kook" who wrongly criticizes American policies and media. Invariably, during many of his talks, someone stands up in the crowd, and from their inflection, the tone of their words, you can tell that the person came with an agenda--"I'm gonna stump Mr. Smart Guy cause I know that I'm SMARTER!"

It's as if what is obvious, what would be elementary truth if you removed the jingoism and propaganda, is irrelevent for the person challanging the "crazy" conspiracy theory, and instead, what is most important for such people is to hopefully (from their POV) discredit the "loonie" espousing a view or information that falls outside of what's considered "normal" within the framework of prevailing perceptions.

A very telling earmark of such people is their appeasement of conservative/establishment ideals ..."moderates" who feel that there's too many shades of "goofy," embarrassing "liberals" who make their "side" appear "weak;" again, completely in keeping with wanting to appease the conservative worldview which naturally disavows critical institutional analysis which reveals its collective sins and crimes.

[oblivious]

6. Isn't it sad how small that "govt would never lie to you" group has become

Well, maybe not that sad. Their threads remind me of a certain place...

[LARED]

8. Must be pretty small as I know of none in the

9/11 forum.

[Kai]

9. What is Your Theory?

Lared;

I've been reading over your posts here in the 9/11 forum and you seem to be very clear on what didn't happen but I have been unable to find a post where you explain what you think did happen. Could you direct me to a post where you propose or support a specific explanation for what caused the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings and the destruction at the Pentagon?

Thank You

[LARED]

10. My Theory?

Sure.

WTC 1 & 2

Each tower had a large jumbo jet fly into the building at a high rate of speed. This impact damaged the building structure, it's life safety systems, and started massive fires over a large area. The combination of the damaged structure and fires weakening the steel, allowed the building to collapse.

WTC 7

This building was damaged by the collapse of the WTC towers. Fires were allowed to burn for many hours. The structure was a unique design due to the substation inside. There was also large fuel oil tanks inside that most likely added to the fires. The bottom line is the building collapsed because the unique design lacked redundancy.


Pentagon

Very bad stuff happens when a jumbo jet crashed into a building.

[Old and In the Way]

11. How about sharing your thoughts about this administration's

involvement, or lack there-of. Do you believe they were totally surprised by the events of 9/11? Or do you think they might have, maybe-sorta, known something was going to happen? If the later, could it be possible that they could have had a vested interest in limiting the scope and conclusions of the 9/11 report?

[Old and In the Way]

13. Given this administration's war on science and truth, I also

find it interesting that the Sceptics assume all went as we are told by the official story of 9/11.

I often wonder if the the official 9/11 committee had found evidence that Al Qaeda terrorists had, in fact, blown up WTC 1 & 2....would they be arguing that the government was lying to us?

[dailykoff]

12. Nice deck chairs over there.

Orchestra's a little loud, though.

[Lithos]

14. Locking

Rallying the troops from one forum to another is against DU rules.

Lithos
9/11 Forum Moderator