Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Conspiracy Theories
 Debunk or Just Bunk
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 5

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/23/2006 :  23:40:33  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Master Yoda suggested I bone up on the classic conspiracy theorist debunks related to the events of 9-11-01. He recommended 911myths.com. The format of the site is to present the 911 myth (they call these myths “stories”), and then to present their take on what is really going on.

911myths.com is an odd site to go to if one wants to see debunking of 9-11-01 events, because from what I've seen, they don't debunk anything. Instead, “their take” on the various stories presented is generally comprised of non-sourced and/or unverified opinions.

Here is one example, related to the collapse of the WTC towers. I'll just point out the problems I have with their treatment of “their take”—you can read the whole example at
http://www.911myths.com/html/progressive_collapse.html My comments will show in red below.

The story...

You've heard that the Twin Towers pancaked, crushing themselves completely. The experts gave us a fancy-sounding term for this: progressive collapse. If you search with the phrase "progressive collapse" you will find numerous articles, most of them written since 9/11/01 about things like assessing and retrofitting existing structures against progressive collapse. It seems that the only examples of progressive collapse of buildings cited are the Twin Towers, Building 7, and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html


Our take...

Their take? Their take on what? All I see is a manufactured issue. The fact that the numerous articles on “pancaking” that were written post 9-11-01 tend to cite the WTC buildings that collapsed might have something to do with the fact that they were the most recent and most viewed buildings to supposedly pancake. What's next--a complaint that none of the works written before 9-11-01 mention the WTC collapses? But, we'll continue…

A pancake-style collapse isn't quite as rare as some sites want to portray. Here's what happened to the L'Ambiance Plaza in 1987, for instance.

Gee. That one was only 14 years prior to 9-11…

L'Ambiance Plaza was planned to be a sixteen-story building…

One floor slab falls onto another, which can't take the weight and collapses onto the next, which can't take the weight, and... Any of this sounding familiar? The end result was a big pile of rubble...

And from this photo (they post a couple of photos) it looks like it's fallen into its own footprint, mostly, although as we don't know when it was taken or how much clearing-up's gone on it's hard to tell for sure.

Okay—so they post a photo but aren't sure when it was taken or how much of the debris was cleared up by the time the photo was taken. So is the point of the photo to show us what it looked like at some point in its history? Then they go on to say…


This building had a very different design to the WTC, of course. And it was under construction, with the cause of collapse being primarily temporary issues:…

So, they essentially present this 14 year old case that is of a different design versus the WTC buildings and not fully constructed and failed primarily of temporary issues. So how is it relevant to the manufactured case they are trying to debunk? That's like saying I'm going to sell you a Ferrari for $1,000 but it's going to say Yugo on it, it's not going to have a Ferrari engine in it and it doesn't actually move…


But nonetheless this does show a structure can undergo progressive collapse, when it no longer has the capacity to support a given load. Which surely has at least some relevance to the topic here. But apparently not enough that they can actually point out what that relevance is. Instead, we are left to imagine for ourselves what that elu

No witty quotes. I think for myself.

Edited by - ergo123 on 10/24/2006 00:58:01

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13462 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  00:20:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I tried to fix your links. Only the second one works… You should try them before you leave a post.

Kil

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  00:59:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Kil

I tried to fix your links. Only the second one works… You should try them before you leave a post.

Kil




Now it works. I guess the system didn't like the "." at the end of the link.

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  02:09:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  07:05:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

Master Yoda
Skeptic Friend

59 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  07:18:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Master Yoda a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ergo, you really are a horse's ass, you know?

Do you know or understand what the purported purpose of 911Myths is all about? It's on their homepage! They list all the dumb-ass questions that they can find answers to (or suggestions of answers other than woo woo crap), and they post the answers or other possibilities.

Are you such a neophyte that you aren't aware that the pancake theory has been accepted only as a secondary cause?



Did you see this at the bottom of the page that you mined?

quote:
The phenomenon isn't the sole preserve of terrorist attacks in the US, then. Real engineers have had real concerns about progressive collapse for a very long time.


Keep shoveling, kid! You are disproving Mrs. Hatchett, my school librarian when I was ten. She used to say, "Well, no one ever got dumber by reading!" Thankfully, Mrs. H. passed on to that great Dewey Decimal System in the sky some years ago, or she'd be tsking and hushing you with every byte you post.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  07:18:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.

Well as I live and breath! Did you actually open it?

Mercy sakes!




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

Master Yoda
Skeptic Friend

59 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  07:22:12   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Master Yoda a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.



No, Filthy is taking it to the next level... He's showing you the LATER WORK OF THE NIST, by which time most engineers had dismissed the pancaking as the primary cause.

911Myths leaves it on there because it's still showing up in tired old CT arguments (much like "molten metal" is seen be the logically-challenged as proof of explosives). They leave it there in a prime spot because it's a tired old saw that won't go away.

Go ahead - read the NIST. Let's do some quote mining and bone-picking there. We've got all the time in the world - you're only on page 1 of this thread.
Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  08:30:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Master Yoda

Ergo, you really are a horse's ass, you know?

Do you know or understand what the purported purpose of 911Myths is all about? It's on their homepage! They list all the dumb-ass questions that they can find answers to (or suggestions of answers other than woo woo crap), and they post the answers or other possibilities.

Are you such a neophyte that you aren't aware that the pancake theory has been accepted only as a secondary cause?



Did you see this at the bottom of the page that you mined?

quote:
The phenomenon isn't the sole preserve of terrorist attacks in the US, then. Real engineers have had real concerns about progressive collapse for a very long time.


Keep shoveling, kid! You are disproving Mrs. Hatchett, my school librarian when I was ten. She used to say, "Well, no one ever got dumber by reading!" Thankfully, Mrs. H. passed on to that great Dewey Decimal System in the sky some years ago, or she'd be tsking and hushing you with every byte you post.



Yes, yoda, I get what they are trying to do...

But they don't accomplish their goal with any sort of credibility.

I know you praise the site because their honesty. Call me picky, but I want honest and credible.

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  08:31:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by filthy

quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.

Well as I live and breath! Did you actually open it?

Mercy sakes!







I open all your links.

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  08:38:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Master Yoda


quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.



quote:
No, Filthy is taking it to the next level... He's showing you the LATER WORK OF THE NIST, by which time most engineers had dismissed the pancaking as the primary cause.


Yes, NIST rejected the pancake theory concluded by the 9/11 Commission. NIST favors the "progressive collapse." What I've never understood is what the difference is between the two. Maybe you can enlighten me as to how they differ.

quote:
911Myths leaves it on there because it's still showing up in tired old CT arguments (much like "molten metal" is seen be the logically-challenged as proof of explosives). They leave it there in a prime spot because it's a tired old saw that won't go away.


Well, I would not advocate removing "their take" because the latest name for the mechanism for collapse changed. I'd advocate removing "their take" because it is a load of



No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  08:51:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

quote:
Originally posted by filthy

quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.

Well as I live and breath! Did you actually open it?

Mercy sakes!







I open all your links.

Bullshit!




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  08:59:23   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by filthy

quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

quote:
Originally posted by filthy

quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

That link of yours is more interesting than it is relevant, filth.

Well as I live and breath! Did you actually open it?

Mercy sakes!







I open all your links.

Bullshit!







That's quite an opinion you got there, fella. Care to back it up with any evidence?

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25997 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  09:36:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

Care to back it up with any evidence?
You're a laugh riot, ergo. When are you going to stop spending time on distractions and get on with your alleged quest?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

ergo123
BANNED

USA
810 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  10:22:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send ergo123 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

Care to back it up with any evidence?
You're a laugh riot, ergo. When are you going to stop spending time on distractions and get on with your alleged quest?



Why do you consider this a distraction?

No witty quotes. I think for myself.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25997 Posts

Posted - 10/24/2006 :  11:20:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123

Why do you consider this a distraction?
Because as far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with the government's theory or with yours (you consider it a "manufactured issue" after all).

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 5 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.58 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000