Lol, A magizine for gods Sake, hahaha.
I think there brainwashed by the media.
You would think the debunkers would use a school, or a college, or some scientists, lol they use a magizine, hahaha
2007-06-04 18:10:25 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
You really should have referred them to Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory.
All they have against this is contempt, in fact Popular Mechanics story is actually what convinced me that it was an inside job. It's funny how intelligence crossed with education is able to see different perspectives. Until reading and listing to their argument I was unsure. In fact the best information out is the 9/11 omission commission, FEAM report and the NIST report. If you read that info and check out since and ethical questions by Kevin Ryan and Steven Jones you cant fail to see my point.
2007-06-06 16:24:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Where the debunking was published, DOESN"T MATTER.
The content of the debunking itself is what matters.
Read it, read the conspiracy, and read the "debunking the debunking" and then if you have any understand of structural mechanics, you'll laugh at the conspiracy like the rest of us do.
2007-06-08 06:58:44 · answer #2 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Popular Mechanics is the magazine I'm sure your referring too. Owned by Hearst Coporation a huge War Profiteering company. They have a vested interest in keeping the offical 9/11 explanation going..
2007-06-04 18:52:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Well if you want to ignore the magazine, try 911myths.com, debunking911.com screw-loosechange video, or check out the Purdue University computer simulation model or check out the icivilengineer site, or the science daily article regarding the issue and the purdue simulation.
The conspiracy theories regarding that have been summarily shown to be silly, or outright misinformation and lies, with the exception of one or two minor things. There is much more information contrary to the CT info than there is CT info but your not looking at it I bet.
And the issue has
2007-06-04 18:22:52 · answer #4 · answered by sociald 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
This is getting really old. 9/11 was an inside job only to Atta and the highjackers. Time to get a life.
2007-06-04 18:14:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Because the engineers who wrote the article did a thorough and professional job of exposing utter nonsense for the complete crap it really is.
2007-06-04 19:54:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
It's a better source than a crappy video some kids put together.
2007-06-04 19:55:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
They have no capability to form their own opinion, so they rely on the liberal media to form it for them. It sometimes scares me, how quickly people suck that garbage up, and take it as absolute fact.
2007-06-04 18:15:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Ralph Wiggum? Is that you?
http://unbillablehours.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/ralph_wiggum_800_1.gif
2007-06-04 18:20:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Well, whatever magazine of which you speak seems to be more than you bring to the table.
2007-06-04 18:13:28 · answer #10 · answered by DOOM 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋