Some words of Stupidity

No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.

-- George Bush Sr.

Friday, April 9, 2010

Don't Investigate the unusual Aspects of 9/11, That would be Illogical!

Judging by the number of responses my blog has gotten I think I can safely assume that the number of Atheists who think that 9/11 was most likely an inside job and the Fed is not your friend is pretty small. I have had two other commentators who told me they are glad they found me because they were feeling pretty alone.

I can understand why if you look on-line. Here is Atheist Experience, a show I like to watch myself. The caller points out that the three steel reinforced buildings that fell on 9/11 were the only ones to do so in the history of that type of building. Matt responds by saying he has a video of a guy surviving a free fall and then the discussion degrades to the point that he cuts the caller off to make a snarky comment.

After they all start talking over each other my blood starts to boil. The poor guy on the phone does not know how to play patty cakes with the staff of Atheist Experience. To be honest my blood boils a little because I have been on the other end of this type of exchange before with Alex Jones, so I know what the guy is going through.

However bad my experience calling into Alex Jones was, the Atheist "Experience" for this caller must have been worse. Matt and Host try to get him into some retarded contract of agreeing to something he did not agree with in the first place, and then berate him for flip-flopping on it. Hey guys at Atheist Experience, call into your own show sometime and try and make some contentious point about something, see how it feels to get cut-off because you can not hear what is being said on the other part of the line while they are trying to talk over your point. Feels awesome doesn't it?

Now I know that talking to a person on a phone-line as a host for a show requires some skill. If they continue to talk forever you have to cut them off. That said, calling into a show and making points takes more then skill, it is a high form of art. So be nicer to your guests, you guys act live a raving bunch of assholes sometimes. Oh yeah, and published peer-reviewed paper. Do a search on nano-thermite. If you are too lazy or scared to be wrong about nothing going on, just click here for your damned paper.

Getting back to the steel reinforced buildings, it is not logical to point out that a man survived a free fall to show why one should not be interested in steel reinforced buildings falling due to fire that never have before, or maybe it is. You see, the main point this poor fella is trying to make is that these buildings falling should be something of a puzzle, in the same way that the guy falling and surviving should be a puzzle. Scientists in the past have had more huh moments then aha moments. These huh moments happen when some effect causes them to say "huh, that is weird." That is how penicillin was discovered in a petri-dish. It is also how X-rays were discovered by Roentgen in his photographic film. Not all great discoveries are eureka "aha" moments where a light goes off and something new makes sense, probably more are huh moments when something weird happens and you have no idea why.

How did the guy fall from such heights survive when others have not? How did three steel reinforced buildings on 9/11 fall from fires and/or plane impacts when others have never in recorded history done so? Matt Dillahunty and Russell Glasser think that because some event is unusual it should not be investigated. That is not scientific and definitely not rational. Unusual events scream out for further investigation. Maybe though the world would be better off without Penicillin or knowledge of X-ray particles? Yes, that is it.

I guess I do not even need to ask questions about the strangeness of WTC-1 and WTC-2 because I know about WTC-7. WTC-7 adds in it's own questions quite distinct from concerns about fires or planes. If you have not seen the video, here it is.

Sometimes in life there is something you get presented with that is just so obviously wrong on the face of it you can not look and turn away. For me, that is WTC-7. This building did not have a plane hit it (even though every other steel reinforced building hit by a plane has never come down because it was hit by a plane). Building 7 was on fire for a while but the fire had pretty much ended by the time it came down.

Now look at other buildings falling because of controlled demolition and honestly ask yourself if this is not a controlled demolition. These are all acknowledged buildings done in by controlled demolition.

The videos all look very different from the video showing building 7 coming down. The common feature though between the three buildings above and building 7 is that huge sections of each building came down all at once and at free-fall accelerations. The other feature that is the same with how building 7 came down is the way that each went into its own footprint because of the pattern of explosions. Now you may say that there were no explosions on building 7, and eye-witness reports would disagree with you, but it is unmistakable how there is a kink in building 7 before it comes down falling into its own footprint.

WTC-7 is what caused me to reassess the reassuring thought that no one besides the hijackers were responsible for 9/11. There is a lot more that can be said about all of this, but that is what made me take notice.

In the interests of fairness I have two of the major for and against websites on 9/11 being a conspiracy, in that order.

Whatever you think about 9/11, don't ever let some fool tell you that something is not interesting enough to be investigated because it is unusual, especially if it involves the loss of 3000+ lives. Need it even be said that unusual events are what scientists look for. Sheesh, way to drop the ball Atheist Experience.

No comments:

Post a Comment