Why, God, why do you believe that? Loopy conspiracy theories

That's it. Fuck it. She's gotta be trolling. She's not even reading what we have to say while she runs around flailing.

Sporkbender Join date : 2009-06-13 Age : 45

At the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, the conspiracy theorists gather together like flies. One tried to get me to subscribe to his newsletter all about the JFK assassination. Another one said that it had to be a mass conspiracy since there's no way one ordinary person could shoot the president. When I brought up that Lincoln was shot by an unemployed actor, he said "That's what they want you to believe!" No theories on JFK being shot by Reptilians, though.

And then there are the UFO people. I used to live in Palestine, Texas, home to a couple thousand rednecks and a weather balloon station. Put 'em together and what have you got?

UFO people do not help conspiracy theorists.

It's ALL the government, and their round planes. And they'd make round planes to evade radar.

Fapmaster Join date : 2009-06-10

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Everybody acts like Jet fuel is some magical liquid that can make buildings burn hotter and melt steel. They can't even melt airplanes in real crashes. Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F). Jet fuel burns at up to 900 degrees C. Jet fuel may not need to specfically melt the steel to weaken it, but that's a big, BIG gap between burning point and melting point, to make the steel supports vanish, and the buildings crumble into dust faster than gravity alone should make it collapse. Oh, and how much fuel can an airliner carry? Traditionally they don't carry more than it takes to make the flight. And they don't spray it all over the place when they crash - the fire remains localised within the plane, mostly. People are basing their explosions on movies. The plane would find it tough to melt itself, let alone steel-re-infor[/size]ced concrete. Concrete doesn't burn very well.

The steel did not melt. It was weakened by the heat, and the weight of the higher stories caused the building to collapse. Steel softens greatly at far lower temperatures than its melting point. The temperature change also causes the steel supports to expand, cracking the surrounding concrete. You keep mentioning the melting point of steel and concrete, but there is no evidence that there was molten steel at the time of the towers' collapse; more likely, there were pools of molten aluminum, which has a much lower melting point. In addition, the towers' interior was full of flammable materials, many of which burned at higher temperatures than jet fuel. The jet fuel only burned for about ten minutes; the fire afterwards was from the materials within the towers.

I don't know what you mean by the buildings "crumbling into dust faster than gravity alone should make it collapse;" if you are referencing to the large dust clouds, the collapse of the higher stories caused the air and debris from the lower stories to be forcibly ejected out the sides of the building (the air doesn't just disappear when a building collapses.)

I am going to continue arguing this with Harley because I know people who seriously believe this ridiculous theory.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Jet fuel may not need to specfically melt the steel to weaken it, but that's a big, BIG gap between burning point and melting point, to make the steel supports vanish,

Who the fuck said they vanished?

Quote :: and the buildings crumble into dust faster than gravity alone should make it collapse.

a) Oh, NOW you remember about gravity?
b) They didn't "crumble into dust", dipshit. A lot of dust was created, but there were large chunks of building, debris, and CHARRED CORPSES all around Ground Zero. You can see them in pictures.
c) What the hell do you know about acceleration due to gravity? You don't even understand F=ma.

Quote :: Oh, and how much fuel can an airliner carry?

A Boeing 747? Enough to get from Africa to Australia, eleven hours' flying time.

Quote :: Traditionally they don't carry more than it takes to make the flight.

What flight were they making that day?

Quote :: And they don't spray it all over the place when they crash

BAH HA HA HA HA

Cy, you get all your information about plane explosions from movies.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Cy, you get all your information about plane explosions from movies.

No Harley, I get my information about plane crashes from Air Crash Investigation.

You get all your information from conspiracy nuts who actually believe the United States Government managed to pull off a vast and complicated scheme to kill thousands of their own citizens in a false flag operation to take the country to war with Iraq, yet for some reason haven't eliminated the makers of Loose Change and all the other people who run 9/11 conspiracy sites.

Armbiter of Good Fanfiction Join date : 2009-06-10

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Cy, you get all your information about plane explosions from movies.

Where as you are a aeronautics expert, structural engineer, physicist, pilot AND hedgehog buggerer by trade.

When Popular Mechanics went to people who are actually experts in what should happen when an airplane strikes a skyscraper, SURPRISE! They determined that it was all bullshit.

I hate all of the 9/11 conspiracy bullshit because I remember turning on the TV that morning, flicking through channels and saying "Oh, what movie is that?". Then I realised it was CNN.

It was the first time my family was supposed to go to the zoo in like, five years, so we were just waiting for my mom. We were watching when the second plane hit, live. I have no doubt in my mind that the collapse was due to the planes - having seen demolitions before, I have an idea what they look like.

I don't watch the bullshit videos because I don't WANT to relive that, not for anyone's sake.

tl;dr: Harley, you're a douche and you have no idea how much the things you're saying can bother people.

Join date : 2009-06-10

Sorry to interrupt the lively "debate", but I thought this was suppose to be a thread for conspiracy theories that didn't warranted (for whatever reason) their own thread. From what I read thus far, whatever one has to say about the 9/11 conspiracy appears to be enough to sustain its own thread. So, is there any chance of someone making a thread for the sole purpose of discussing the 9/11 conspiracy theories and have this thread go back to its original purpose (discussing little known conspiracy theories)?

*goes back to lurking*

Lysander wrote:

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Cy, you get all your information about plane explosions from movies.

Where as you are a aeronautics expert, structural engineer, physicist, pilot AND hedgehog buggerer by trade.

Did someone say structural engineer? What an amazing coincidence! I was just hangin' out, reading this thread, giggling, and my dad walks by. He asks me what I am doing, and I tell him. I mention that some crazy on this forum is totes into this whole 9/11 conspiracy thing. He asks if it is another one of those people who think that a plane crash would not collapse the building like it did. I say yes and he sighs. He says to me "Look. I'm a structural engineer. I've seen the photos of that crash, and the way those buildings came down was textbook." He went on for some time after that saying most of the things Cy and everyone else were saying, about the fire and the how steel hits a certain point some place under the melting point and just gets limp all of a sudden and then all the concretes plummets down while building momentum, etc.

He then added that the REAL conspiracy was how the US pestered all these middle eastern countries to provoke them into doing something criminal so we could invade them.

Quote :: These are not decks of cards, they are SKYSCRAPERS, of concrete and steel and double-glazing, specially constructed to stay UP.

They're designed to be EARTHQUAKE PROOF, dammit.

For a non-American you sure as hell have a lot of confidence in our magical skyscraper building powers.

Oooh boy, my English teacher in high school was a conspiracy nut, he wrote a book on it and kept telling us his theories all the time. The one I remember the most, because we wasted a week on it, was a video about how Al-Qaeda was an invention by the US government. The government needed a group to blame for terrorist activity agains the US, so they pulled a name out of thin air, started throwing it around and after 9/11 Bin Laden just decided to say that they were the big, bad Al-Qaeda, really screwing Bush over.

Aw, shit, did I miss the wank while I was drunk?

I should have expected this. Rolling Eyes

Meh, I got bored arguing on my own, so the wank's over.

I won anyway, because Cyber started calling me names first.

Mae Bedlam wrote:

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: I know why people don't want to listen to these theories. It's because it's simply HORRIFIC to have to acknowledge that your own government, the people you trust, would do such a thing to incite a war, just for money.

You're awfully quick to assume that we trust the government to get anything done properly. :lolinsane:

Frankly, I'd tend to buy South Park's take on 9/11 conspiracies: That the conspiracy was to convince everyone that there was a government conspiracy, not that 19 lunatics armed with box cutters pulled of the the biggest terror attack EVER.

To try and drag this thread back from Harley vs. Facts: Michael Jordan's first "retirement". I firmly believe this was a back room deal between MJ and David Stern so Jordan could serve a de facto suspension for gambling without having to brand the best basketball player on the planet with a Scarlet Letter.

The second retirement/return? That's all on MJ.

I disbelieve all claims of government conspiracy/ies. I work for the (British) government and, trust me, these people can only just get their legislation out on time, let alone conspire in anyone's death.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:: Meh, I got bored arguing on my own, so the wank's over.

I won anyway, because Cyber started calling me names first.

And thus you prove that you're completely delusional.

Sporkbender Join date : 2009-06-13

Uh she kind of already proved that with the whole buying that theory thing

Sporkbender Join date : 2009-06-10 Age : 48

Wow, just when my opinion of harley couldn't get any lower.
I seriously doubt our government is smart enought to pull off something like 9/11. Same thing with the Masons. None of the ones I know, including my dad, have what it takes to rule the world. These guys couldn't take over a Dairy Queen.
Now the SCV, those guys you have to watch out for. Wink

Armbiter of Good Fanfiction Join date : 2009-06-10

karmyn31 wrote:: I seriously doubt our government is smart enought to pull off something like 9/11.

Just about any organization on the planet with access to twenty wannabe martyrs and a set of boxcutters could attempt to pull off 9/11. NO organization on Earth could FAKE it; nor would they want to.

That would mean pulling off a absurdly overcomplicated plan without a single minute flaw, broadcasting all the evidence of fraud live on CNN, and then fooling everyone, everywhere, forever. If there are men on this Earth that possess that level of subterfuge, then it's time to start questioning our most basic assumptions. Like, "What color is the sky for real?" level questioning. Because these people would have to be witches, or something.

Sporkbender Join date : 2009-06-13

Lysander wrote:: Like, "What color is the sky for real?" level questioning. Because these people would have to be witches, or something.

AND WHAT IF THEY ARE WITHCES EH!??!? THAT TOWER COUDLNT HAVE COLLAPSED LIKE THAT WITHOUT MAGIKC!!!! THINK!!!! USE YOUR BRIAN!!!!!!!

anangrychocobo wrote:

Lysander wrote:: Like, "What color is the sky for real?" level questioning. Because these people would have to be witches, or something.

AND WHAT IF THEY ARE WITHCES EH!??!? THAT TOWER COUDLNT HAVE COLLAPSED LIKE THAT WITHOUT MAGIKC!!!! THINK!!!! USE YOUR BRIAN!!!!!!!

MY BRIAN DOES NOT APPRECIATE THIS NONSENSE

I have two that came up this week in the local paper:

1) The switch from analog to digital television is so that the government can monitor everything we watch, record, or flip through on TV.

2) The Bureau of Land Management (an agency of the Department of the Interior) is conducting "weather modification" tests in order to create or disperse storms by saturating the air with a spray containing heavy metals.

And This is Why I Need Medication Join date : 2009-06-10

Spotts1701 wrote:: I have two that came up this week in the local paper:

1) The switch from analog to digital television is so that the government can monitor everything we watch, record, or flip through on TV.

See, that's got an inherent flaw (if it was true in the first place, which it isn't). A fair number of people don't own TVs. I didn't own one for close to two years after the ex and I got divorced, because I couldn't afford cable, and I know people who own them, but only so they can watch DVDs and video tapes.

Also, a fair number of religions, including the Amish, the Mennonites, some of the polygamist cults that have broken from the Mormon church, and certain rabid factions of the Fundamenalist movement don't allow TVs in their house. In the case of the Amish and Mennonites, because they're considered 'worldly; in the case of the other two groups, because they want their followers to have as little contact with the outside (i.e. 'sinful world') as possible.

I have this idea that Jehovah's Witnesses don't allow TVs in their house either. Anyone know if that's true?

Rabid Badger wrote:: I have this idea that Jehovah's Witnesses don't allow TVs in their house either. Anyone know if that's true?

There's no explicit prohibition of TV or any media. But more than a few eschew TV (and obviously, the internet) as being too "worldly". (Mom's a Witness)

» Illuminati Conspiracy Theorists