tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post116136188398745406..comments2024-01-10T17:36:15.040-07:00Comments on The Lippard Blog: Matt Taibbi takes on 9/11 conspiracy theoristsLippardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post-55598940337355015272010-10-30T08:57:27.031-07:002010-10-30T08:57:27.031-07:00Kenric: Your bullet points are not inconsistent a...Kenric: Your bullet points are not inconsistent at all with what we know happened--i.e., 19 terrorists flew planes into the WTC, Pentagon, and the ground in Pennsylvania. There is no remotely plausible conspiracy theory in which the events of 9/11 took place because Silverstein wanted the insurance money.<br /><br />The molten steel quotes do nothing to demonstrate that any observed metal in a liquid state was steel (itself an alloy, not an element) to the exclusion of all other metals--such as aluminum, which was observed at the 80th floor of WTC 2, according to the NIST investigation. Nor, even if it was steel, that there was some other cause--as <a href="http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm" rel="nofollow">NIST notes</a>, "Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing."<br /><br />See the answers to questions 11 and 13 in that FAQ.<br /><br />You've posted a bunch of other comments to this post which go off on wild tangents, which I'll consider publishing later.Lippardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post-64532910630461113782010-10-29T23:31:40.255-07:002010-10-29T23:31:40.255-07:00The debunker site's claim that there are only ...The debunker site's claim that there are only three sources re: molten steel is completely ridiculous. See here:<br /><br />http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=142980022410<br /><br />And you are referencing debunk sites that themselves have already been debunked. For example:<br /><br />http://www.911popularmechanics.com/Kenrichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05214039934355879204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post-32923713528530855522010-10-29T23:25:27.158-07:002010-10-29T23:25:27.158-07:00You are obviously not aware of the other possible ...You are obviously not aware of the other possible motives that actually DID require demolishing the buildings:<br /><br />* WTC owner Larry Silverstein just prior to 9/11 added a clause to his insurance specifically for terrorist attacks and he made a huge bundle from that.<br /><br />* The fireproofing throughout the buildings was due for replacement by law and that would have cost millions of dollars.<br /><br />* There were allegedly many files for criminal investigations that were destroyed in the towers.<br /><br />* There may have also been gold stolen from the towers.<br /><br />Furthermore, even if there were NO known motives, this line of "debunking" totally ignores the mountain of evidence, particularly five months of molten steel and the detection of nanothermite explosives as reported in a PEER-REVIEWED scientific journal and recently independently verified by a chemical engineer, that at the very least demand a real investigation, so we can figure out what those motives were.Kenrichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05214039934355879204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post-1164910383681615762006-11-30T11:13:00.000-07:002006-11-30T11:13:00.000-07:00Thumperings: You'd have more credibility if your ...Thumperings: You'd have more credibility if your list of problems to be explained hadn't already all been explained in detail (or refuted, like the "admission of demolition by Silverstein").<BR/><BR/>The sites <A HREF="http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/08/911-myths-debunked.html" REL="nofollow">I've linked to in previous posts</A> on the subject of 9/11 on this blog address everything you've brought up.<BR/><BR/>I particularly recommend the <A HREF="http://www.911myths.com/" REL="nofollow">9/11 Myths site's</A> treatment of Building 7 myths.Lippardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15453937.post-1164873649689160062006-11-30T01:00:00.000-07:002006-11-30T01:00:00.000-07:00This blathering does nothing but allow you to slep...This blathering does nothing but allow you to slep better at night. Any asshole could do what you just did from their perspective and make it work. When you can explain building 7 you snide goof, then I'll listen to you. Explain the molton steel in the basements 1000 degrees hotter than kerosene burns. explain the towers dropping at freefall speed, the seismic proof of bombs, and the admission of demolition by silverstein . and the fact that no steel structures have ever fallen by fire (and never will) get a cluethumperingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14434313483583914352noreply@blogger.com