Why conspiracy theories seem so convincing

Discussion in 'Pandora's Box' started by UU_ood, Jan 15, 2011.

  1. No conspiracy theory has been proven. If you mean there are some specific claims that have not been debunked that may be true. This is only because they are mostly irrelevant to the conspiracy theory itself. The theorist will try to make it seem as if it is hard evidence.

    Whoosh. He meant you guys hate the government and are attracted to anything that demonizes the government.
     



  2. hmm so you forgot to mention NORAD, where was NORAD ? hmm
     

  3. My question to you is when there is more to hate then love.....what do you do?
     
  4. Of course no conspiracy theory has been proven. Its no longer a theory if its been proven. Its fact. Never heard of a conspiracy fact, though. we should get that started.

    Debunkers always toss out and banish any theory that has been proven and act as if they knew it all the time...

    MK-ULTRA - Conspiracy theory of mind control.

    Status: Confirmed and proven
     
  5. So the fire wasn't near hot enough to melt steel, but they found a bunch of molten steel in the wreckage? The fire was only about 500 C to 800 C, it wasn't anywhere near hot enough to melt steel, yet they found molten steel :confused::confused::confused:
    Debunking 9/11 debunking: an answer ... - Google Books
     
  6. The conspiracy theorists have jumped on me with their claims already. I'll take a few I guess.

    How fast do you expect NORAD to intercept? Do you have any sources that say NORAD would have normally intercepted at a significantly faster rate?

    They didn't find molten steel. Find me an analysis that says molten steel was found at the site of WTC. I want a confirmation by officials of molten steel. Not whatever that conspiracy theorist book claims. I don't think the author was at the site.
     
  7. OOOOHHhhhhh

    You mean 9/11 conspiracies?
     
  8. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ogrupgt4mI]YouTube - History Channel Molten Metal At Ground Zero[/ame]
     
  9. Not exactly what I was looking for. Molten materials are practically impossible to identify unless you analyze it by testing it. Molten metals look very similar to each other and the fact is, nobody can truly prove what exactly the molten metal was unless it was tested for. However, based on evidence we can deduce what the material was.

    NIST what the molten metals most likely were: NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster - Frequently Asked Questions

    Photographs, and NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.

    NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.



    Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.


    I won't pretend I know that it is a 100% fact that it was aluminum because there was no testing done. But, the evidence shows it was aluminum.
     
  10. Yup.

    9/11 theories.
     
  11. Yes, but aluminum cools very quickly, the "molten pools" were hot for very long periods of time (2 weeks), indicating that they were metals that didn't cool as quickly -- like steel.

    That's what I read in that book lol, think it's true?
     
  12. Considering that in the documentary you showed me, they said fires were still raging in the debris, I'd say the fires were keeping the aluminum and other materials molten. I'm not physics major but I don't think molten steel can stay molten for weeks...
     


  13. Are you serious?

    I can't think of one that sounds convincing, so much fault in all of them.

    The government has god awful laws because of history but they aren't out to get us either!
     
  14. Right now Im confused at what conspiracies people are thinking of...

    I just figured out OP was referring to the 9/11 theories.

    Ive already made a point with one theory
     
  15. So the hot spots were even hotter than the jet fuel fires five days after the collapse.
     
  16. Well I'm talking about the big-time conspiracy theories. Apollo/NWO/911, etc..
    MK ULTRA is interesting though and you do have a point. These conspiracy theories though, I just can't find the evidence for them.

    Also, Stewba, I think I found the source of "molten pools" weeks after the debris.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YXzjAKJQOg]YouTube - 9/11 Debunked: WTC - No Pools of Molten Steel[/ame]

    He also makes another important point: what purpose does molten steel weeks after the demolition have? Absolutely none. Why would the steel stay molten if the building was destroyed by explosives? That's impossible.
     
  17. Conspiracy theories cover a lot of topics. Its not always the unbelievable ones that are the most entertaining.
     
  18. Since 9/11, I haven't spoken to a single person, in New York City, that believes the attack was a conspiracy staged by the government.
     
  19. How many people has that been? I know a few people who were in New York that day, fuck I know a person who was miles away from the incident, and they all believe there is government involvement. Okay for one second lets pretend nothing has been proven, how does jet fuel burn down a tower that was made specifically to out stand the likes of jet fuel?


    Maybe everything is a coincidence, and if that's so then good but even if the government had no involvement, their story sure as shit doesn't match to anything. People just be like "no our government wouldn't do that" well you just confided your trust into the government. Well hate to break it to you, but when someone has your trust they can easily get away with doing things :bongin:
     
  20. Probably. Pretty much everyone there lost someone they knew
     

Share This Page