Loose Change

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

One thing I can't understand is why is there such a need to know? Why aren't the answers provided by the government, and other officials on site acceptable? I mean it just seems like some people are really pushing for some radical theory, but....Occam's Razor.

People will always (and should) challenge authority and isn't that the backbone of a democracy?

I'm not a fan of every wild theory associated with 9/11, but I do think there are some pretty significant questions out there that deserve to be discussed at the very least.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

People will always (and should) challenge authority and isn't that the backbone of a democracy?

I'm not a fan of every wild theory associated with 9/11, but I do think there are some pretty significant questions out there that deserve to be discussed at the very least.

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

Yeah this is an excellent point, many conspiracy theorists are unwilling to listen to reason. They maintain a bias towards everything the government says, assuming it's all a lie. Based on this premise, it's pretty easy to keep circumventing what they say.

But a truly objective individual will keep an open mind to both wacky theories and dull government statements.

In the end, it comes down to the old adage: the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yeah, except I guess I don't think democracy means challenging and questioning for the sake of challenging and questioning. Which to me seems to largely be the case when it comes to many of the conspiracy theories tied to 9/11. It's like someone poses a question, an answer is given, and then that answer is never "good enough." And I just wonder what is "good enough?"

Are you 100% satisfied with the answers we've been given regarding 9/11?

Does the book on 9/11 deserve to be closed and never questioned?

If you think so more power to you. Personally I think there's more layers to peel back there.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Are you 100% satisfied with the answers we've been given regarding 9/11? If so more power to you. Personally I think there's more layers to peel back there.

I'm about to say some things to you that might get me banned!

No seriously though, I have some questions. But minor ones, and not nearly enough to believe this was an "inside job"

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Are you 100% satisfied with the answers we've been given regarding 9/11?

Does the book on 9/11 deserve to be closed and never questioned?

If you think so more power to you. Personally I think there's more layers to peel back there.

It's good to peel back more layers. Problem is, sometimes you peel back a layer and the question doesn't get answered because not enough information is available. That's not a problem in and of itself, but when people start inferring the improbable and irrational to help them fill in the gaps created by lack of info, that's what leads to ridiculous conspiracy theories.

A lack of information does not necessarily mean, for example, that the government is covering things up. It could mean that 9/11 was a really chaotic day, with lots of government agencies scrambling to ensure the safety of the country, and with events taking place too quickly for all questions to get thoroughly vetted.

And I'm in no way saying you're guilty of filling in the gaps with the improbable and irrational. Asking the questions is good. Trying to answer them yourself without good information at hand is bad. In the end, it's OK to say "we just don't know."

[SmootSmack]

I don't even know if Occam's Razor really applies there, I just like it.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I don't even know if Occam's Razor really applies there, I just like it.

Caveat Emptor, etc., etc.

In my new book, I will reveal that UA 93 was actually brought down by triangulated fire involving "Badgeman", Jack Ruby, and Clint Murchison, who is really still alive.

[dmek25]

most of the questions that are raised can be put to rest with simple answers. why not give them to the people? it only adds fuel to the fire. to many inconsistencies, and to much silence create more inaccuracies. i think there is much more then the american government is letting us in on

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by dmek25

most of the questions that are raised can be put to rest with simple answers. why not give them to the people? it only adds fuel to the fire. to many inconsistencies, and to much silence create more inaccuracies. i think there is much more then the american government is letting us in on

That assumes the government has the answers. How do you know that they do?

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

That assumes the government has the answers. How do you know that they do?

i was always brought up where its alright to say you don't know, rather then make up something, or lie. that is definitely not the rule of thumb with this administration. to answer your question, i don't. but with all the money and resources available to them, if they really want answers, they can find them

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i was always brought up where its alright to say you don't know, rather then make up something, or lie. that is definitely not the rule of thumb with this administration. to answer your question, i don't. but with all the money and resources available to them, if they really want answers, they can find them

OK so now you're accusing the government of making something up, or lying, about 9/11? Can you be more specific?

Seems like there needs to be a basis for such an accusation.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

OK so now you're accusing the government of making something up, or lying, about 9/11? Can you be more specific?

Seems like there needs to be a basis for such an accusation.

I think he is saying that because the govt isnt giving a straight answer they are therefore hiding something.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

OK so now you're accusing the government of making something up, or lying, about 9/11? Can you be more specific?

Seems like there needs to be a basis for such an accusation.

slow down, big guy. i really don't know all the facts about 9-11, therefore i cannot make an accurate judgement on the real story. what im trying to say is our government has been known to lie before( see W.M.D and the ties between Iraq and Al Quada- sp?) so, in my eyes, its not below them to stretch truths. when people have the combination of power and money, then can pretty much accomplish anything they want to

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

OK so now you're accusing the government of making something up, or lying, about 9/11? Can you be more specific?

Seems like there needs to be a basis for such an accusation.

That's the beauty of conspiracy theories - all it takes is to stand around and raise vague questions.

If the conspiracy theorist can latch on to the .01% chance that something different than the official story happened, all they have to do is ask "Why not?" There's really no way to refute them.

Oh, I'm with Matty - there's some unanswered questions about the whole thing and a lot of it seems shady. I'm not sure who to blame or even what to post blame about, but there's a number of things that seem pretty odd.