So, one of the rare moments of speculation on this blog was not suprisingly seized upon by the 9/11 truth gossip artists. In my last post I talked about the possibility of man-made earthquakes and used a US Air Force document that discusses the physics of teleportation as evidence that technology is much more advanced than we think. Now of course Strawman Pat made out that I was claiming the government has teleportation machines, when I never said that, I was simply pointing out the existence of the document.
See that's what we do here, we read documents. We read scientific literature. We do research! We're not just some blogger parrots who act like we know what we're talking about while attacking people's character. And we're skeptical of both sides. We don't endorse Pentagon no-plane theories or fake phone call theories, and we're skeptical of the assumption that "pull it" was a confession. We stick to science.
Do I personally sometimes get annoyed when I see politicians and celebrities exploiting tragedies, like they did with Haiti, or throwing an agenda in our face, like when Beyoncé marched with stormtroopers at the Grammys, and feel compelled to rant about it? Sure. That's because I'm human.
Most of the time however I stick to the facts. And one fact I learned, and have referenced a number of times, is that Southcom was, just by coincidence, preparing for a drill based on the scenario of a natural disaster in Haiti, the day before the earthquake ... Fact! What people do with that fact is entirely up to them. I have never proposed a theory of what I think happened. I'll leave that to the experts in that field. Would it surprise me if it was man-made? No. Just like it wouldn't surprise me if the recent earthquake in Chile was man-made. It's called being skeptical (real skepticism, not "skeptic" skepticism) and open minded. There are lots of problems in the world that are rarely talked about in the mainstream such as poverty and depleted uranium, so as a general rule of thumb, if a crisis rapidly escalates into a global cultural phenomenon, there's probably an agenda.
As I said, they blew up skyscrapers with nanotechnology back in 2001. Another fact! You debunkers can deny it all you want but the fact is basic chemistry proves that the red material is thermitic. This stuff ignites when heated to 400-450°C and after ignition we find molten iron. Since iron doesn't melt until 1500°C, this ignition temperature of 400-450°C couldn't possibly melt iron. So the fact that we find molten iron is proof that some kind of chemical reaction has occurred. Anyone who has read the paper and watched the lectures by Jones and Harrit and still believes it's something innocent, is suffering from deep denialism! That's why I coined the term "thermite denier", because it really is that obvious.
Now of course our speculation is really the only thing ScrewLooseChange can comment on. They can't refute the existence of the thermite, so instead they just ridicule Steven Jones when he speculates about explosive paint/fireproofing or thermite matches. When it comes to actual evidence, they are ... well ... screwed. Well here are two evidence-filled videos of mine still waiting to be debunked. Come on Pat, let's see what you got!
Yet Another "9/11 Was An Inside Job" Song
Evidence
We do agree with OUR rebunkers on one thing ... Darwin may very well have been wrong.
Related Info:
Sometimes I Forget
We Don't Care For Free Speech...
Refuting the Hollow Arguments of the So-called 9/11 Debunkers & Truthers
