The Instigator
theta_pinch
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
truther1111
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

9/11 was an inside job: new perspective.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
theta_pinch
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,136 times Debate No: 44219
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (1)

 

theta_pinch

Con

first round is acceptance. NO arguments in first round.
Debate Round No. 1
theta_pinch

Con

In previous debates about the controlled demolition "hypothesis," physical artifacts and video's of and after the collapse have been used in an attempt to either prove or debunk it. In this debate I'd like to take it from a different perspective; that of the supposed orchestration of the act.

PREPARATION FOR CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

Steps to prepare for controlled demolition:

1. clear out any debris(it would fly out due to explosives and cause large amounts of damage.)
2. remove non-load bearing walls(they would stiffen the structure hindering collapse.)
3. (optional) weaken columns with sledge hammers(makes it easier to destroy.)

Obviously it would be virtually impossible to remove the walls without anybody noticing since it takes weeks to months to prepare the building.

EXPLOSIVES
For the steel columns a powerful explosive called RDX is used. To make it explode a violent shock is needed, so a weak explosive is set on a wire connected to a trigger.

In this case it's going to be very difficult to get the explosives attached without anyone noticing. There is also the problem of detonation; the wire is connected to a trigger that is manual, so someone has to be inside pressing the trigger, and it would be very difficult to not be noticed during the day.

THE PLANES

Two planes crashed into the towers piloted by terrorists; that was confessed in court by other members of Al-Queda and they were given a life sentence. The planes came from a flight school that the terrorists had been going too which means that the flight school would have known that they were piloting the planes.

It seems highly unlikely that someone would fly into the world trade center knowing they would die unless they were terrorists. It is also highly unlikely that innocent people would falsely testify in court to something that would give them a life sentence.


CONCLUSION
The "orchestration" of the controlled demolition scheme would have been virtually impossible to carry out; therefore the controlled demolition "hypothesis" is incorrect.


SOURCES:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://science.howstuffworks.com...
truther1111

Pro

Preperation for controlled demolition.

1.Debris from the wtc did cause large amounts of damage.
2.load bearing walls were horizontally ejected as shown in our last debate.
3.Im not sure the relevence here.

-If standard technology is used i.e technology the commercial controlled demolition companies use thenit would be difficult.

-However there is evidence of nano thermite and carbon nanotubes found in the wtc dust .(1,2)
Nanothermite technology was declassified after 911, its known that technology can be 20 years more advanced than what is official at the time, this is due to national security we would not want our enemies to copy our technology.
These advanced explosives methods are not used by controlled demolition companies who still use archaic and cheap methods they have to remove walls etc to wire up the explosives.
However wireless explosives would have been used.

Explosives-

"The Linear Thermite Charge (LTC) is designed to rapidly cut through concrete and steel structural components by using extremely high temperature thermite reactions jetted through a linear nozzle. "

http://techportal.eere.energy.gov...

-This is exactly what was seen on 911
-Active thermitic material was found (1)
-Trace of thermite were found in the wtc dust(3)

Nano thermite reactions can be customized by changing the size of its particles, this changes the speed of reaction and explosiveness
"In addition to providing fine

microstructural and compositional control needed to

produce materials that have both high energy density and

extremely fast release rates, sol-gel offers other advantages

of safety and stability in energetic material processing,

e.g., eliminating the need for hazardous machining"



Tillotson TM, Simpson RL, Hrubesh LW (1999), Nanostructure High Explosives Using Sol-gel Chemistry, 98-ERD-048, LLNL Laboratory Directed Research and Development, Annual Report FY1999
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov...;(p 8-11 or 181 of 255)

Who had access to the towers ? Not enough space to write this in the debate but very good research has been done into this.

- "Throughout the life of the WTC buildings, modifications were made to each structure. The modifications included upgrades to electrical, fire protection, and elevator systems, as well as general construction activities "

-"While examining the tenants in each critical area, we should ask — Cui Bono? That is, who benefited from the destruction of the WTC buildings, and the resulting War on Terror? The obvious answer includes, primarily, the Bush Administration and its friends. It also includes overlapping groups of oil and gas companies, defense contractors, and those who desired to wield undue influence on international policies related to a wide number of issues from civil rights to space domination."

-"If we look at the companies that occupied the impact zones of the WTC towers, and other floors that might have played a useful role in the demolition of the towers, we see connections to organizations that had access to explosive materials, and to the expertise required to use explosives"

-"Several facts are clear from this review of the companies and people responsible for revamping the security systems for the WTC buildings, and securing New York City, on 9/11. One is that many of the people involved were deceptive and/or corrupt, and appeared to have benefited from the attacks. Another is that many of them were connected to each other and to the investigations into previous acts of terrorism and the terrorist financing bank BCCI. Yet another striking similarity among these organizations is that they all did major work for the Saudi Arabian government, or the royal family of Kuwait. Finally, the history of some of those involved, like Terry McAuliffe, shows a level of greed and corruption that overshadowed all preconceptions about US politics."

http://www.911truth.org...

http://www.911truth.org...


The planes ?
The planes did not come from a flight school, but from airports- united airlines , american airlines planes were hijacked.
The confession was likely due to torture (waterboarding )
The flight school however said that the terrorists could barely fly a cesna but somehow mananged to do extreme manuevors in a jet plane something that professional pilots fail to do in flight simulators , even though they have tried many times .
Operation home run is a system in which hijacked planes can be re hijacked via remote control .
Only a computer could have handled the planes like they did anyone in the plane would be helpless to reclaim control manually.

Pilotsfor911truth.org

The terrorists were saudi arabians not aghan.The terrorists were likely on the CIA payroll as they were seen partying with hookers and doing cocaine the night before. They were patsies .Muslim fundamentalists do not do these activities .

" two American congressional representatives were allowed to read the Congressional 9/11 Investigation Report, this time including the areas President Bush had ordered removed. Both congressmen clearly state that the redacted pages of the report place full responsibility for the planning and execution of 9/11 on one or more foreign intelligence agencies, not “terrorists.”"

http://www.presstv.ir...


Conclusion-
The orchestration of the cave terrorists would have been virtually impossible to carry out without funding and protection from US, Israeli and Saudi intelligence agencies . A complete standown of the US airforce which didnt manage to scramble one fighter for over an hour and a half while the planes were hijacked should also be mentioned as clear evidence of criminal activity within US
military or defence institutions . This means it was an inside job .

Sources:
1/ http://www.benthamscience.com...
2/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
3/ http://wtc7.net...
Debate Round No. 2
theta_pinch

Con

1.Debris from the wtc did cause large amounts of damage.

1. clear out any debris(it would fly out due to explosives and cause large amounts of damage.)

The first step is to clear out debris; by debris it likely means things like furniture, coffee mugs, computers....etc.

2.load bearing walls were horizontally ejected as shown in our last debate.

2. remove NON-load bearing walls(they would stiffen the structure hindering collapse.)

Load bearing walls may have been ejected but it's those that DON'T bear any load that need to be removed.


-However there is evidence of nano thermite and carbon nanotubes found in the wtc dust .(1,2)
Nanothermite technology was declassified after 911, its known that technology can be 20 years more advanced than what is official at the time, this is due to national security we would not want our enemies to copy our technology.
These advanced explosives methods are not used by controlled demolition companies who still use archaic and cheap methods they have to remove walls etc to wire up the explosives.

Nano-thermite alone doesn't mean anything for the controlled demolition theory because a thermitic reaction is not controlled enough to cut the steel columns at precise enough angles for controlled demolition.


"The Linear Thermite Charge (LTC) is designed to rapidly cut through concrete and steel structural components by using extremely high temperature thermite reactions jetted through a linear nozzle. "

If these were used someone would'be seen them being attatched to the steel columns. Also Linear Thermite Charges were not invented by the government; if you read the patent information you'll see it was invented by people not connected to the government, AND the patent was granted in 2006; 5 years to late.


-"While examining the tenants in each critical area, we should ask — Cui Bono? That is, who benefited from the destruction of the WTC buildings, and the resulting War on Terror? The obvious answer includes, primarily, the Bush Administration and its friends. It also includes overlapping groups of oil and gas companies, defense contractors, and those who desired to wield undue influence on international policies related to a wide number of issues from civil rights to space domination."

The crux of the Controlled demolition theory is that NIST faked the report and then you say that it's the Bush administration who would have benefitted. Well the Bush administration also wanted evidence against global warming but NIST wouldn't falsify anything so there is no reason to assume that they would have falsified the 9/11 reports.

-"If we look at the companies that occupied the impact zones of the WTC towers, and other floors that might have played a useful role in the demolition of the towers, we see connections to organizations that had access to explosive materials, and to the expertise required to use explosives"

Where's the evidence? and not from one of those 9/11truth; none of the source links go to the peer revied study; rather they go to another 9/11 conspiracy site that has it but with no source.

-"Several facts are clear from this review of the companies and people responsible for revamping the security systems for the WTC buildings, and securing New York City, on 9/11. One is that many of the people involved were deceptive and/or corrupt, and appeared to have benefited from the attacks. Another is that many of them were connected to each other and to the investigations into previous acts of terrorism and the terrorist financing bank BCCI. Yet another striking similarity among these organizations is that they all did major work for the Saudi Arabian government, or the royal family of Kuwait. Finally, the history of some of those involved, like Terry McAuliffe, shows a level of greed and corruption that overshadowed all preconceptions about US politics."

See above.

The planes ?
The planes did not come from a flight school, but from airports- united airlines , american airlines planes were hijacked.


Well if the planes were remote controlled the airports certainly would've noticed no one was inside, and remember they couldn't take control of the planes; that means that the technology that allowed the airports to take remote control must have been either removed or damaged.


The confession was likely due to torture (waterboarding )

They were brought before a grand jury in accordance with US law; they couldn't have been tortured.

The flight school however said that the terrorists could barely fly a cesna but somehow mananged to do extreme manuevors in a jet plane something that professional pilots fail to do in flight simulators , even though they have tried many times .

They probably intentionally failed; also if professional pilots couldn't due those maneuvors then ther's no way it could be done with remote control as you say.

Operation home run is a system in which hijacked planes can be re hijacked via remote control .

They could've damaged the system that allows Operation home run.


Only a computer could have handled the planes like they did anyone in the plane would be helpless to reclaim control manually.

Not necessarily.


NOTE TO PRO: the sources you have used are known conspiracy theory sites, please try using more reliable sources.
truther1111

Pro

1. I have no idea why that is neccesary
2. Yes now you understand, this is why a gravity caused collapse wouldnt work... You cannot have it both ways saying on one hand a controlled demolition wouldnt work because there were load bearing walls yet a gravity caused collapse would have worked .

"Nano-thermite alone doesn't mean anything for the controlled demolition theory because a thermitic reaction is not controlled enough to cut the steel columns at precise enough angles for controlled demolition."

I just provided a link to a device that is meant to cut through steel .

"If these were used someone would'be seen them being attatched to the steel columns. Also Linear Thermite Charges were not invented by the government; if you read the patent information you'll see it was invented by people not connected to the government, AND the patent was granted in 2006; 5 years to late."

Yes, so what are you arguing that commercial companies are more advanced than DARPA or Los alamos national laboratory?
We know that is not true and any commerical device that uses explosives is less advanced than what the military have otherwsie the military would go get it an classify it for national secutiy.
The point with this device is that is plausible to use thermitic materials to pulverise and vaporize concrete and steel.

-Not the Bush administration, but insiders in bush administraion which included the oil and gas companies, those insiders have been linked to insiders in NIST who investigated 911 but not global warming.

-Its not peer reviewed because its not science its a criminal investigation the sources of that investigation are at the bottom of the 911 truth link , however those sources are NOT conspiracy sources...
for example one
http://www.nytimes.com...;


The independent work done is well researched and lays out other suspects for a new criminal investigation, without a new criminal investigation we wont prove who did it will we? Without any investigation no one will be caught so how can you expect me to prove to you who did it ! When I do not when no criminal investigation has taken place . It is like finding a dead body on the street with a bullet whole in the head and you asking me well you dont have proof who did it so therefore he wasnt shot by anyone.

The technology to take over the planes was in the pentagon .... not airports, they had the technology to retake control that is why people in the know like Von buelow said the only logical conclusion is that because they didnt retake control of the planes it means they were in control the whole time. The planes did have people and pilots and maybe even the muslims in the plane yet they couldnt do anything as the communications were severed.

It is well known that they were waterboarded.

Remote control as in computer inputs are more effective than a pilots hand.

The terrorists couldnt have access to the planes to damage the system .

Yes necessarily unless you believe some arabs without any experience flying jet liners are better pilots than real professionals.

NOTE to con , 2 sources were independent Peer reviewed scientific articles in mainstream scientific journals such as the Enviromentalist.
One conspiracy source was well researched and had sources such as the NY times
Debate Round No. 3
theta_pinch

Con

Yes, so what are you arguing that commercial companies are more advanced than DARPA or Los alamos national laboratory?
We know that is not true and any commerical device that uses explosives is less advanced than what the military have otherwsie the military would go get it an classify it for national secutiy.
The point with this device is that is plausible to use thermitic materials to pulverise and vaporize concrete and steel.

YES! None of the inventors of the thermite charge were working for the government. Just because you find that hard to believe doesn't mean it's not true.

-Not the Bush administration, but insiders in bush administraion which included the oil and gas companies, those insiders have been linked to insiders in NIST who investigated 911 but not global warming.

And what do oil and gas companies have to gain from a terrorist attack?

It is well known that they were waterboarded.

Where's the evidence?

Remote control as in computer inputs are more effective than a pilots hand.

And if they couldn't do it by hand why would they be able to program it into a computer?


The terrorists couldnt have access to the planes to damage the system .

A claim with no proof.


One conspiracy source was well researched and had sources such as the NY times

Newspapers are NOT good sources for information about the collapse of the twin towers because news reporters like to sensationalize everything.


2 sources were independent Peer reviewed scientific articles in mainstream scientific journals such as the Enviromentalist.

I found two THE ENVIRONMENTALIST sites; one is a political weblog and one is from the UK and niether are scientific journals. If you are talking about a different one please provide a link.



The technology to take over the planes was in the pentagon .... not airports, they had the technology to retake control that is why people in the know like Von buelow said the only logical conclusion is that because they didnt retake control of the planes it means they were in control the whole time. The planes did have people and pilots and maybe even the muslims in the plane yet they couldnt do anything as the communications were severed.

Another logical conclusion is that the terrorists damaged the the system that allows control of the plane to be taken.



1. I have no idea why that is neccesary

So that furniture doesn't become a 300 pound bullet.


2. Yes now you understand, this is why a gravity caused collapse wouldnt work... You cannot have it both ways saying on one hand a controlled demolition wouldnt work because there were load bearing walls yet a gravity caused collapse would have worked .

Then provide an alternative to controlled demolition and the official version.



CONCLUSION
Pro used known conspiracy theory websites, and made unsupported claims. Therefore Pro has not proved that 9/11 was an inside job.
truther1111

Pro

The companies that develop and people involved in the nano thermite technology had access to the towers and were also involved in the coverup as shown in previous links,
http://www.amazon.com...


Is anyone who investigates who had access to the towers and was involved in the development of naothermite technology automatically a conspiracy theorist? This is an impossible burden of proof because how can we investigate other suspects without being automatically labelled a conspiracy theorist. Are ex government , CIA and engineers conspiracy theorists because they question 911 ? If you do not agree with everything the US government says nowadays you are automatically labelled a conspiracy theorists. The American propaganda machine has demonized anyone who questions them and people like you actually buy into modern day propaganda.


""And what do oil and gas companies have to gain from a terrorist attack?""


Haha.
The miilitary industrial complex which is tied in with the media and oil and gas companies also benefited hugely from 911 watch this video before 911 explaining it thankyou X-files .



http://www.theguardian.com...


Because programming it into a computer is more reliable than a unsteady human hand , using maths for example is more exact.

Burden of proof is on you to suggest the terrorists had access to jet airliners and had the technical know how to do such an operation.

The information was not about the collapse it was about who had access to the towers and who developed nano thermite technology, none of which is actually a conspiracy theory by the way .

I already linked it in the first link ,heres their homepage
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov...



http://www.benthamscience.com...

An illogical conclusion


1. Debris did shoot out, such as steel girders laterally hitting other buildings a fact a gravity collapse cannot explain .
Video 2.


There is no alternative to a controlled demolition , the official story doesnt work as there is needed some extra energy to demolish the towers the only alternative explanation which there is some technology we are not aware of was used to provide that extra energy in the towers , however the evidence points towards thermtic materials and nanothermite because there is evidence of

  1. Molten metal: There are numerous photographs and eyewitness testimonies to the presence of molten metal at the WTC, both in the buildings and in the rubble. No legitimate explanation has been provided for this evidence other than the exothermic reaction of thermite, which generates the temperatures required and molten iron as a product.
  2. The fires at Ground Zero could not be put out for several months. Despite the application of millions of gallons of water to the pile, several rainfall events at the site, and the use of a chemical fire suppressant, the fires would not subside. Thermal images made by satellite showed that the temperatures in the pile were far above that expected in the debris from a typical structure fire. Only thermite, which contains its own oxidant and therefore cannot be extinguished by smothering it, can explain this evidence.
  3. Numerous eyewitnesses who were fleeing the area described the air mass as a hot wind filled with burning particles.[1] This evidence agrees with the presence of large quantities of thermite byproducts in the air, including hot metallic microspheres and still-reacting agglomerates of thermite.
  4. Numerous vehicles were scorched or set on fire in the area. Photographic evidence shows that cars parked within the lower-level garage areas of the WTC complex burned as if impacted by a super-hot wind like that described by the eyewitnesses. All non-metallic parts of the cars, including the plastic, rubber, and glass, were completely burned off by a hot blast.
  5. There was a distinct “white smoke” present—clearly different from smoke caused by a normal structural fire—as indicated by eyewitnesses and photographic evidence.[2]The second major product of the thermite reaction is aluminum oxide, which is emitted as a white solid shortly after reaction.
  6. Peer-reviewed, scientific research confirmed the presence of extremely high temperatures at the WTC. The high temperatures were evidenced by metallic and other microspheres, along with evaporated metals and silicates. These findings were confirmed by 9/11 investigators and by scientists at an independent company and at the United States Geologic Survey.
  7. The elemental composition of the metallic microspheres from the WTC dust matches that of metallic microspheres produced by the thermite reaction.
  8. The environmental data collected at Ground Zero in the months following 9/11 indicate that violent incendiary fires, like those produced by thermite, occurred on specific dates. Peer-reviewed scientific analysis of these data show that the components of thermite spiked to extraordinary levels on specific dates in both the air and aerosol emissions at Ground Zero.
  9. Carbon nanotubes have been found in the WTC dust and in the lungs of 9/11 first responders. Formation of carbon nanotubes requires extremely high temperatures, specific metal catalysts, and carbon compounds exactly like those found in nanothermite formulations. Researchers have discovered that nanothermite produces the same kinds of carbon nanotubes. That finding has been confirmed by independent analysis in a commercial contract laboratory.
  10. A peer-reviewed scientific publication has identified the presence of nanothermite in the WTC dust. One of the critical aspects of that paper has been confirmed by an independent scientist.

If con can explain all 10 of these then he can say that i have unsupported claims but I think he will find it very hard. Good luck .Thanks for the debate, Ask for a new investigation of 911 and lets find out the truth !
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
The terrorists couldn't have access to the planes autopilot system I'm afraid but apart from that you attacked the sources I provided, do you have any clear explanation to how the building self imploded or how the terrorists did flight manoeuvres that trained pilots cannot recreate in flight simulators?
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
actually I did provide counter argumnts. See round 3 to the end.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
well what was your argument then you attacked my sources but didn't offer any counter explanations to my arguments.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
My argument was not shot down.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
from 1 vote when really you know your argument was totally shot down ..
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Actually I won the debate.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
Did you want to concede this debate as your clearly lost
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
I mean second round.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Actually I did use sources; see first round.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
voter atheist you gave sources to Con but Con did not even use one source in his whole debate!
It just proves the fundamentalist nature of deniers of 911 truth , you call yourself an atheist and probably think christians are ignorant or naive , well you just proved that its you .Did you even read my argument?

You also mentioned bentham paper is unscientific because it was published by bentham, bentham only publishes they do not review, the reviewers of the paper were more than well qualified including the ex manager of DARPA, DARPA LMAO if anyone is qualified to review a paper on nanothermite then it would be DARPA . You see the debunking websites never tell you the full story and are worse than the conspiracy sites in terms of accuracy.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
theta_pinchtruther1111Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: The debate arguments go to Con for more rational arguments, while Pro tried to back up his debate using scientific publications it was faulty. The Bentham link resulted in the editor resigning as it was not meant to be published and resulted in the journal becoming the laughing stock of science. The other link refers to CNTs in lungs which is not evidence for thermite. Sources go to Con as Pro as I pointed out did not use source appropriately, and then also conspiracy sites are not good sources. Conduct and S&G are tied.