After putting up Newton's three laws in this video, this guy makes arguments that violate all three. As I said above, the Second Law formula does not include any term that says a mass of aluminum behaves differently from a mass of steel: In a collision, any object will exert a force proportional to its mass times its acceleration. (In a collision, we usually say deceleration, but both mean a change in velocity and F=ma still applies.) The Third Law tells us that when two objects collide, they both receive equal force, and to assert that aluminum can't cut steel in a high-speed collision is to assert that some mysterious violation of the Third Law prevents the aluminum from imparting enough force to cut through the steel. And of course, the First Law tells us why we should expect to find most of the planes inside the buildings, which apparently baffles this guy.
But nonetheless, this guy has the chutzpah to title his video, "911 explained in simple terms. Newtonian physics vs Lying pre scripted witnesses." In other words, after making a complete fool of himself over Newtonian physics, he is accusing ordinary citizens who happened to witness the plane crashes of being accessories to a mass murder. Some 9/11 conspiracists go so far as to accuse some members of victims' families of being accessories, but ALL "truthers" necessarily level such accusations of murder or complicity against someone, whether it's against the witnesses, the people who cleaned up the messes, the airline companies, the FAA, the military, FBI, CIA, FDNY, NYPD, FEMA, NIST, experts from academia and private industry, and the 9/11 Commission. I've even seen accusations that a Red Cross volunteer was counting down the WTC7 "controlled demolition!" Holy shit, how much does it take before you realize how crazy that sounds to rational people?
Someone in this thread would like us to believe that all the 9/11 "lies" originate from Bush and Cheney, who concocted an insanely complicated and risky plot and then apparently have some secret means of coercing this murderous complicity from hundreds or thousands of ordinary people (but not a one of the ones who were approached had the common decency to expose the plot), and then somehow Bush and Cheney prevented any one of them from confessing for 13 years so far.
And yet, time after time after time, we find that the basis for these accusations is willful ignorance and stupidity. And then, even people who simply point out the ignorance and stupidity are accused of being "shills," which would mean they are also accessories to murder, after the fact.
And then, people who make such accusations based on willful ignorance and stupidity expect their "truth" to be treated with respect. Please tell me why you think the debate over these unfounded accusations ought to be "civil."
No, your behavior is uncivil in the first place. Regardless of what you believe or suspect, when you publicly accuse thousands of people of murder and complicity, then calling unsubstantiated speculations "truth" is not nearly good enough. When you have something much better than that -- say, some credible evidence -- then I will give it the respect that actual evidence deserves. For sure, when I myself am accused of complicity in covering up a murder and being a thrall to Bush and Cheney (who in my opinion were the most disastrous administration in our history), that pisses me off. But the bigger issue is that conspiracism is a disease that causes such behavior on an ever-widening scale -- whatever it takes to keep the "theory" alive -- and it undermines our entire democracy and civil society.
= new reply since forum marked as read