Conspiracy theory's

[FlightlessDuck]

I believe in global warming but like i said before don't know about man's role in it.

I believe in human-induced climate change.

 

[PaulaSB12]

I believe in human-induced climate change.

So how do you explain the fact that we have had higher co2 levels before. That co2 rises about 800 years after temperature rises, also if man is causing climate change what caused the 14th century little ice age or the medieval warm period?

 

[pioneer89]

Plenty of buildings have had fire, hot ones too. Some burn on for days and days. The jet fuel would have burned off quickly and left office supplies to burn. I just can't understand how a building cannot survive a fire like that following the attacks on the wtc. Understanding how the building is constructed, it just does not add up. To sit there and tell me they just fell over because of the weight of the floors on top makes no sense because they lower floors hold up the upper floors.

I also believe in Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy

If you can't understand it, I suggest that instead of comming to an unfounded conclusion, you read this http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf.

It is highly technical, but since you have an "Understanding how the building is constructed" you are obviously comfortable with nonlinear second-order differential equations and there is nothing that this report leaves to question, don't you agree?

 

[maelstrom]

Were you?

No, I was not in the WTC on 9/11. But riddle me this... you may or may not have heard of a woman named April Gallup. She was in the Pentagon when the supposed plane hit. RIGHT NEXT TO HER OFFICE. She walked out of the hole in the building that the plane had supposedly made. She saw no plane. Nobody saw a plane. Just some food for thought.

 

[pioneer89]

So how do you explain the fact that we have had higher co2 levels before.

Where is this fact from? Everything I've seen has shown that we have CO2 levels at around 390 ppmv right now, and the highest it's been in the recent past (400,000 years) is about 300 ppmv.

Are you refering to the study of birch leaf Stomata done by Wagner?

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

No, I was not in the WTC on 9/11. But riddle me this... you may or may not have heard of a woman named April Gallup. She was in the Pentagon when the supposed plane hit. RIGHT NEXT TO HER OFFICE. She walked out of the hole in the building that the place had supposedly made. She saw no plane. Nobody saw a plane. Just some food for thought.

Tell me - if they were able to manage the hijacking of all the other planes and hit their targets, why did they have to resort to the use of a missile for the pentagon? It stretches credibility to the breaking point. Even if this were some conspiracy to use planes to attack the US and blame it on another country, they would not have used a missile to attack the pentagon. This is the kind of stuff that makes the whole thing look ridiculous.

 

[Jennasis]

No, I was not in the WTC on 9/11. But riddle me this... you may or may not have heard of a woman named April Gallup. She was in the Pentagon when the supposed plane hit. RIGHT NEXT TO HER OFFICE. She walked out of the hole in the building that the plane had supposedly made. She saw no plane. Nobody saw a plane. Just some food for thought.

Are you suggesting that the US allowed the planes to hit their targets, or that the planes were "controlled"/"ordered" by the US OR that there were NO planes?

But just in case... http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.asp

 

[hambirg]

I believe in human-induced climate change.

This is one I really don't.

With 9/11 I know nothing about engineering, so I will believe that the planes alone could have brought down the towers.

But I have some science background, and from everything I was ever taught about the history of climate is that it is driven by the sun. Considering we are entering a period of significant solar storms, this just is much more likely. That along with Antarctic Ice core CO2 studies data that show a lag in Co2 to climate. Basically, climate drives CO2 cycle changes, not the other way around.

In investigating this question, Siegenthaler et al. say they obtained the best correlation between CO2 and temperature "for a lag of CO2 of 1900 years." Specifically, over the course of glacial terminations V to VII, they indicate that "the highest correlation of CO2 and deuterium, with use of a 20-ky window for each termination, yields a lag of CO2 to deuterium of 800, 1600, and 2800 years, respectively." In addition, they note that "this value is consistent with estimates based on data from the past four glacial cycles," citing in this regard the work of Fischer et al. (1999), Monnin et al. (2001) and Caillon et al. (2003). Clearly, therefore, it is temperature that is the robust leader in this tightly-coupled relationship, while CO2 is but the humble follower, providing only a fraction (which could well be miniscule) - of the total glacial-to-interglacial temperature change.

http://www.co2science.org/articles/V8/N48/EDIT.php

 

[disneylovin24]

Tell me - if they were able to manage the hijacking of all the other planes and hit their targets, why did they have to resort to the use of a missile for the pentagon? It stretches credibility to the breaking point. Even if this were some conspiracy to use planes to attack the US and blame it on another country, they would not have used a missile to attack the pentagon. This is the kind of stuff that makes the whole thing look ridiculous.

Yup. Of course there may be a few tiny holes with the current 9/11 theory but there are definetely more holes in the conspiracy theory theory.


Also, what happened to all of those who died on the plane that hit the pentagon? Are they still alive and in hiding?

 

[Missy1961]

No, I was not in the WTC on 9/11. But riddle me this... you may or may not have heard of a woman named April Gallup. She was in the Pentagon when the supposed plane hit. RIGHT NEXT TO HER OFFICE. She walked out of the hole in the building that the plane had supposedly made. She saw no plane. Nobody saw a plane. Just some food for thought.

People did see the plane that hit the Pentagon.

 

[ford family]

Fascinating thread, makes you shake your head in wonderment at what some people are prepared to believe.
As for me, with any controversial subject, conspiracy, global warming, religion, ghosts etc, I always apply Occam's Razor which is translatable as

Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred.

The application of this philosophy generally invalidates all complex theories in favour of the simplest one.

ford family

 

[pioneer89]

But I have some science background, and from everything I was ever taught about the history of climate is that it is driven by the sun. Considering we are entering a period of significant solar storms, this just is much more likely. That along with Antarctic Ice core CO2 studies data that show a lag in Co2 to climate. Basically, climate drives CO2 cycle changes, not the other way around.

The work you quoted is an opinion piece written with little to no respect to the scientific process. It does refer to a study which shows that in the past CO2 ppmv lags a change in surface temperature fairly consistently. This might be an important point if someone were arguing that the current high levels of CO2 are due to natural causes. I'm pretty sure that no one is arguing that point.

One of the key hypothesis of climate change is that human caused elevations in CO2 will (or have been) effecting the planet's climate. The author of this piece seems have a big issue with the assertion that past natural CO2 reactions to glacial periods

do not cast doubt ... on the importance of CO2 as a key amplification factor of the large observed temperature variations of glacial cycles.

The entire point of the opinion article seems to be to convince people that because CO2 levels have moved in the past as a reaction to other climate changes, artificially elevating those levels today will have no effect. It is a jump in logic that is entirely unsupported by any evidence in the opinion piece.

Think of it this way: The original study shows that temperature change leads CO2 change. The opinion author took that and says "I now have proof that CO2 change DOES NOT cause temperature change." Anyone that has "some science background" should be rolling their eyes at this pseudo-science.

 

[LIDisneyFan]

No, I was not in the WTC on 9/11. But riddle me this... you may or may not have heard of a woman named April Gallup. She was in the Pentagon when the supposed plane hit. RIGHT NEXT TO HER OFFICE. She walked out of the hole in the building that the plane had supposedly made. She saw no plane. Nobody saw a plane. Just some food for thought.

Oh well then, you must be right. HOw stupid of me to throw facts into a conspiracy conversation.


ETA-How do you think the people whose families actually died on those planes feel about people who say they didn't exist??

 

[DopeyDame]

People did see the plane that hit the Pentagon.

Lots of people.

 

[joviroxx]

People did see the plane that hit the Pentagon.

Yeah, if not where did Flight 77 and its passengers go??

 

[wvjules]

This thread is "enlightening". I didn't realize that there were really people that bought into the 9/11 conspiracy hook, line, and sinker.

Should people question their government? Heck yes! But to think that our government conspired to kill thousands of its citizens for whatever purpose is ludacris and bordering on mental instability.

 

[Explodo]

Read about the Georgia Guidestones. Scary Stuff there.

Haarp is intresting...

so is some of the UFO stuff.

I guess the one that sets me off the worst is New World order info. Those folks exist and are scary.

 

[Phil'sFrontier]

I looked at the link that was there, no I don't understand those equations. But I do understand construction and building engineering from my experience in the field and in school. There was not an explanation(that I saw in there) that gave reason as to why the core of the building collapsed. Think of the largest heaviest steel in the building placed very close together, kind of like a building in a building. There is no way the steel columns in that core can collapse other than physically cutting them. They aren't just going to fall apart because the floors are coming down. Can somebody please give me a reason why the building core collapsed into nothing?

I also wonder how a massive wide body jet can leave only a small 10 or so foot diameter hole in a building. And then somehow the massive multi-ton engines magically disappear.

 

[Explodo]

Phil, Had very close friends die in the pentagon...the engines ended up almost into the central interior ring. My BUddies were turned into paste by wheels and Landing gear.

 

[LIDisneyFan]

I looked at the link that was there, no I don't understand those equations. But I do understand construction and building engineering from my experience in the field and in school. There was not an explanation(that I saw in there) that gave reason as to why the core of the building collapsed. Think of the largest heaviest steel in the building placed very close together, kind of like a building in a building. There is no way the steel columns in that core can collapse other than physically cutting them. They aren't just going to fall apart because the floors are coming down. Can somebody please give me a reason why the building core collapsed into nothing?

I also wonder how a massive wide body jet can leave only a small 10 or so foot diameter hole in a building. And then somehow the massive multi-ton engines magically disappear.

So-are you saying there were no planes-where did the flights and pasengers go?
Are you saying the buildings were 'rigged'? How? I worked in them and the thought that the buildings could be rigged to collapse without any of us 50,000 people knowing it is ludicrous.


What is you scientific explanation?