SHARE

The fact that thousands of people died in the Twin Towers that day is extremely sad.

The fact that some people still think it was an inside job is extremely pathetic.

From Reverend Sun Myung Moon’s own Washington Times:

A former Bush team member during his first administration is now voicing serious doubts about the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9-11. Former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush’s first term Morgan Reynolds comments that the official story about the collapse of the WTC is “bogus” and that it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7. Reynolds, who also served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and is now professor emeritus at Texas A&M University said, “If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an ‘inside job’ and a government attack on America would be compelling.”

And after the interview, Reynolds promptly put on his foil hat and did the NumaNuma Dance to drown out all those “loud voices.”

Come on people. I’ve heard the conspiracy theories surrounding this and I just have to say that it doesn’t make any sense. Can you imagine anybody being able to keep that secret? I mean, can you even imagine?

Of course, that isn’t a good enough explanation for it to not exist, but Occam’s Razor people!

In its simplest form, Occam’s Razor states that one should make no more assumptions than needed. When multiple explanations are available for a phenomenon, the simplest version is preferred. A charred tree on the ground could be caused by a landing alien ship or a lightning strike. According to Occam’s Razor, the lightning strike is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions.

So to Morgan Reynolds, and all the other conspiracy theorists out there, let’s just take a deep breath and repeat after me, “The Illuminati doesn’t exist. The Illuminati doesn’t exist…”

5 COMMENTS

  1. You are stupid….I could go on forever, but it would be like talking to a 2 year old…Or maybe you are working for this Gustopo government..Either way…I dont see how you made it through the 3rd grade…Yours a looser…I see a new Nerimbuge Trials comeing shortly…

  2. I just want to know how WTC building 7 came down. That’s it (for now). The dumb ones are the ones that don’t wonder about things as mysterious as this.

  3. Occam’s Razon maintains that simpler explanations are preferable when they
    can account for all the available relevant evidence. Justin Gardner not only does
    not understand the principle but appears to be massively ignorance about the
    evidence in this case. He should consider how the government’s own theory — which involves a conspiracy — can account for these facts:

    The impact of the planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes that hit were very similar to those they were designed to withstand, and they continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.

    The melting point of steel at 2,800*F is about 1,000*F higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, so the fires cannot have caused the steel to melt, which means that melting steel did not bring the buildings down.

    UL certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000*F for for three or four hours before it would even significantly weaken, where these fires burned too low and too briefly at an average temperature of around 500*F” following–about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North–to have even caused the steel to weaken, much less melt.

    If the steel had melted or weakened, the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt, and total demolition that was observed.

    There was not enough kinetic energy for the collapse of one floor to bring about the collapse of the next lower floor, even if the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires had been enough to cause the steel to weaken, which means that, even if one floor had collapsed due to the impacts and the fires, that could not have caused lower floors to fall.

    There was not enough kinetic energy for the collapse of one floor to bring about the pulverization of the next floor, even if the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires had been enough to cause the steel to weaken and one floor to collapse upon another, which required a massive source of energy beyond any that the government has considered.

    Heavy steel construction buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of “pancake collapse”, which normally only occurs with concrete structures of “lift slab” construction and could not occur in “redundant” welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, as Charles Pagelow has pointed out to me.

    The destruction of the South Tower in 10 seconds and of the North in 9 is even faster than free fall with only air resistance, which would have taken at least 12 seconds, which, as Judy Wood has emphasized, is an astounding result that would have been impossible without extremely powerful explosives.

    The towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where the floors do not move, a phenomenon that Judy Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the concrete, the official account cannot possibly explain.

    Pools of molten metal were found at the subbasement levels three, four, and five weeks later, an effect that could not have been produced by the plane-impact/jet-fuel-fire/pancake collapse scenario, which, of course, implies that it was not produced by such a cause.

    WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM/ET after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to “pull it”, displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions, including a complete, abrupt, and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, and so forth, an event so embarrassing to the official account that it is not even mentioned in THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT.

    The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

    The Pentagon’s own videotape does not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O’Reilly admitted when it was shown on “The Factor”; but at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 71-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and visible; it was not, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

    The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory–flying at high speed barely above ground level–physically impossible; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the government has no way out, which means that the building was not hit by a Boeing 757!

    If Flight 93 had come down as advertised, then there would have been a debris field of about a city block in size, but in fact the debris is distributed over an area of about eight square miles, which would be explainable if the plane had been shot down in the air but not if it had crashed as required by the government’s official scenario.

    There are more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly the planes; their names were not on any passenger manifest; they were not subject to any autopsy; several have turned up alive and well; tthe cell phone calls appear to have been impossible; on and on. The evidence may be found at st911.org.

    James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
    Founder and Co-Chair
    Scholars for 9/11 Truth

  4. Your statement that “it doesn’t make sense” is the first sign you may still have a slight ability to think critically…..It takes weeks to set up a building like WTC 7 to implode perfectly as this one did. meaning it was set up BEFORE 9/11……If you watch the footage of WTC 7 and still don’t see it, you are not compitent to be writing any opinion about any subject to inform anyone…..

LEAVE A REPLY