SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A member of the 9/11 commission has broken his silence about some of the unreleased findings:
A former Republican member of the 9/11 commission, breaking dramatically with the commission's leaders, said Wednesday he believes there was clear evidence that Saudi government employees were part of a support network for the 9/11 hijackers and that the Obama administration should move quickly to declassify a long-secret congressional report on Saudi ties to the 2001 terrorist attack.
The comments by John F Lehman, an investment banker in New York who was Navy secretary in the Reagan administration, signal the first serious public split among the 10 commissioners since they issued a 2004 final report that was largely read as an exoneration of Saudi Arabia, which was home to 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @04:21AM
Wow I'm just super surprised by this!
No shit!
All of the hijackers were students from Saudi Arabia
The flight trajectory of the hijacked aircraft does not agree with facts and physics. [undergrounddocumentaries.com] Oops!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 15 2016, @04:55AM
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Bumblebee_argument [rationalwiki.org]
While some fools argue that the bumble bee cannot possibly fly, millions of witnesses testify to the fact that bumblebees DO fly.
There were sufficient witnesses on 9/11/01 to prove that the theory you cite is so much bullshit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @05:16AM
I am glad you replied without watching the video.
Bumblebee argument
This "theory" is science. So its not "theory" any more. When theory becomes science, it is no longer called a theory.
If this theory were still in its theory stage, then you can use your intelligence to see that it tells the truth.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday May 15 2016, @05:26AM
A: I should waste most of an hour, watching a video, which purports to prove all those witnesses wrong? Why?
B: You don't seem to grasp the concept of science. The scientific method isn't terribly complicated.
sci·en·tif·ic meth·od
noun
a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by devlux on Sunday May 15 2016, @07:56AM
Don't bother with this poor confused troll.
I've tried and failed multiple times to explain to them that just giving something a scientific sounding name doesn't make it scientific.
Even if you can build a majority consensus around your theory, that doesn't make it science even if it "sounds scientific".
It just means rigor is lacking in the community and possibly a spine.
Science is a branch of philosophy. One which deals in observation, collection of data and ascertainment of facts.
The scientific method lays out basic standards called rigor, which allows us to attribute the data collected to the hypothesis being tested.
If the data does not support the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is wrong.
Warping the data to "fit" the hypothesis is just intellectual dishonesty.
Remember kids...
A hypothesis is a critical part of science.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0CGhy6cNJE [youtube.com]
But it's only one part of a process that requires critical thinking skills and a dedication to uncovering the truth, not just what you "believe to be true".
Anything else is pseudo science or religion.
My kids understood this concept before kindergarten. Yet this guy can't follow it?
At this point it's only a troll and we should quit feeding them and just move on.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @10:00AM
When theory becomes science, it is no longer called a theory.
Damn straight! I mean, except for ...
Biology: cell theory, modern evolutionary synthesis, germ theory, particulate inheritance theory, dual inheritance theory
Chemistry: collision theory, kinetic theory of gases, Lewis theory, molecular theory, molecular orbital theory, transition state theory, valence bond theory
Physics: atomic theory, Big Bang theory, Dynamo theory, M-theory, perturbation theory, theory of relativity (successor to classical mechanics), quantum field theory
Other: Climate change theory (from climatology), plate tectonics theory (from geology), theories of the origin of the Moon, theories for the Moon illusion
... and let's not forget gravity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @10:59AM
The reply to the video comment (flight trajectory) talked of a "conspiracy theory" or something like that.
The video contains evidence that the maneuvers made by the 9/11 planes were beyond the capabilities of the planes. The video was made by pilots who want an independent investigation. Truth fears no investigation, right?
You could've saved that "theory" post of yours for another time. It wasn't appropriate here, thanks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @04:13PM
When the GP posted "When theory becomes science, it is no longer called a theory" they were claiming theories are not "science" to which I call bullshit. I posted that many theories are in fact still called theories but which are in fact science. My post was more than appropriate, it was warranted.
AFA your little whining conspiracy video, keep spreading the lies and let your delicious speak for themselves. You can post and/or believe anything you want but that doesn't make it true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @05:36PM
If the fight path wasn't possible, what does that mean? That we were just seeing swamp gas refracting the light from Venus when we thought we were seeing aircraft crash into buildings?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 15 2016, @05:33PM
Would you please help those of us who don't want to sit through a documentary that's 40 minutes of images floating about to a voice over and tell us more about why the flight trajectory couldn't have been correct and why that would even be important?
Two aircraft collided with buildings in New York. Of what importance was the flight path? Can this help us understand why the official story about there being no controlled demolition is incorrect? Is there some other significance?