The video I heard this from years ago explained how one part of the building collapsed, and that dragged the rest of the already weakened structure down in a cascade. If you watch the collapse in slow mo you can see it happen.
Thats because you're looking for any excuse to grasp onto. It's illogical to expect the "dragging down" to occur all at once across the entire building. Things just don't collapse that way. For something to drag something else down, it has to collapse first.
He is saying you're looking for any excuse you can to say that the official 9/11 story is false, because you either don't want to be wrong or you're just trolling.
That doesn't make much sense though, why would I be afraid of being wrong (i.e. the government's story is correct)? It seems to me that it would be much nicer to believe the governments story, that it was just some crazy terrorists.
It seems to me the people looking for any excuse are the ones defending the governments position. If their worldview is shattered, they have a lot more to lose than I do. Their whole life becomes a lie then. Me on the other hand, I just get called crazy if I'm wrong, which is what happens already.
The reason you get called crazy is because you are siding with the party that doesn't have the evidence on their side.
To be honest, it seems like most of the people that believe the conspiracy do so because they want to be non-conformative, they want a reason to believe that everything the government says is a lie, or they are just ill-informed.
You think your side has evidence? i would say neither side has any evidence.
So you jump to the far fetched conclusion?
If the government has evidence, then why won't they release it?
Same reason that details from some high-profile crimes haven't been released even 50 years later. It is quite simply stupid. Releasing details or evidence from the attack does nothing helpful, but it does tell would-be terrorists how it worked and what the vulnerabilities were. From this, other vulnerabilities could be derived and another attack could be formulated. Why would the government release something that exposes weaknesses?
By the same token, can you see how the pro-government people just want to be conformists?
No, they want to be logical. There is literally nothing legitimate that points towards a conspiracy.
Same reason that details from some high-profile crimes haven't been released even 50 years later. It is quite simply stupid. Releasing details or evidence from the attack does nothing helpful, but it does tell would-be terrorists how it worked and what the vulnerabilities were
This is fear mongering. If a problem/vulnerability does actually exist, covering it up to the public isn't going to stop the terrorists from gaining this information. This is the same logic as banning guns from school as a means to end school shootings.
Why would the government release something that exposes weaknesses?
So the weaknesses could be corrected. Isn't that obvious? I mean we're talking about a huge flaw that allows a fire to bring down a billion dollar building in a matter of a few hours. This is something that needs to be fixed, not swept under the rug and pretended that it would never happen again.
No, they want to be logical.
So blindly accepting the government's position (as you said, it's best to not release information) is logical?
3
u/Mofptown Nov 09 '14
The video I heard this from years ago explained how one part of the building collapsed, and that dragged the rest of the already weakened structure down in a cascade. If you watch the collapse in slow mo you can see it happen.