newmac wrote:There are a few fairly obvious reasons why conspiracy theories prove to be quite attractive:
Another reason is that they help to offer alternative reasons for holes in official stories.
For instance, if the official story of 7/7/05 says that the bombers used acetone peroxide as the homemade explosive then one can accept that at face value. On the other hand and with a little investigation one can discover that acetone peroxide cannot be transported since it is too volatile, certainly it cannot be placed into a rucksack. Plasticization of the explosive is the only way to prevent accidental decompostion and that is something only the military seems capable of doing.
Ok, so the bombers had some form of military training and backing and were capable of making plasticized acetone peroxide....oooops, still a problem, acetone peroxide does not produce heat when it explodes, it decomposes as an enthropic explosion, producing only a violent shock wave. So how come so many people got burned on that horrible day?
You see, it is evidence like this that will be accepted by Joe Public but rarely examined. It's quite interesting that some reporters at the time asked the same questions I ask above only for the official story to change. Only when this issue died down did the story revert back to the bombers having used acetone peroxide. No wonder a full public investigation is unlikely!
a little look at newmacs latest book post about our wonderful media makes life yet more interesting. To think that I felt sorry for the Chinese last Christmas because I read in the newspaper about how sensored their press was and what a terrible time the journalists were having there because they were in constant threat of being put in prison! Ha, ha, ha,ha,ha........No need to throw our journalists in because we have an almost perfect system here.... and guess what.....we think its great...or did I mean we take it forgranted.. or was that, assume its all ok? !!!!
I love all the debate here at powerswitch.....I love you all (kissy, kissy) .......and its definately more fun (from a learning point of view) than any other place I've been.......just makes you wonder why the most important topic in the world today doesn't really have a title and isn't taught in school, athough as someone from here pointed out to me recently by the time it works its out of date (or something like that).
Ok, so the bombers had some form of military training and backing and were capable of making plasticized acetone peroxide
Terrorists have been using this explosive without needing military help - see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... omb416.xml
acetone peroxide does not produce heat when it explodes, it decomposes as an enthropic explosion, producing only a violent shock wave. So how come so many people got burned on that horrible day?
You mean "enthalpic". In fact studies show that the reaction is "entropic". Palestinian bombers who survive are usually burned as well as maimed.
More generally, I am most disappointed to see this forum become infected with the Conspiracy Theory rubbish which plagues peakoil.com
Vortex wrote:Ok, so the bombers had some form of military training and backing and were capable of making plasticized acetone peroxide
Terrorists have been using this explosive without needing military help - see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... omb416.xml
acetone peroxide does not produce heat when it explodes, it decomposes as an enthropic explosion, producing only a violent shock wave. So how come so many people got burned on that horrible day?
You mean "enthalpic". In fact studies show that the reaction is "entropic". Palestinian bombers who survive are usually burned as well as maimed.
More generally, I am most disappointed to see this forum become infected with the Conspiracy Theory rubbish which plagues peakoil.com
Well, I for one think that open discussions about anomalies surrounding current events are much more ejoyable and relevant than UFO-stuff...
peakoil.com is absolutely infested with Conspiracy Theory posts which in my opinion spoils its purpose.
The Conspiracy Theorists seem to become obsesed/infected with all sorts of daft ideas ... and go on & on & on about them.
The post here earlier was typical: strident about the London bombs explosive being "impossible" and thus a plot of some sort ... but based on incorrect data.
Vortex wrote:This is a Peak Oil forum, as is peakoil.com.
peakoil.com is absolutely infested with Conspiracy Theory posts which in my opinion spoils its purpose.
The Conspiracy Theorists seem to become obsesed/infected with all sorts of daft ideas ... and go on & on & on about them.
The post here earlier was typical: strident about the London bombs explosive being "impossible" and thus a plot of some sort ... but based on incorrect data.
Do we have to go the same way here?
Well, I think it's ending up in a very difficult situation if conspiracy theories are to be avoided. The official explanation of the 7/7 bombings is nothing less than a conspiracy theory.
Since the UK is turning to a net energy importer due to the decline of the north sea fields, there might be some relevance in connecting TB's willingness to go to war in Iraq with PeakOil.
I dont think the solution is to avoid discussions about alternate explanations to current events, I think the solution is to discuss those issues in a factual way. Nuts can turn ANY subject on it's head. Invoking UFO's for example....
Edit: I agree that the forums at peakoil.com are full of pretty weird writings, but that is true for most of the threads there, not only 9/11 stuff. Their news editors are first class though.
Vortex wrote:You mean "enthalpic". In fact studies show that the reaction is "entropic". Palestinian bombers who survive are usually burned as well as maimed.
Hi Vortex,
You are quite right, it was a typo on my part and I meant to write entropic but not enthalpic as you suggest. Isn't enthalpy a description of somethings thermodynamic potential?
You might like to read about entropic reactions in Wikipedia
I cannot change your opinion about conspiracy theories but I can ask that you do not rubbish them without at least knowing something about what you are criticizing.
I was making the point that conspiracy theories come about when there are holes in any story and was using this as a good example. To make and transport TATP (acetone peroxide) does not require great intelligence but does require great skill. A proper investigation, which the UK government has not allowed (how convenient), would perhaps look at such issues to determine whether this is possible by anyone other than an explosives expert.
I find some conspiracy theories fascinating but just because you don't doesn't make you right and me wrong. Who would have thought that it was the KGB who tried to murder the Pope in 1981 using Agca as the assasin or that key politicians and financiers from the US and UK aided the rise to power of Hitler in the late 1920's under the 'Hitler Project'.
Perhaps I could ask you for proof to verify your statement that most Palestinian bombers who use TATP are burned as well as maimed? I do hope you are not using the same rhetoric that you condemn conspiracy theorists of using?
Here is a picture of small amount of TATP being ignited. If the detonators used any form of flame then this would have been the result. It looks a bit hot to me.
This series of images is also of TATP exploding. It doesn't look icey cold here either.
My guess is that you get a bit of burning and a bit of decomposition during a TATP detonation. It seems that it is NOT totally flash-free or "cold".
You could have done this research yourself - it at least raises major doubts about the idea of a "cold" flashless explosion.
We have also not yet considered the effect of a supersonic shock wave on the human skin. Additionally, the waste products (acetone and ozone) of a 20kg TATP explosion hitting at Mach 2 or faster may also burn the skin.
So in the event of being near to a 20kg TATP explosion I would be more than 50% sure that I would suffer burns from some aspect of the detonation process.
Sadly any of the above might spoil your interpretation of the story ....
I am at a loss why so many people seem to prefer a contrived, complex story to the more likely explanation i.e. 4 lunatics made some dodgy explosive and blew it up in London.
Vortex wrote:Here is a picture of small amount of TATP being ignited. If the detonators used any form of flame then this would have been the result. It looks a bit hot to me.
TATP in quantities less than 2g will ignite hence the flame in your pictures. Anything greater than this amount will detonate and in the case of acetone peroxide the detonation will be entropic. Perhaps you should re-read the Wiki description.
The article you posted also raises more questions than it answers. For instance, why would the July 7th bombers make highly dangerous TATP when its only advantage is that it cannot be detected by sniffer dogs? (How many sniffer dogs are employed on the London underground or buses compared with the number in Israel?).
Vortex wrote:I am at a loss why so many people seem to prefer a contrived, complex story to the more likely explanation i.e. 4 lunatics made some dodgy explosive and blew it up in London.
I wouldn't have a problem with the story that four lone people blew themselves up in London except for the fact that by lunchtime Tony Blair was stating on TV that this was obviously the work of al qieda, hyping the war on terror myth even further. How the hell did he know that so soon? - after all it took several days to conclude that David Copeland was behind the bombs in Brixton and the Admiral Duncan in 1999.
It was very interesting to note that on that day, at exactly the same time, there was an exercise being undertaken which simulated the exact same attacks on the exact same tube stations. I wonder what the mathematical probability of these two events happening together was? Strange how 9/11 also saw up to 15 military exercises being performed on that day, confusing the whole event for all those who were in control of the skies - skies that remained undefended for up to one and a half hours in a country with the most advanced military technology in the world.
It's clear that like most in the 9/11 or 7/7 denial clubs you have made up your mind about this ... nothing is likely to change your opinion.
Nevertheless please check: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Chemical_s ... _synthesis
"Each solid molecule of TATP dissociates directly into 4 gas-phase molecules. It is held together by three weak O-O bonds in a ring formation with three H2C and three CH2 molecules. Dissociation may be initiated by heat, pressure, or impact. The first dissociation creates enough pressure to cause surrounding TATP molecules to dissociate. The heat created by friction may initiate a reaction between atmospheric oxygen, the resultant ozone molecule, and the three hydrocarbon molecules."
The final lines essentially means that the waste products of the explosion then react chemically together: the acetone will burn in the ozone and in (which is a strong oxidant) and also in the air.
This normal chemical combustion reaction will release energy - it will cause thermal burns.
Essentially we have a 20kg backpack which has just emitted a shockwave equivalent to 80% of that of TNT. This 20kg is now a mixture of oxone & acetone and probably other chemicals.
Personally I would NOT like to be zapped by that shockwave and then be exposed to 20kg of burning acetone-oxygen mixture.
I believe that I have provided sufficient evidence to show that burns from a TATP explosion are very likely.
If you still have doubts, why not go abroad somewhere where tinkering with explosives is allowed and brew up a few grammes of TATP and detonate it.
Are you convinced that it will be a "cold" high pressure explosion?
All you have provided are a random mix of loose opinion, surmise & rumour.
I suspect that if the explosive had NOT been home-made TATP, but had been TNT or C4 then you would be pushing a line such as "Clearly the military built these bombs".
If the bombs had been messed up and had not worked, I'm sure that you would have yet another reason to complicate the issue.
I am basing my analysis of the facts that have been reported. They seem to stack up to me.
Like the 9/11 brigade you clearly have some sort of need to find a more complex solution.
Vortex wrote:I am basing my analysis of the facts that have been reported. They seem to stack up to me.
Hi Vortex,
I see that you are making a number of assumptions which are no more or no less valid than the assumptions I am making. You are therefore welcome to your thinking just as much as I am to mine. The problem is that you have probably (my guess of course) not seen all of the facts reported about July 7th. Perhaps this explains why you have not commented on the issue of the 'exercise' being run on 7/7 by Visor Consultants.....and please don't say this was just coincidence.
I can go on with many more irregularities but that is for another forum. The issue is that some of us will believe in conspiracy theories and some of us won't. It's just a shame that those who don't always choose to be so aggressive when giving their views as they believe them to be more valid. Strange, when many conspiracy theorists are often in receipt of so much more information than non-theorists.
Perhaps, as a way of testing this, you can tell me how many buildings of the World Trade Centre collapsed straight down into their footprint on 9/11? Here's a clue, it wasn't two as reported in the trusty media you so obviously rely on.
Perhaps, as a way of testing this, you can tell me how many buildings of the World Trade Centre collapsed straight down into their footprint on 9/11? Here's a clue, it wasn't two as reported in the trusty media you so obviously rely on.
Having failed to make your London bombing "evidence" stand up you rush off to change the subject! Classic!
So you are a WTC7 conspiracy fan too? I should have guessed - multiple "infections" of Conspiracy Theories are remarkably common.
Someone else bombarded me with "reasons" why WTC7 collapsed ... being uninformed on this, I did some detailed research before making up my mind. The answers that I eventually came up with were much more prosaic than any mega-conspiracy. And, no, I'm not going to discuss WTC7 any further ... it's just one of the raft of Conspiracy Theories that are floating around out there.
Strange, when many conspiracy theorists are often in receipt of so much more information than non-theorists.
Yep, a standard cult respose .... you are of course one of The Enlightened so anyone challenging your views is to be disregarded. Convenient.
Why not take a look at this list of features of Conspiracy Theories and see how many boxes you can tick?
Allegations exhibiting several of the following features are candidates for classification as conspiracy theories. Confidence in such classification improves the more such features are exhibited:
1. Initiated on the basis of limited, partial or circumstantial evidence;
Conceived in reaction to media reports and images, as opposed to, for example, thorough knowledge of the relevant forensic evidence. 2. Addresses an event or process that has broad historical or emotional impact;
Seeks to interpret a phenomenon which has near-universal interest and emotional significance, a story that may thus be of some compelling interest to a wide audience. 3. Reduces morally complex social phenomena to simple, immoral actions;
Impersonal, institutional processes, especially errors and oversights, interpreted as malign, consciously intended and designed by immoral individuals. 4. Personifies complex social phenomena as powerful individual conspirators;
Related to (3) but distinct from it, deduces the existence of powerful individual conspirators from the 'impossibility' that a chain of events lacked direction by a person. 5. Allots superhuman talents or resources to conspirators;
May require conspirators to possess unique discipline, unrepentant resolve, advanced or unknown technology, uncommon psychological insight, historical foresight, unlimited resources, etc. 6. Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning;
Inductive steps are mistaken to bear as much confidence as deductive ones. 7. Appeals to 'common sense';
Common sense steps substitute for the more robust, academically respectable methodologies available for investigating sociological and scientific phenomena. 8. Exhibits well-established logical and methodological fallacies;
Formal and informal logical fallacies are readily identifiable among the key steps of the argument. 9. Is produced and circulated by 'outsiders', often anonymous, and generally lacking peer review;
Story originates with a person who lacks any insider contact or knowledge, and enjoys popularity among persons who lack critical (especially technical) knowledge. 10. Is upheld by persons with demonstrably false conceptions of relevant science;
At least some of the story's believers believe it on the basis of a mistaken grasp of elementary scientific facts. 11. Enjoys zero credibility in expert communities;
Academics and professionals tend to ignore the story, treating it as too frivolous to invest their time and risk their personal authority in disproving. 12. Rebuttals provided by experts are ignored or accommodated through elaborate new twists in the narrative;
When experts do respond to the story with critical new evidence, the conspiracy is elaborated (sometimes to a spectacular degree) to discount the new evidence, often incorporating the rebuttal as a part of the conspiracy. 13. The conspiracy is claimed to involve just about anybody;
Conspiracy tales grow in the telling, and can swell to world-spanning proportions. As the adherents struggle to explain counter-arguments, the conspiracy grows even more (see preceding item). Conspiracy theories that have been around for a few decades typically encompass the whole world and huge portions of history. 14. The conspiracy centers on the "usual suspects";
Classical conspiracy theories feature people, groups or organizations that are discriminated against in the culture where the story is told. Jews and foreigners are a common target. Likewise, organizations with a bad or colorful reputation feature prominently, such as the Templars, the Nazis and just about any secret service.
Anyway, my mission here is done ... once people get this sort of claptrap in their heads it's almost impossible to counteract.
Bozzio wrote:It's just a shame that those who don't always choose to be so aggressive when giving their views as they believe them to be more valid.
Slipping in unasked - sorry all!
It is just human all of it. We have a situation with three (four including Bali) serious events the last five years: 9/11, Madrid and London. All those events are full of unanswered questions.
It's extremely uncomfortable to suspect that there might be government involvement of ANY kind in these events. Own/foreign government initiation or just own government exploitation of the events. Equally uncomfortable just to think about it. Such stuff was done in Nazi Germany. Not here. I would not fall for it. It was different with the Germans. I mean, Germans are Germans after all. Right?
I'm a mere mortal without government or police connections, but I'm seriously worried over a number of discrepancies in the official conspiracy theories. The ends just dont match when I try to make sense out of the official explanations. This might be due to my ignorance and lack of information, and the prudent thing to do for any government in such a situation would be to DISCLOSE as many details as possible. Right?
I mean, where are the dangers with disclosure? It was one thing when we had the mighty and cunning Soviet Empire against us, but now? Some ragheads in caves in Afghanistan? What kind of resources can they put up against our industrial societies? Are they sponsored by some mighty empire somewhere? Which one?
If the official stories are true, Osama is about to win on walk over - we are vouluntarily destroying our open societies! "In order to save the village we had to destroy it". We do it to ourselves!
Are they sponsored by some mighty empire somewhere? Which one? Err ... just the whole of the Islamic world.
They don't need tanks or nuclear bombs ... just a few thousand suicide bombers using home made explosives could really dent the Western world.
I forgot to mention in my last post that, purely by chance, I came across this today in the book "how Homo became sapiens" by Peter Gaerdenfors.
"The tendency to look for hidden mechanisms is so strong in humans that one can speak of a causal drive. For the most part, this drive is beneficial for our planning activities, yet sometimes we take it to extremes. We crave causal connection also in cases where there is none."
