On Mar 15, 8:40*am, wrote:
On Mar 14, 1:24*pm, Harry K wrote:

On Mar 13, 9:51*pm, wrote:


snip

One does not have to explain _everything_ but mosst of it does have to
be. *If you are paying attention, the kooks explain absolutely
NOTHING. *They make assertions with nothing to back them up, ignore
reams of evidence, what they can't ignore they either distort or lie
about.

You are doing a good job of the latter.

Harry K- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Exactly. * If you take any sudden event, be it a bank robbery or auto
crash, subsequent interviews with eye witnesses almost always have
discrepancies. * *Someone will say guy A had a gun. * Someone else may
say it's guy B. *Somebody else will say there was no gun. * *If you
applied the standard of the conspiracy theorists to the bank robbery,
no one would ever get convicted. * But if you look at ALL the evidence
fairly, then it's usually easy to figure out what happened.

Regarding these conspiracy kooks, my favorite was a show on TV couple
months ago. * They re-examined the Oklahoma City bombing, because
there are conspiracy kooks claiming the exact same nonsense, which is
that the federal building couldn;t have been brought down by a simple
truck bomb. They claim there was another bomb well inside the
building. * * One key conspiracy nut is a retired airforce general,
who claims he was involved with weapons development with the airforce,
understands explosives, etc. * He said by his calculations, the force
from the 1000lbs of amfuel explosive in the truck which was about 15ft
away, would have generated only a couple hundred pounds of force at
the key pillars holding up the front of the building. * *The official
investigation concluded that it was over a couple thousand pounds of
force.

So, the show got a Ryder truck, filled it with the same amount of the
same explosive, took it out to the desert and built concrete columns
placed the exact distance from the truck. * They set it off with a
recording instrument to measure the force at the columns. * Not only
were the columns destroyed, but the force recorded was dead nuts right
on to what the official report had concluded. * I don't remember the
exact number but it was over 2000lbs and roughly 10X what the general
had calculated.

Presented with this result, the general said something to the effect,
"Well, it really doesn't matter, there had to have been a 2nd bomb
inside the building." * * That fits right in with one of the
characteristics of the conspiracy nuts listed above.

Among the other nit picking nonsense in the OKC case is that the
expolsion damage to the building wasn't symetrical. *WTF? *They expect
a truck bomb to make a perfect half circle imprint in damage to the
building. * Construction experts explained that elevator shafts and
similar design details lead to the pattern being irregular.

But no matter what level of proof, the conspiracy theorists will never
be satisfied. *I'm still waiting for their alternate explanation of
what they say happened on 9/11, start to finish. * I don't want to
hear some lady in the basement heard a boom. * I want to know the
plausible sequence of events, from start to finish, that explains what
happened.

My favorite from alt conspiracy is the "ATC controller" that was
adamant that the AF , prior to 911, scrambled and escorted all planes
that weren't following all procedures. After teh actual regulations
were posted and quoted showing that the AF scrambled on such incidents
ONLY when requested, he still insisted he was right and relied on his
ATC experience. A bit of checking found that he had retired some 20
years earlier. When the regs from back then were posted that refuted
his claim, he still insisted he was right.

Harry K