Oh I'm sorry, because there are no questions to be answered and the governemnt tell the truth about every thing. The way those buildings fell did not even seem the slightest bit odd to you?
Odd? No. Airplanes, giant freakin' airplanes, flew into them.
Or how all those police officers, fire fighters and medical workers said they heard pops or saw flashes did not seem strange to you? Did it not seem odd to you when asked about these things the government will not answer? To many things just seem odd for it all to be as the government says. Did you even watch the whole video?
First of all, absolutely none of that proves a conspiracy.
The problem is that most "truth"ers spend all their energy blasting holes in the explanation (the empirically observable
FACT) that two big honkin' airplanes smashed into the building and caused
extreme structural damage to the building.
This is observable fact.
The problem with the convoluted, unproven theory of a conspiracy is the fact that it takes a giant **** on Occam's Razor and replaces that with basically nothing.
The "evidence" presented is always very suspect, and fails to accurately portray the science. It makes dubious comparisons of other high rise fires that do not have the second factor of the MASSIVE projectile impact.
The velocity of the airplanes are estimated around 400 MPH. The maximum takeoff weight of a 757 is 250,000 lbs (125 tons). It is even more for a 767.
Thus, the momentum of impact is about the same as a 1 ton meteor with a velocity of
50,000 MPH! Even if we assume the velocity at 200 MPH the momentum of impact is still like a 1 ton meteor traveling 25,000 MPH. That's gonna leave a mark, to say the least. Especially on a hollow structure that offers no lateral strength (like an aluminum can).
The sweet irony, is that "truthers" will use that momentum "evidence" to attack one point while simultaneously
ignoring it regarding their attacks on other points!
There problem is not
disproving the fact that the towers were hit with airplanes. That is impossible. It is that truthers cannot prove their allegations at all. Any detailed objective analysis of the two explanations will
always lead to a full dismissal of the truthers allegations as unfounded, unproven, and irrational.
Because even if the truthers
could show evidence that the official explanation is unlikely, their allegations will
still fail the logical test miserably. It's purely the application of Occam's Razor. If given two probabilities that are unlikely, the least unlikely explanation (simplest) is usually correct. Until evidence is given that changes the level of "unlikely" in the official explanation (not really all that unlikely given
all the data) and the conspiracy (really, really, really unlikely in the sense that it assumes an extreme level of government competence that is unsupported by simple observance of government at any level)
Until truthers stop trying to disprove the given explanation and start
proving theirs, they will never successfully argue their case of Government involvement.
When they can do that efficiently and effectively, I will give them their due. I honestly doubt they will ever make their case effectively, though, because they will ignore the disconfirming evidence of their beliefs in favor of what they
want to believe.