This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Monday, March 17, 2008 12:00 AM

How photos support your own "reality"

Why do 9/11 deniers see an alternative story in pictures of the attacks? Because we all interpret images according to our biases.

Read other letters about this article

  • Monday, March 17, 2008 04:23 PM

    Clearly

    Clearly the beams were cut by thermite, when the beams were in fact designed to snap if they were placed under too much stress - like what might happen if the support structure above them failed and the loads weren't placed correctly anymore. The weak points were built in, just in case. No one ever would or ever will allow a 1,300 foot tall building to be built in a city unless it was designed to collapse straight down. Imagine the carnage if they fell over sideways in Manhattan. A quarter of a mile of building landing on people all over town.

    Clearly the black smoke indicates a low oxygen fire, when the color of smoke is determined by what is burning, not how hot it's burning. Leave a pot of rice on your stove on a high heat for 45 minutes or so, and tell me what color the smoke is. Is your house a low oxygen environment?

    Clearly the buildings should have withstood the impact when the chief architect himself said they were designed for the worst impact imaginable in 1965 (they broke ground in 1966 so that's the frame of reference they had to use) but not for what actually wound up happening.

    Look, I don't buy everything the government has told us about that day. I don't believe the bullshit about what happened on the flight over Pennsylvania. I'm still wondering what happened to the plane that was inbound to Washington from over the Atlantic and was never mentioned again after they announced that fighters were going out to intercept it. I figure there had to be at least 25 attempted hijackings that day for 4 or 5 to succeed, but we only hear about 4. And no one ever mentioned the failed attempt at Miami International after 9/11 either, when that one was all over the news down here on the day it happened.

    But no evidence has ever been offered that shows those buildings didn't collapse because airliners flew into them at a high rate of speed. They fell exactly the way they were designed to fall, lasting as long as the designer calculated they would almost to the minute. Did we know beforehand? Maybe. Are we being told everything? No way.

Most Active Letters Threads

409

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
175

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
110

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
55

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon