[quote=Bankers Slave]In addition to Mish Shedlock,do we now have Mr Kunstler denying the hard evidence pointing to direct Federal involvement in the terror attacks on 911.
[/quote]
This topic goes well beyond believing that the global economy is sustainable.
A lot of otherwise rational people are deeply offended if you bring up the possibility that our government would engage in a terrorist act of this magnitude.
I don't think you can break through that barrier. I stopped trying. The argument frequently gets too personal and emotional for my taste.
I can't think of this topic without visualizing Dorothy finding the Wizard of OZ behind the curtain. He is clearly visible for all to see. People simply refuse to look because even the mention of the idea is offensive.
I mentioned it to one of my daughters once. Her earnest reply was that there are some things you just don't want to know.
now understand the magnitude of denial in many issues of a conspiratorial flavour.Just the other day when I was handing out fliers regarding the AE911truth.org organization, I was approached by a husband and wife who were both 911 truthers. My eyes were starting to well up, having never met in person anyone that is willing to stride into the no mans land that is the faked war on terror. It is days like this that give me hope…or am I the one living in denial?
I agree, I too believe there is something rotten in D.C. Notice that no one mentions Bldg. 7 very much? That looks like a truly planned "take down."
I still, to this moment, find it hard to stomach that the tin hat crowd may just be right on this one. Which leads me to agree with your daughter's sentiment. On this topic, I don't want to know, what I want to know.
How does that movie line go? "You want to know the truth? You can't handle the truth!"
To confront something like bldg 7 is to confront a multitude of very deeply entrenched belief systems.
The information, the science itself, is incontrovertible; the building came down at free fall speed for nearly 3 full seconds of its descent. Therefore there was zero resistance during that time. Therefore there could not have been any intact steel framing on any one of the four corners or at any place on any of the floors that occupy a vertical distance covered by 3 seconds of free fall.
Ergo it's not possible that the 'fire took it down' narrative put forth by the NIST to be even remotely among a set of plausible explanations. The current 'explanation' violates science and physical laws. The conservation of momentum, being one.
Once one has gone through this very simple intellectual exercise, however, what comes next is not so simple. A whole constellation of belief systems get twanged. Perhaps faith in authority, or the goodness of people. Believing one narrative but then being confronted with the truth of another is always a jarring experience, as anybody who has had their trust violated by someone they thought they knew well understands.
We have a lot of very uncomfortable truths to confront on a whole wide range of issues and I actually have a lot of compassion for everybody who is not able to face them on their own terms. Eventually they will have to face them on some other terms, and that's ;likely to be a rough time for them.
Given your orientation to data backed evidence, do you have an explanation that is supported by the evidence? Or is that in the realm left to conspiracy theorists?
Doug
"You can successfully contradict NIST.But you will have a hard time doing that to Sir Isaac Newton"
Given your orientation to data backed evidence, do you have an explanation that is supported by the evidence? Or is that in the realm left to conspiracy theorists?
Doug
[/quote]
Scientifically we can say, without any doubt and in conformance with the law of conservation of momentum, that there was no structural resistance during the free fall phase.
The only explanation that conforms to that is that the steel framing members were somehow removed or cut.
That much is certain.
There aren't that many ways to remove structural steel effectively all at once, but there we have to begin to speculate, so I'll leave it at that.
so I'll leave it at that.A good idea. I like this site too much for it to suddenly go off-line.
Thanks to JHK for a great article. I agree with previous commentary that highlights not just his message, but the way the message is delivered. We need more of this hard hitting clarity to bring the attention to things that are meaningful- not just controversial.
I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
To head down this rabbit hole may well be interesting to some, but this dilutes the larger point the Kunstler is making, and deflects us away from important and actionable conclusions- which is precisely what he is warning against.
The recent popularity of the term ‘Deep State’ springs forth from a series of essays and interviews promoted by Mike Lofgren, ex-Republican congressional staffer who has widely denounced the Republican Party. His recent interview on Bill Moyers' PBS program focused nearly exclusively on discussion of the so-called ‘Deep State’.
Largely because of Lofgren’s status as a “fallen angel”, his testimony has reached whistleblower status, and appears congruent with another emerging theme, which like a wave sweeping the public discourse, is gathering momentum. This emergent theme in the public consciousness is the slow realization that corporations are colluding with government to act in ways that undermine not only individual freedoms, but threaten the very foundation and basis of democracy.
While to some this might seem obvious, this is profoundly disturbing to much of the conservative narrative that clogs the mainstream media. The pre-packaged for consumption explanation for matters that concern declining liberties, government overreach, and free market debauchery is laid at the feet of what has been generally termed the “Crony Capitalist”. The Cronies are described as statistical outliers, a deviant form that is equal part sociopath and no-good villain, but nevertheless, an anomaly, a circus attraction or side show to the pursuit of all that is Good and Just in the free market.
But this narrative is sounding more and more shrill as the evidence is mounting that such matters are not the handiwork of statistical outliers, rather, they are intrinsic contradictions that are systemic and widespread through our political economy, and in fact are endemic to Capitalism.
The concept of the Deep State represents an evolution of this cronyist thinking, and implies that there is deep and incontrovertible linkage between Capital and the levers of governance. In short, government is at the very least influenced- and some would more correctly claim completely captured- by Capital.
If you’re a free market evangelist this is really bad news, and does not sit well. In response we see pages of conspiracy theories, with every single investment newsletter screaming ‘manipulation’ when the observable does not match the narrative. Like the much maligned comparisons to heliocentric theory, ever more complex schemes and explanations are required to try and explain something that is fundamentally based on conceptual error- with the schemes becoming more vivid and complex as new data continues to pile on refuting even basic assumptions. Easier to dream anew than scrap the narrative.
Kunstler does a great job taking this dry edifice of a proclamation and giving tangible and visible examples of how this manifests in our world to the casual observer. He cites the horrific architecture of strip malls, the bleak urbanscape of many of our neighborhoods, begging the unspoken question- is this the best we can do? Is this evidence of an efficient market system? He references the collection of virtually all personal data- not just by government, but more to the point- by Capital. These are linked. If Google has your data- so does the NSA- and vise-versa.
Kunstler is framing the problem correctly, he has visualized the symptoms in a fashion the illustrates exactly what is going on. We may quibble that using new terms like ‘Deep State’ to define very old concepts is facile, but it tells the story, and it may help to move a decaying narrative towards something much more useful.
“human beings are generally too inept to carry out schemes at the grand scale, as well as being poor secret-keepers.”The successful Manhattan Project puts the lie to that quote!
[quote=darbikrash]I find it troubling this the majority of the commentary is focused on conspiracy theories, which although mentioned in Kunstler’s article, is really not his point.
[/quote]
I understand your troubled experience because the implications are immense and therefore hard to emotionally digest.
However, the term you use, 'conspiracy theories', is regularly used to shut down conversations and is dismissive, and therefore I'd like to request we keep the conversation focused on data, science, and facts as much as possible.
In my case my focus was solely on matters of science. Gravity, conservation of momentum and the like. I do not consider these to be either theories or a matter of conspiracy. If we cannot agree on basic science as a legitimate avenue for discussion and inquiry then I don't know quite what to do with this site. If you have alternative scientific explanations for the observed event(s) then I am completely open-minded an curious.
To couple the science of the bldg 7 collapse to the idea of a deep state, I find them intimately linked. After all, how much 'deep state' do you think is required to get a scientifically oriented institution like NIST to cobble together and publish a report that fails to conform to basic, high school level physics?
I'm thinking 'quite a lot' is the answer.
Again, I know the topic is emotionally difficult, and probably dangerous to discuss in today's environment, and yet the science stands in the way of letting it go.
There are numerous topics across all three E's to which that prior sentence applies. How shall we approach such things around here? Head on, sideways, or not at all? So far we've been pretty delicate but perhaps the circumstances of the world call for a more direct set of declarations along the lines of the emperor has no clothes!
I think the hardest part of sifting through conspiracy ideas is that there is a lot of misinformation out there on top of a lot of complete nonsense. It's hard to find the real science and weed out the crap. Drawing the line is often very difficult.
Chris - most of the time you analysis is at least close, however your comments on the trade center collapse are so far off as to be nonsensical and almost impossible to argue without starting from scratch and many others have done that quite well.Sorry to be so disagreeable, but in my opinion, your conclusions are way off the mark
Jim
Jim,
excellent display of avoidance there.
If you want to take the time to type out your alternative scientific explanation, feel free, I'm all ears, but please don't bother to simply say I'm off the mark and you don't have the time to set me/us straight.
The engineering and science behind my statements is quite deep and I am 99% confident will stand any test.
However, in the interest of the 1% chance I've missed something I'm curious. What's your explanation for achieving freefall with resistance or, alternatively, for how structural steel can suddenly become resistanceless across all four corners of a 47 story building that occupied a full city block.
Use science and engineering principles please, bearing in mind that I have the data for bldg 7 in terms of its construction, types of girders, and total mass in tonnage (framing elements only, I don't have any data on the furnishings and such, but assume those to be negligible for our purposes).
So that's the challenge. Explain, freefall despite resistance. Or how all four corners all lost 100% of their resistance at the same time. Or how it's possible for structural steel to effectively offer zero resistance. One of those three things
Remember, you have to account for the full 2.5 seconds of freefall which, starting from rest, means the building travelled in perfect free fall for a bit over 30 meters or 98 feet, which means you have to account for not one, but more than eight full stories of structural framing losing 100% of its resistance.
Feel free to show your math.
Seriously, this is just science, and I love science. It works.
a large amount of evidence/proof and dozens of eyewitness accounts of what happened that day, with special regards to the emergency services, and most of it is of audio visual recording evidence. Its all on the internet.I have my doubts that you have looked very far for this information.
Wildlife … you hit on a very, very important point. In some ways, the central point I think. That is this; It is essential that our society gets back to critical thinking… to the exercise of critical thinking skills. This means that we all need, as much as possible, to become self-sufficient thinkers, across a broad range of topics. One could make the case that many of our brethren have been lulled into a sort of intellectual malaise… a laziness. A blind trust if you will. Is there a vast conspiracy by the one world government, agenda 21 team to dumb down our education systematically in order to breed this laziness? I am not sure… that is near where I draw my line… sitting just to the far side of it for now. When we open our minds and put our beliefs aside, hard as that is to do, myself included…and get to the business of research and critical thinking, we still need to draw a line somewhere. What I mean is this; If you just say to yourself, "now I am a critical thinker", and you start reading every liberty/conspiracy site on the internet and assuming that it is true… you are not really being a critical thinker at all. You have to draw a line somewhere… and it's HARD to do. But it is your line, and it is important to draw it, because doing so means that you are doing the hard work of critical thinking. Your line can change…and you should let it… that does not make you dumb or wrong… it only makes you a more evolved, more experienced critical thinker. In a world of propaganda and misdirection… critical thinking is our only hope.
It's fair to ask… where do I draw my lines?
1) The mass media is captured by the fascist deep state machine and no longer is a source of effective investigative journalism, but is rather a megaphone for said deep state.
OMG YES.
2) When you look up in the sky and see persistent plane trails criss-crossing the sky… those are the signs of chemical spraying for some nefarious purpose (maybe HARP, or geo-engineering). Chemtrails!
No way. Are there a few planes around the world that can spray stuff? I am sure they exist. Is there mass spraying taking place everyday over the US? No way. This is preposterous on so many levels to my mind.
The latest swing in terms of my own critical thinking relates to the existence or non-existence of the phenomenon known as Cold Fusion, aka Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, aka Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions. I was of the mind that these were chemical phenomena being mistaken for nuclear… but after watching Peter Hagelstein of MIT teaching his course earlier this year (all on Youtube) … I have had a change of mind. Here's a great place to start if you are interested;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMx1mpcokBk
Thank you Arthur!
Hi Jim,
Might I suggest watching this short segment from the History channel on the momentum issue Chris is mentioning here. http://youtu.be/Zd65gK-mXR0?t=54s
[quote=Jim H]2) When you look up in the sky and see persistent plane trails criss-crossing the sky… those are the signs of chemical spraying for some nefarious purpose (maybe HARP, or geo-engineering). Chemtrails!
No way. Are there a few planes around the world that can spray stuff? I am sure they exist. Is there mass spraying taking place everyday over the US? No way. This is preposterous on so many levels to my mind.
[/quote]
I get asked about chemtrails all the time. I have not come to any firm conclusions yet. It would not surprise me in the least to discover that experiments with geoengineering were being conducted, but I seriously doubt they are happening everyday everywhere.
What bothers me is the proof would be trivial for someone who really wanted to know and yet nobody has bothered to gather it.
The idea is that various reflective substances are being sprayed in the upper atmosphere, presumably to increase albedo and reflect sunlight. Things like barium and aluminum oxides have been fingered as the probable agents.
Okay.
Regardless of what the actual substances are, the test is simple.
Take absorption spectra readings. Sunlight has a perfectly well known light absorption 'fingerprint' and anything else that shouldn't be there will leave its fingerprints all over the reading.
If the worry is the concentration is not enough to give a good reading, just wait for a suspected chemtrail to cross the sun and take your reading.
This should be easy as pie and nobody has done it yet so I have my doubts about why not.
Chris and all,
For the reasons you stated, (science) is exactly why I mentioned Bldg. 7 as opposed to the other events that occurred that day. When one's beliefs are questioned, and I mean questioned internally, questioned by one's own inner voice when presented with data and science that perhaps validate the feelings that things are not quite right, the grieving process begins. I hope, some day before I die, the truth comes out.
It is much easier to discuss manipulation of the stock market, oil, gold and other mineral prices because those things - (while they do in fact effect one's personal safety) are more abstract and in a way appear less threatening to one's personal safety than a ruthless direct physical attack.
The Deep State is both inept and cunning - incredibly inefficient and precise. It is these and other paradoxical behaviors that make the Deep State so dangerous. When it boils right down to it, which do you really, really fear the most - a banker that steals your wealth or a person with intent (and means) to take your life? It is that answer that makes one side (the 3 - E's) easier to talk about than the other (one's own government meaning to do physical harm to those they are sworn to protect).
I can't remember where it was discussed, but it may actually be the Deep State that "saves" us from the banking cabal. It has been said that the golden rule is - the man who owns the gold makes the rules, I say, that only holds true until the man with a gun comes along.
- When you get into the airplane math. Such as storage capacity, dispersal rate to provide "chemtrails," etc. the idea that these planes are producing chemtrails at any significant scale is crazy. Small scale albido "experiments" would make sense, but I doubt they would perform these experiments beyond a couple areas in the world, but I really have no idea.2) Then consider chemical production. Where are they producing these chemicals and where are they receiving the precious minerals to waste at any significant scale?
- The biggest "forget about it" for me regarding chemtrails is that they link non-point source contaminants with chemtrails as evidence.
Coal burning is done everyday, THROUGHOUT the world. Coal burning releases aluminum, arsenic, and other heavy metals suggested to be linked with chemtrails as well as mercury. This occurs because fly ash is released through the smoke stacks of poorly filtered power plants as well as the smoke stacks of power plants that completely lack a filter. Fly ash is then deposited via precipitation.
38% of power plants had a filter in 2008. Not all of them worked and to varying degrees. Knowing how useless the EPA is on this stuff, I'm sure that has not improved. Now imagine the rest of the world?
Coal burning also participates in point-source pollution through coal ash disposal areas (waste that did not go up into the atmosphere) which are conveniently located above our vital aquifers. These may or may not have an adequate liners to prevent seepage.
http://content.sierraclub.org/coal/disposal-ash-waste
What's the EPA for again? Maybe we can some quantitate easing funding for some new liners and filters for these companies that get away with murder?