9/11 Truth for Dummies: Why Near-Free Fall Speed Was Impossible Without Explosives

[video=youtube_share;IwdD6ERutEI]http://youtu.be/IwdD6ERutEI[/video]

 

and yes, I actually took time to view the video
the voice in the video makes claims about the
nature of the stuff seen projected out from WTC1
as it was collapsing, and really there is no way to
confirm or deny these claims. Also, if I may point
out WTC7 fell for 2.25 sec at free fall acceleration
there has been no explanation of why this happened.
the NIST has attempted to make it go away, but its
really not going away its a fact and its damning evidence.
since when does chaotic damage cause coherent "collapse".

 

Nah nothing like that at all LOL

debunker mentality is the same as the guy in the hat

[video=youtube;uuvGh_n3I_M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuvGh_n3I_M[/video]


The Asch Conformity Experiments

By Kendra Cherry


Line Test from the Asch Conformity Experiment


Do you think of yourself as a conformist or a non-conformist? If you are like most people, you probably believe that you are non-conformist enough to stand up to a group when you know you are right, but conformist enough to blend in with the rest of your peers.

Imagine yourself in this situation: You've signed up to participate in a psychology experiment in which you are asked to complete a vision test. Seated in a room with the other participants, you are shown a line segment and then asked to choose the matching line from a group three segments of different lengths. The experimenter asks each participant individually to select the matching line segment. On some occasions everyone in the group chooses the correct line, but occasionally, the other participants unanimously declare that a different line is actually the correct match.



So what do you do when the experimenter asks you which line is the right match? Do you go with your initial response, or do you choose to conform to the rest of the group?

What Were the Asch Conformity Experiments?:

In psychological terms, conformity refers to an individual's tendency to follow the unspoken rules or behaviors of the social group to which he or she belongs. Researchers have long been interested in the degree to which people follow or rebel against social norms. During the 1950s, psychologist Solomon Asch conducted a series of experiments designed to demonstrate the power of conformity in groups.

In Asch's experiments, students were told that they were participating in a 'vision test.' Unbeknownst to the subject, the other participants in the experiment were all confederates, or assistants of the experimenter. At first, the confederates answered the questions correctly, but eventually began providing incorrect answers.

Results of the Asch Conformity Experiments:

Nearly 75 percent of the participants in the conformity experiments went along with the rest of the group at least one time. After combining the trials, the results indicated that participants conformed to the incorrect group answer approximately one-third of the time. In order to ensure that participants were able to accurately gauge the length of the lines, participants were asked to individually write down the correct match. According to these results, participants were very accurate in their line judgments, choosing the correct answer 98 percent of the time.



The experiments also looked at the effect that the number of people present in the group had on conformity. When just one other confederate was present, there was virtually no impact on participants' answers. The presence of two confederates had only a tiny effect. The level of conformity seen with three or more confederates was far more significant.



Asch also found that having one of the confederates give the correct answer while the rest of the confederates gave the incorrect answer dramatically lowered conformity. In this situation, just five to ten percent of the participants conformed to the rest of the group. Later studies have also supported this finding (Morris & Miller, 1975), suggesting that having social support is an important tool in combating conformity.

What Do the Results of the Asch Conformity Experiments Indicate?:

At the conclusion of the experiments, participants were asked why they had gone along with the rest of the group. In most cases, the students stated that while they knew the rest of the group was wrong, they did not want to risk facing ridicule. A few of the participants suggested that they actually believed the other members of the group were correct in their answers.



These results suggest that conformity can be influenced both by a need to fit in and a belief that other people are smarter or better informed. Given the level of conformity seen in Asch's experiments, conformity can be even stronger in real-life situations where stimuli are more ambiguous or more difficult to judge.

thats how adults see it.

debunkers are just victims of their own devises and lack of knowledge and reason

 

ALL IS AS IT SHOULD BE
support the official hijacked airliners story ......

is this the state of thinking that AMERICA has come to?

 

Then you should not have any problem building a physical model duplicating the north tower "collapse".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c

psik

 

LOL no its the state of normal thinking people everywhere.

 

Well, of course for the video and the visible damage, there is no way to confirm it. LOL. You, of course, have a way to confirm your demolition nonsense.

 

Video and damage are factors, but a very serious factor
to consider is that the alleged airliner wreckage was not
accounted for, why is there any question at all as to how
much ( by weight or volume ) in aircraft bits had been recovered
from the PENTAGON lawn?

 

Aircraft parts were also recovered from NY. FAIL.

 

"aircraft parts" Parts is Parts ..... exactly what parts, how many? and where is the INFORMATION about where said parts were found and documentation connecting them to the airliner in question?

 

They were found after the crash and in NY. What else do you need?

 

AA77 didn't crash on the lawn. It crashed into the Pentagon.
Plane parts, body parts and personal property of the passengers, along with one of the black boxes, were recovered on site.

 

so simply the fact that something that can be labeled a piece of aircraft wreckage & found in NYC, is sufficient to then KNOW that it was part of "FLT11" or "FLT175" what?

- - - Updated - - -

The lack of aircraft wreckage on the Pentagon lawn is a factor, a very large factor. and its isn't somekinda "incredulity" bit that drives the knowledge that the lack of aircraft bits on the Pentagon lawn is clearly an indication that no airliner crashed there.

 

There was also aircraft wreckage on the lawn and in the building of the Pentagon.

 

OK, exactly how much wreckage was on the Pentagon lawn?
were the bits ever cataloged & inventoried?

 

No airliner crashed on the Pentagon lawn. Correct.

 

So ..... do you believe a Boeing 757/767 airliner could crash into the Pentagon and leave behind on the lawn as little wreckage as was seen on 9/11/2001?
a crash where the nose of the aircraft and the starboard wing tip contacted the wall at very nearly the same time, because of the angle of the strike.
The ONLY precedent airliner crashes to have the aircraft penetrate a wall in that manner, are "FLT11" & "FLT175" to follow the precedent of all other aircraft crashes would mean seeing many tons of aircraft wreckage on the Pentagon lawn.

 

Provide links to other aircraft that crashed in similar situations. (Full speed into a building and left 'tons of wreckage' outside. Show your evidence.

 

Just look at your beloved F4 destruction video,
notice that the aircraft upon meeting the resistance of the wall, as much as
exploded as if a bomb went off, and distributed the aluminum confetti all over
the place, specifically in a pattern behind the aircraft, the F4 was much smaller
aircraft than the Boeing 767 and so one could well expect many tons of aircraft
bits on the Pentagon lawn. Not only in that manner, but for the fact that the
F4 destruction was carried out with the aircraft perfectly lined up perpendicular
to the wall, while the "FLT77" alleged airliner struck the pentagon at such an angle
as to have the nose and wing tip of the starboard side wing hit at very close to the same time. The alleged scenario was that the wings broke off and then followed the body of the aircraft into the Pentagon, and people are buying this crap?

 

The F-4 was MUCH smaller than a 767,and the concrete wall it hit hardly resembled the wall of the pentgon,which was made of several different layers of materials.

the angle it hit at is irrelevant.

 

So the angle was irrelevant ....... I'll leave that for the people who didn't sleep through Science 101 ......

 

I slept through no science classes bob....the angle to a certian point WAS irrelevant...

Or did you think the plane would ricochet off the pentagon?

 

Do you mean to say that it was impossible for an aircraft to ricochet off of a wall?

 

I'm saying given the angle flight 77 hit it was...the angle it hit made the wall only a bit thicker...

 

The angle also would mandate that stuff, that is bits of the aircraft,
once broken loose by the crash event, had a surface to bounce off of,
and so by bouncing off of said surface, would end up on the Pentagon lawn. The fact that there was so little "aircraft bits" on the Pentagon lawn speaks volumes.