Reg

The article mentions that her server was checked for signs of being hacked. It was not. At that time the White House network, including the state department was hacked. Ironically, she was deemed as being "extremely careless" . Many of the emails she sent ended up on servers that were hacked anyway. One article I read explained that attempts were made, and she didn't have any special encryption going on, but I guess she didn't fall for any phishing scams.

I would say the generations of bc-ers who did the heavy "extraction" are fading and IMO being replaced with a more idealist population - for better or worse.

From what I understand, there is a quantifiable difference between the carbon molecule that is from burned fossil fuels and a naturally occurring carbon molecule. What is rapidly increasing in our our atmosphere is carbon from burned fossil fuels.

Funny Romney assumes that all of the people who don't pay taxes all vote Democrat.

I'm not going to research every claim you make on this conspiracy hot enough, I'm not very invested in this. I am curious that you didn't respond to the fact that the research you posted used citations that contradicted the conspiracy. I have no doubt in my mind that you are being honest in your opinion on this, but I question the integrity of the author of the research paper you posted, as I've seen this type of thing before. Research papers with contradictory (or sometimes bogus ) citations. Major red flag. That alone doesn't disprove your theory, just be careful about your research - always check the credentials of the researcher/peer review, their affiliations, and first and foremost check all citations. If the paper is bogus, you can usually find out pretty quick checking citations as the perpetrators don't expect people to read them. Take care

Some research on my part shows that the "thermite" is a conclusion being drawn from the presence of aluminum and iron oxide. Yes, scientists will agree that thermite is a combination of those 2 compounds. They will also tell you it's in common paint. Here's research: http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/millette/paper/index.htm And here is a quote from the conclusion: "According to the Federation of Societies for Coatings Technology, kaolin (also known as aluminum silicate or china clay) is a platy or lamellar pigment that is used extensively as a pigment in many segments of the paint industry.12 It is a natural mineral (kaolinite) which is found in vast beds in many parts of the world.13 Iron oxide pigments are also used extensively in paints and coatings.13,14 Both kaolin and iron oxide pigments have been used in paints and coatings for many years.13,14 Epoxy resins were introduced into coatings in approximately 194715 and are found in a number of specially designed protective coatings on metal substrates." Its more likely these compounds are a result of paint flakes.

Here's another quote from the NYT article your post cited: "Engineers and other experts have already uncovered evidence at the collapse site suggesting that some type of fuel played a significant role in the building's demise,"

I read the citations in your quote. This is a quote from the NYT article: "Within the building, the diesel tanks were surrounded by fireproofed enclosures. But some experts said that like the jet fuel in the twin towers, the diesel fuel could have played a role in the collapse of 7 World Trade. ''If the enclosures were damaged, then yes, this would be enough fuel to explain why the building collapsed,'' Dr. Barnett said."

Please do. I will read Hot Enough's response, but I don't really have more to add to this discussion. I am interested however in people's fascination with conspiracy theories though.

I'm not sure what your referring to on the first point. On the second point, I'm talking about looking into this maybe 10/15 years ago. On the third point, I think the claim was that it was impossible for jet fuel to melt steel, therefore the fuel could not have caused the collapse. My point was that the steel is critically weakened at much lower temperatures. There seems to be a growing market for this Alex Jones type stuff out there. It's easy to put together media that focuses on anomalies (any large chaotic event has anomalies) and paint a picture of conspiracy. Cherry picking information, taking things out of context, all these things can be used to make a compelling argument to those who want to believe. To be honest, my first thought while watching the towers was a military demo crew went in and dropped the buildings to avoid them toppling on the city. But that was my natural tendency to try and make sense out of a tragic situation. Once I gathered my senses I realized that was highly unlikely. The real tragedy here is the foreign policy that lead to such tragedy. A govt can treat foreign nations like cannon fodder, but don't look so surprised when the favor is returned.

I was curious about this at one time and did some research. The "truther" argument is not very compelling. I remember reading what appeared to be a very detailed analysis of the properties of jet fuel, and its ability to melt steel. As someone with very basic knowledge of such things, I know that metal loses much of its strength at much lower temperatures, and that it doesn't need to physically melt in order to become pliable. This type of information is missing from these analyses, Right there I know the information is misleading. As mentioned before, keeping a conspiracy secret between even 5 people is incredibly tough. Each person you add to that makes it exponentially more difficult. 100 people is pretty near impossible. There is research on such things. for example: https://phys.org/news/2016-01-equation-large-scale-conspiracies-quickly-reveal.html Im not saying conspiracies don't happen, but very, very improbable on that scale.