That's Just Stupid...
A conspiracy theory is an account of social or natural phenomena, according to which a secret organization or powerful individual is responsible for a phenomenon and has deliberately deceived public opinion in connection with it, typically with the motive of partisan gain at the expense of the wider society. When conspiracy theories combine logical fallacies with lack of evidence, the result is a worldview known as conspiracism. Conspiracism is a worldview that sees major historic events and trends as the result of secret conspiracies.
Since the terrorist attacks on America that took place on September 9/11 2001, theories of conspiracy flourished. These "theories" are often irresponsible, lacking in fact, and ignorant of key factors of cicumstance and physics that took place on 9/11.Christopher Hitchens represents conspiracy theories as the 'exhaust fumes of democracy', the unavoidable result of a large amount of information circulating among a large number of people. Other social commentators and sociologists argue that conspiracy theories are produced according to variables which may change within a democratic (or other type) of society.
According to many psychologists, a person who believes in one conspiracy theory is often a believer in other conspiracy theories. Psychologists believe that the search for meaningfulness features largely in conspiracism and the development of conspiracy theories. That desire alone may be powerful enough to lead to the initial formulation of the idea. Once cognized, confirmation bias and avoidance of cognitive dissonance may reinforce the belief. In a context where a conspiracy theory has become popular within a social group, communal reinforcement may equally play a part.
Some claim that Muslim extremists led by Osama Bin Laden were NOT the perpetrators of the September 11th attacks and the entire premise extending forthwith is a scapegoat.
In reality, there is a great deal of evidence supporting the widely accepted account that hijackers commandeered and crashed the four 9/11 planes. To deny even the very basis of this event is to begin with a groundless premise that a concerted international effort somehow successfully faked the cockpit recordings and documented forensics as well as murdered and disposed of the planes crews and passengers all without ever getting caught and non of the hundreds of people involved ever leaking even small parts of their secrets.
"The jets that struck New York and Washington, D.C., weren't commercial planes"
Soon after 9/11, a popular myth that received a lot of attention and endorsement in conspiracy theorist circles was that planes didn't hit the buildings at all, but rather missiles, cheaply fashioned to look like planes were used. This soon died after a number of home videos surfaced that matched the network news footage showing the civilian airline jets, however there is no such multiple footage proof in the case of the Pentagon, so the myth was altered to focus only on the attacks in D.C.
The theory hypothesizes that a guided missile was what struck the Nations military headquarters and the lack of American military defense on its own operational hub is proof that the U.S. government either instigated the attack or allowed it to occur in order to advance oil interests or a war agenda.
CLAIM: Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing. The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker. LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images--the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."
"The physics of 9/11 prove that official explanations of the WTC collapses are wrong"
To effectively convey the illusion of legitimacy of arguing a topic you have no proof or logical evidence of, conspiracy theorists often gravitate to pseudo-science that is often groundless and misleading.
The collapse of both World Trade Center towers--and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later--initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.
A possible explanation for this particular theory is the clumsiness of the English language via the word "melt". The word brings to mind an ice cube or popsicle and the dramatic change in matter when it "melts". Theorists claim that "Jet fuel cannot melt steel" and it is this distortion of fact that makes a 9/11 conspiracy of this order possible...
Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. This is not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F).
However the overwhelming majority of experts agree that for the WTC towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to "melt", they just had to lose some of their structural strength, and that required exposure to much less heat.
"I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including a large quantity of rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."