SAN JOSE, CALIF. — After Sandra Dahl's husband died on Sept. 11, 2001, she had their names inscribed together on his gravestone. Capt. Jason Dahl was the pilot of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed into a Pennsylvania field during an aborted hijacking. His widow planned that when her day came, she would join him in spirit and on finely etched granite. But the tragedy of Jason Dahl's death — an event remembered with honor across the land — has fallen into a bitter family feud over his remains.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4406631.html

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/2006/1201/10441863_240X180.jpg

However, Jason Dahl is not listed in the Social Security Death Index!
http://ssdi.rootsweb.com/

Besides, I don't think any conspiracy theory has been proven wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt by a thorough investigation and interviews of key players under oath. Until that happens I'm going to keep an open mind.

Yes, if you're new here, please ignore In Plane Sight.

Check out:

9/11: Press for Truth

Improbable Collapse

9/11 Mysteries

They should be easy to find on Google Video.

#1 - WTC7

end of arguement 

Please utilize this checklist of quotations from the NIST and FEMA reports on the WTC collapses. I have copied these examples from Improbable Collapse, which I recommend.

Remind OCTs that the official studies of the collapses were underfunded, inadequate in every way, and ultimately inconclusive:

"With the information and time available, the sequence of events leading to the collapse each tower could not be definitively determined." – FEMA BEPAT, Executive Summary, p.2

Remind OCTs that the airplane impacts did not topple WTC 1 and 2, and that the official theory is essentially based on the claim that fire brought down steel-reinforced skyscrapers for the first time in history:

"The towers likely would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact damage and the extensive, multi-floor fires if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact." – NIST, p. xxxviii

Remind OCTs that the fires did not burn hot enough to melt or deform steel, and that NIST could not replicate the collapse of the steel when it burned models for over 2 hours:

"None of the recovered steel samples showed evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 degrees C for as long as 15 minutes." – NIST, p. 180

"Only three of the recovered samples of exterior panels reached temperatures in excess of 250 degrees C during the fires or after the collapse. This was based on a method developed by NIST to characterize maximum temperatures experienced by steel members through observations of paint cracking." – NIST, p. 181

"All four test specimens sustained the maximum design load for approximately 2 hours without collapsing…" – NIST, p. 143

Remind OCTs that the towers were built with redundancies capable of withstanding much more than an airplane crash and brief and moderate fire:

"The results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11." – NIST, p. 143

Remind OCTs that the experiments of Dr. Steven Jones addressed a very specific and identified need, according to the FEMA report itself:

"The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires." – FEMA, C-13, Appendix C.6

Remind OCTs that FEMA itself characterized its theory that fire caused WTC7 to collapse as having a "low probability of occurrence," strong words for a scientific report.

Finally, remind OCTs that the official explanation of why the towers collapsed does not explain what happened after collapse initiation. There is no official explanation of why the towers fell as they did:

"The focus of the investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the 'probably collapse sequence,' although it does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable." – NIST, p. 82

"Remember, the 9/11 Truth Movement cannot refute this"

Sorry, but it already has.

Next?

Buy a clue...