May 31, 2006

Occam's Razor Proves 9/11 is a Conspiracy

If you ever try to argue with someone that 9/11 was an inside job, you'll probably get the phrase "Occam's razor" thrown back at you to explain away the evidence you present. Occam's razor is the logical principal that states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed, or when it's put in its "simplest" terms: the simplest explanation is the best one.

For example:

Conspiracy question: "Why did our military stand down and why were all those war games going on the day of the attacks?"

Occam's razor answer: "The military wasn't ordered to stand down, they were just caught off guard and the military practices all the time, so having a war game going on shouldn't be too surprising."

CQ: "Why were all of the four planes only about 25% full of capacity?"

OR: "The hijackers choose flights with the fewest passengers, so they would be easier for them to control."

CQ: "How did the towers completely collapse to the ground at free-fall speed when the fires weren't even hot enough to melt the steel?"

OR: "The planes crashing into them caused structural damage and the jet fuel fires didn't have to melt the steel, but only needed to weaken them which caused the trusses to give and the weight of the top section caused each floor to pancake down on each other at a high rate of speed."

CQ: "How was Hani Hanjour able to fly a Boeing 757 like an experienced jet fighter pilot into the Pentagon when his flight instructors said his flying skills sucked?"

OR: "Crashing a plane is not very hard to do. Taking off and landing a plane is the hard part and none of the hijackers were training to do that."

CQ: "Why is there no plane at the Pentagon, but all the passenger's remains were supposedly recovered there?"

OR: "The plane virtually disintegrated upon impact, but there were few parts that survived which are seen in photos and the passengers were identified by their DNA which only small amounts are needed to do so."

Notice how each question seems easily answered by using the principal of Occam's razor. People who use this principal are at an advantage because:

  1. Some events, such as 9/11, have a lot of evidence surrounding it, so usually you will only be able to present one or two pieces of evidence at a time which makes it easier for someone using Occam's razor to debate against instead of having to explain all the evidence away.
  2. Some evidence can be complicated, so Occam's razor can be an easy way out of trying to explain away something that is complicated.
  3. The official 9/11 story itself is very simple (19 Arabs with box cutters hijacked four planes and crashed them into our buildings because they hate our freedoms.), so that fits with Occam's razor perfectly.

Now notice how Occam's razor is basically explaining things as being a coincidence too. Yes coincidences do happen and the bigger the event, the more likely you will find more coincidences. However, each time you add on another coincidence, the odds get greater and greater that they can all still be just a coincidence (unless you think like a coincidence theorist). And remember, the flip-side of a coincidence is a conspiracy:

Coincidence - A sequence of events that although accidental seems to have been planned or arranged.

Conspiracy - An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

Well 9/11 doesn't just have a few coincidences surrounding it, it has TONS of coincidences surrounding it. So far I've found over 200 coincidences surrounding 9/11 with the help of a lot of great websites out there and some coincidences by themselves seem too coincidental to believe they're just a coincidence.

So how can one explain how an event, such as 9/11, can have so many coincidences surrounding it?

"Simple" (and ironically): Occam's razor.

The simplest explanation for there being so many coincidences surrounding 9/11 is that it was a conspiracy!

Case solved.


MD said...

Ockham's razor cannot be used to eliminate releveant evidence. Any theory must include and explain all the evidence. Ockham's razor applies to theories, not to facts (i.e., relevant facts).

This distinction is fundamental (that is, between theories and facts).

The Official Story is a conspiracy theory. Under Ockham's razor, the question is: Does the Official Story account for all relevant facts in the simplest and most elegant manner?

If it doesn't, is there another theory that disposes of all relevant facts in the simplest and most elegant manner?

In any case, one can't dispose of relevant facts, and their relations, in the name of Ockham's razor.

MD said...

One more comment on Ockham's razor. You give as an example:

"CQ: "Why were all of the four planes only about 25% full of capacity?"

OR: "The hijackers choose flights with the fewest passengers, so they would be easier for them to control."

This isn't a fact; it is a rank speculation. It therefore has no place in any theory. It' wholly irrelevant.

MD said...

Just to clarify my earlier comment.

The rank speculation is attributing motives to the hijackers. We don't know the motives or thought processes of the hijackers. Those motives are therefore not part of the evidentiary pool, and their invocation in support of a theory is worthless.

It also violates Ockham's razor, by they way. It's just a manufactured supposition to support a theory.

Unknown said...

Minor / Major Point.

I thorough support that it wasn't OBL and 19 hijackers that caused 9/11. However, using the legal term conspiracy applies regardless of what group was responsible.

I think you've made yourself look rather silly in that sense, and I mourne the loss.

Killtown said...

BG, maybe you missed it at the beginning when I said:

"If you ever try to argue with someone that 9/11 was an inside job"

Unknown said...


If you are wasting time arguing about how "Occam's razor" applies to 9/11, you have most likely lost the battle to begin with.

The proof of who was behind 9/11 is best made by facts such as:

1) Fake planted evidence (WTC, Wash, PA)

2) Planted Witnesses

3) Video Evidence of Pentagon Site

4) Video Evidence of WTC, especially wtc 7

5) Photo Evidence of PA Crash Site

6) Cover up / spinning in major Govt., Media, Educational Instituations.

I'm sadly aware of how much people can look reality in the face and deny it. However for those people, you Occam's razor logic is the one of the least likely approaches to make any headway.

Anonymous said...

If you are wasting time arguing about how "Occam's razor" applies....

i think that killtown is not wasting time by writing this blog entry. killtown has already made as big a contribution with the welcome to killtown website as most 911truthers put combined.

Anonymous said...

INDUCTIVE LOGIC--One Of Those Stupid, Stubborn Things
(Apollonian, 12 Jun 06)

Note there's not only "Occam's razor" but simply the INDUCTIVE LOGIC to it all, the 9-11 affair-outrage.

Note Inductive Logic works by way of GENERALIZATION. An instance here, a detail there, the facts then indicating a pattern by means of generalization then LEADS TO A TENTATIVE CONCLUSION called, in scientific terms, "hypothesis."

One then isolate SUSPECTS by this means of inductive logic, and now the scientific task is to look at these suspects (Jews, Israelis, Mossad, CIA, et al.) AND SEE IF THEY CAN NOW BE "RULED OUT" AS THE ACTUAL CULPRITS--can these suspects be ruled out? And the answer is a RESOUNDING NOOOOOO.

Cui bono--"who benefits"--is yet another investigative technique much emphasized by the ancient Romans. 9-11 was used as excuse-pretext for virtual martial-law and unprovoked attack (as in Iraq and Afganistan) to enhance and enlarge interests and dominion of the imperialist oligarchs of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR--see for fullest exposition), a real "Reichstag Fire" excuse-pretext invoked explicitly by the "neo-conservative" Jews as a new "Pearl Harbor" event. See Michael Collins Piper's "The High Priests of War" expose' on the conspiracy to defraud the American people into attacking Iraq, the beginnning of Orwellian "perpetual war for perpetual peace."

9-11 then merely needs placing within historical context. Is the USA now the epitome of empire-out-of-control, this just another stage and phase in the cyclic Spenglerian "Decline of the West"?

Such inductive logic can only be ignored by a corrupt population wallowing in a putrid cultural hubris, utterly distracted, diverted, and afflicted with addiction to Mammonism built upon heresy, cowardice, and fear of the Jews, these Jews abetted by similar-minded gentiles--what is the common link btwn Jews and accomplices among gentiles? I submit it is SUBJECTIVISM, indulgence in the hubristic idea, for example, humanity can be "good," that humanity can express a will perfectly free, equal to the absolute freedom of will of a God.

What is the practical instance of this hubristic subjectivism, the banishment of the God-created objective reality?--it is the moralistic, neo-Pelagian idea, for example, that Jews are fellow human beings of good will towards gentiles, that Jews are not enemies of the rest of humanity, as indicated in the Talmudic war program in which Christ is held to have been rightfully executed for blasphemy and heresy.

CONCLUSION: Thus as Ed Steele ( avers, "it's the Jews, stupid," the only caution being there's something more fundamental at work too, that being the common bond and link btwn such Jews and the necessary and obligatory gentile accomplices: that subjectivistic hubris by which human is made God, creator of the world (at least as it is perceived within the Talmudic, subjectivistic mentality). Ck for more Apollonian essays on under "commentary" heading. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

Anonymous said...

Tell me, how is that the simplest solution? That theory has to take into account ALL 200 COINCIDENCES that you mentioned. So, if you put it into terms that provide valid truth that there are 200 coincidences, and that each one is truly an anomoly, your theory is far to complex to be prooven by Occam's Razor. Plus, Bin Laden seems more likely to benefit from such an event then our own government. Explain to me now, why would our Government do such a thing? As far as I can tell, they have not benefitted from it at all!

Anonymous said...

Yes, our Government's reason to do such a thing complicates your theory even more. Your logic is if terrorists didn't do it, then our own Government did. You seem to just want a reason to belive such an absurd theory!

Anonymous said...

to the above two comments: Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just ignorant of reality and not a shill. How did they benefit?
#1 reason: FEAR scared the crap out of people to let them do the following:

Allowed them to curtail civil liberties even further than they already had: patriot act etc

allowed bush to become a dictator (what, he's not you say? then why has the courts ruled what he is doing illegal (eg warrantless wiretaps, torture etc) and yet he has said he will continue, and has done so? and not been impeached? democracy my ass)

gave them a pretext to invade afghanistan: invaded for a few reasons
1) oil pipeline
2) To gain influence in the middle east region (ie US bases etc) for the coming(ie occuring now) war against iraq and then iran and so on
3)Drugs. See "truth and lies of 9/11" on google video
(note that they where already in position to invade at the time of 9/11)

Iraq: for a few reasons:
1) iraq wanted to sell oil in euro's not USD. BIG no no to the US (iran was going to do so as well, partly what all the fuss is about)
2) Bush had a vendetta against saddam(he tried to kill my daddy)
3) to gain permanent millitary bases (now being built in the area) in the region, for coming attacks on iran
4)considered an enemy by zionists

over all this, there are the millitary contractors and security experts who gain from any and all wars/terror/fears etc.

Above them are the international bankers, who are the true power in this world despite what you might think, who base their profits upon peoples and especially governments debts: war= spending, which normally = loaning from intternat. banks= debt = more interest payments for the international banks.
(see "the money masters" on google video)

Next you have the Gold repository under WTC 4, known as one of the worlds largest, which had confirmed amounst of nearly a billion and rumoured amounts of 160 billion in gold, silver and other precious metals in it. Only 260 million has been officially recovered.

Another massive motive is the trillions missing from the pentagon budget, announced only the day before 9/11 by runmsfeld, and promptly forgotten on 9/11. This trillion dollars of missing (ie embezzled) money was nicely covered up by the fact that many of the victims of whatever it was that happened at the pentagon where ACCOUNTANTS AND BOOK KEEPERS! On a similar note, WTC7, the THIRD huge building that collapsed (if you've not seen this collapse, do so) held the offices of cia, fbi, SS, mayor guilliani's emergency bunker and, more interestingly: SEC securities commision. This was where allmost all the evidence for huge fraud and insider trading cases was stored, such as ENRON! with this evidence lost, many multi million/billion dollar cases where set back years or dropped.

ALthough there are many more motives and many groups who have benefited and may or may not have been involved, I'll leave you with one more:

The WTC towers needed either billions of dollars of work done to them or to be brought down due to a few reasons:
massive problems with asbestos and other health concerns, which would have cost many millions if not billions to properly remove. Also it has been claimed by a photgrapher/engineer who worked with some companies involved with the WTC that they where sufffering from galvanic corrosion due to the combination aluminium facade and steel frame, ie the holes for the bolts holding the aluminium on where corroding. He claimed they had been given only a few more years to figure out a safe way to bring it down, and that the cost was estimated between 10 and 20 billion dollars.

What is know is that larry silverstein, the lease holder, took out a record breaking insurance policy against terrorism only weeks before the attacks, when he took over the whole property (3.5 billion). after the attacks he claimed 2 incidents (2 planes ) and recieved over 5 billion in insurance, despite only spending a couple of hundred mill on the actual lease. The cleanup costs (which would have been covered by him if he'd had to bring them down due to asbestos/corrosion) where around 12 billion if I remember correctly, all covered by federal money, and the government has supplies silverstein with billions in ultra low interest bonds to cover rebuilding costs: Basically silverstein/port authority has turned a run down hated building (look it up) needing billions in repairs/demolition into a multi-billion dollar windfall.

There are many more possible motives, and its possible some of the above motives where accidental/ unrelated. WIthout a proper investigation (ie impartial/independant, not the suspects investigating themselves as has occured so far) it's hard to tell

either way, is that enough motive for you? literally trillions of dollars in motive? my estimate - trillions for the iraq war/cleanup contracts/bases, trillion/s for afghanistan/iran/etc middle east wars over next decade, trillions in iraqi oil/afghani pipeline profits, billion(s) in gold (now worth much more due to high price of gold) , 5 billion insurance, 12 billion cleanup cost/contract, billions in loans for silverstein/controlled demolitions inc, God knows how much interest on loans made to pay for these things (this interest is where much of your income tax goes, not building roads etc)

Ill leave it there, with a final note: What motive did the supposed muslim terrorists have? they minimised casualties (planes where nearly empty, towers where struck near the tops so more people (but not too many) could escape, and at a time of day that maximised witnesses while keeping victim numbers down (consider that those buildings normally had over 20,000 people in them) pentagon hit was in the ONE PLACE THAT WAS VIRTUALLY EMPTY due to being renovated to be BOMB/BLAST PROOF! None of that makes sense if you are a muslim terrorist. WHat have they got since then? have they benefitted? NO they have been discriminated against (muslims) blown up, invaded, hated, deposed etc etc

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that if 911 was a terrorist operation, they acheived it rather easily.
If they are that good, why hasn't there been another? Before or since?
Does not compute.

mark said...

Your arguments could convince most people who are rather ignorant - like perhaps yourself. Not everyone is as gullible however. Some people called scientist and engineers who actually understand the mechanics of building collapse and know that the explanations presented simply can not be correct, actually it does not even take a scientist to understand it, just something called "common sense".