Posted on 05/24/2009 12:22:13 AM PDT by neverdem
Those who subscribe to 9/11 conspiracy beliefs are generally suspicious and inquisitive, a new study suggests.
Shortly after terrorist attacks destroyed the World Trade Center and mangled the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, conspiracy theories blossomed about secret and malevolent government plots behind the tragic events. A report scheduled to appear in an upcoming Applied Cognitive Psychology offers a preliminary psychological profile of people who believe in 9/11 conspiracies.
A team led by psychologist Viren Swami of the University of Westminster in London identified several traits associated with subscribing to 9/11 conspiracies, at least among British citizens. These characteristics consist of backing one or more conspiracy theories unrelated to 9/11, frequently talking about 9/11 conspiracy beliefs with likeminded friends and others, taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, feeling generally suspicious toward others and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook.
“Often, the proof offered as evidence for a conspiracy is not specific to one incident or issue, but is used to justify a general pattern of conspiracy ideas,” Swami says.
His conclusion echoes a 1994 proposal by sociologist Ted Goertzel of Rutgers–Camden in New Jersey. After conducting random telephone interviews of 347 New Jersey residents, Goertzel proposed that each of a person’s convictions about secret plots serves as evidence for other conspiracy beliefs, bypassing any need for confirming evidence.
A belief that the government is covering up its involvement in the 9/11 attacks thus feeds the idea that the government is also hiding evidence of extraterrestrial contacts or that John F. Kennedy was not killed by a lone gunman...
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencenews.org ...
Not directing this to you, but to be perfectly frank, there are a significant number within this very forum that believe such tripe but do not openly say so. I am not one of them, simply stating the obvious given a number of conspiracy related threads I have seen within this forum in the past...and present. Quix and a number of other members do come to mind...
From 9/11 Myths—By Popular Mechanics Pages 53-54
“The collapse of WTC 7 was initially puzzling to investigators, but they now believe the building failed from a combination of long burning fires in its interior and damage caused by debris from the North Tower's collapse. This conclusion is a modification of initial findings from FEMA, reached in a preliminary report released in May 2002, that attributed the collapse almost exclusively to the fires. The report stated there was relatively light structural damage prior to the building's collapse.
Page: 55:
NIST’s analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of “progressive collapse” a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down.
Video footage of the fall of WTC 7 shows a crack, or kink, in the buildings facade just before the two penthouses disappared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in diagonal collapse.
Page 55 goes on after that describing the unusual construction of the building. This is a very informative book and I suggest everyone reads it. The building was on fire inside. They think it was due to the broken gas lines in the basement of the building. It posed such a danger to the firefighters, they were pulled out and the building was left to fall.
Sad, but awfully funny this many years later!
I am not a 9/11 truther, but the BC issue is absolutely unsolved to any satisfaction
how anyone can accept a digital image as an authentic document is lunacy or just a sign of the times we live in, the digital age, where people think animation is real.
The closer on the bc issue to me is: Why is there BOTH a BC and a COLB?
only ONE is issued at birth.
GPS signal under threat - A few years of reduced precision might affect scientists worldwide.
Europium’s superconductivity demonstrated
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
THX.
Thank you. Glad I wasn’t the only one puzzled. I’ll have to find a copy of that book.
I went and looked it up . The temperature where chemical compounds are first encountered in stellar atmospheres is 6300 F . Of course Iron vaporizes at 5300 degrees F and even ROSIE is not stupid enough to believe gaseous Iron will hold a structure up.
And it looks like I stand corrrected....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.