In the forums opinion, what are the most regular claims in relation to 9/11 which:
* Have been very persuasively debunked.
* You think are particularly powerful at making non-believers question themselves on the matter, or for reinforcing the beliefs of those who are interested but not evangelical about the subject.
To use the chemtrails theory as an example, I wonder what you all think are the 'some disappear, some persist' pieces of evidence in this case. It's a claim that's easily debunked, but is STILL in circulation amongst those believers who don't have the capacity to take the science on board, and I think is the thing that triggers CT-biased research into the matter most regularly in the first instance.
That's basically a transitional claim, as they demonstrably did not, taking several seconds longer. But it's still the one that gets repeated most by regular people. I think the unexpected dramatic appearance of the progressive collapse is the primary source of the incredulity most people initially have about 9/11
AE911 is a good source of pop-911 evidence, and they have that as #1, just qualified:
"Free-fall" has been debunked", but "nearly free-fall" has not, seeing as it's true. Unfortunately there's just a bit too much science involved in understanding why the building would fall at nearly free fall "speed", so it's hard to explain.
The problem with any mature conspiracy is that once it's been debunked beyond a certain point, then what remains are the things that are resistent to debunking. Not because they are great evidence, but because they are either vague assertions (pyroclastic dust), or interpretations of eyewitness accounts ("molton metal"), or they are things that are complex and difficult to explain (free-fall).
As I posted in another thread (please check your "Alerts", upper right corner of the screen), simply subscribing to every "conspiracy theory" that exists is not indicative of proper research. Some diligent fact-checking should be employed....I think then, those who thoroughly investigate will realize the huge amount of misinformation that exists, on the Internet.
Thermite and explosives. My ears prick up to anything explosive based, so I might be offering a false positive so to speak, as I often read casually written 'controlled demolition' like its easy-peasy.
Oddly enough James Janos (AKA Jesse Ventura) was a UDT, so presumably knows something about explosives, but oddly has never applied this knowledge to his conspiracy theory....?