Well I thank you all for the warm welcome - Though I'm not reading any real concrete definition of what the Accepted Theory for the planes of 911 might be. But now why do you think that is?
OK - Let me spell out where I'm going with this:
My theory, or as you are labeling it, the "Alternative" Theory, as to the truth behind all four of the alleged 911 planes is that they weren't real. It's simple and elegant as far as theories go.
Now I have science on the side of my theory, both the discipline of metallurgy and penetration mechanics not to mention a Newtonian Law or two. The inconsistency of the evidence is also supportive. (e.g. did any of you pilots here at this site compare the flight paths of the planes from the various videos that depict vastly dissimilar trajectories?)
Along with all this, I've got some plain understandings born of experience and some finely tuned intuitions born of inheritance that harmonize perfectly well with my theory. So, all in all, I'm on quite comfortable ground, I do believe.
So this then is the "Alternative" Theory, and what am I to understand is the "Accepted" Theory?
Let me attempt to sum up the accepted theory in as simple and elegant a fashion as I did mine. The Accepted Theory about the planes is that they were real. This is simple: yes. But is it Elegant? hardly!
Indeed, I strongly suspect that what most of you are calling the "Accepted" Theory is really, when all's said and done, quite "Unacceptable."
What is it that backs the theory up to make it worthy of the designation: "Accepted"? What basis is there for widely held belief in it?
There is no science which will lend a hand here; I swear there is not even a scientifically plausible hypothesis to start to begin explaining how the planes of 911 could have behaved in the way they were alleged to have done:
Lightly constructed aluminum planes slicing through heavily constructed HSLA Steel framed buildings, showing no visible deceleration and holding off both structural failure and flash point ignition until safely behind "closed" walls.
Planes burying themselves deeply and completely into fields, just like their distant but much more firmly constructed relatives, the Bunker Buster EPWs.
Composite Nose Cones pummeling their way clean through multiple military grade masonry and reinforced concrete walls.
Wings somehow folding inwards upon impact and thus allowing the plane to slip inside through the hole the nose cone managed to bore.
This is all truly and utterly fantastic and quite "unreal!"
But there are the videos that show the planes performing some of these miracles; surely we can believe our eyes? Wait though - the videos are wildly inconsistent with each other in the first instance, are riddled with artifacts betraying their production methods in the second instance and they portray a scientifically implausible event in the third.
Well then there is the witness testimony; but no - the same problems that are present with the videos are present with this aspect too. Inconsistencies abound: there was a plane, there was no plane, it was a missile, it was a small jet, a bird, a bug, a boo...
Everyone of reasonable maturity must be aware that both the camera (of the still and motion kind) and people can be made to lie. They always have been and I suspect they always will; just as long as there are unscrupulous characters that have a vested interest which, for whatever reason, they wish to uphold.
Then what of the physical evidence, the debris? There is none recovered from where it should have been, i.e. underneath and surrounding the impact zone of the WTC Towers. The precious little samples of whatever was collected is all as suspect as the behavior of the planes.
So what IS there then in support of the theory that the planes of 911 were real? Nothing?
Now please allow me a moment to digress -
Did any of you believe in Santa Claus as a young child? Some, maybe a good portion of you?
Now as I recollect, from my own personal experience, there was no real evidence as such which formed the basis of my deep conviction in the jolly old elf. Instead there was merely a naive trust in the tradition of this figure and possibly more than just a little psychological pressure, both internal and external in origin.
From the point of view of tradition: The red robed one's ubiquity made him hard to ignore or for that matter deny.
Psychologically speaking: on the one hand the idea of a magically endowed Patron Saint of gift giving was a pleasant thing to believe in and on the other it was my caretakers who were encouraging this belief.
Ah yes, I fondly remember the comfort and joy of those early and innocent Christmases of my childhood -
But even more vividly, I remember that Christmas Eve when I stumbled upon the plain, harsh truth and found what was obviously going to be Christmas morning's stocking fillers for me, my brother and my sister, all neatly laid out on my parents' king-sized bed in three equally proportioned piles.
I knew at first sight what the three piles meant but my conviction kept me from admitting it to myself consciously. Basically, I didn't want to believe that it was all a lie. So I made up a rationale: the presents must have been for some surprise street party that my mom and dad where going to put on for the other children who lived on our street.
Believe it or not that far fetched rationale sustained my challenged and now tenuous faith until Christmas morning: when ultimately I saw those selfsame presents that had been laid out on my parents' bed, stuffed into mine, my brother's and my sister's stockings, I simply had to face up to the facts.
How the three of us cried as I revealed to my younger siblings the truth of my discovery and oh, what confusion on my parents' faces when they burst in to the living room to see what Santa had brought us - only to find us all in tears. That morning, the fantasy of Santa Claus had only brought us pain.
But of course we got over it and moved on: rather quickly as I recall. An opportune and welcome visit an hour or two later, from a kindly Great Uncle, laden as he was with boxes of chocolates, definitely helped to ease the pain.
But now back to the planes of 911. Where is everybody in regards to this lie? Are some of you still bound up in a mere conviction built upon naive trust and bolstered by psychological pressures?
Have some of you stumbled upon the underlying truth but yet are still not ready to believe that it is all a lie?
Is this unwillingness to accept that it is all a lie the only thing now supporting your implausible theory?
Are there any of those amongst you who are finally ready to accept the suspicions of the night before in the cold light of the morning after?
The very worst of the Santa Claus lie is that it temporarily fills a child with false hope. The whole fantasy seems well intended, designed as it is to bring a spirit of joy to an otherwise harsh season. Once I realized the truth I still had real hope to build upon and work towards. No one had tried to take that away from me and there really wasn't much harm done in retrospect.
in stark contrast, the perversity of the 911 lie is that it fills us with false fear. Whoever put the theatre of terror together for us that sunny September day sought to incapacitate our wills: to bring despair to an otherwise hopeful world: to effectively rid us of our genuine hope.
The lies of these abusers keeps us bound to their will. The horror of their theatre initiates a blind obedience that lurks within their shadowy falsehood: a falsehood that deceives us into thinking that these masters of horror somehow will protect us from the things that they are lying to us about in the first place.
Chubby men dressed in red can't squeeze down chimneys. We can all accept that now and maybe smile at our naivete in once believing that they could.
In remarkably similar fashion: Aluminum based planes can't slice through steel framed buildings.
The only thing that supports the theory that they can is the idea that it surely can't be all just one big amazing lie? Such a massive betrayal of trust is unimaginable. The amiable News Anchors, the men and women on the streets, the nice lady tourist from the Ellis Island Ferry who's now visiting schools with her photographs to help children accept the terror - they can't all be lying?
Well, just like I was there to tell my brother and sister on that Christmas morning long ago, here I am to tell you on this autumn morning (and won't it soon be the Holiday's):
There is no Santa Claus - and there was no planes!
Though the Holiday Season is coming upon us quickly, there might yet be a chance to give ourselves and each other the greatest gift of all before it arrives:
The fear they spread is a lie, destroying our genuine hope. When we can find the courage to face the truth - I'm telling you all - it is then that we can start reclaiming this concrete hope: you know, the kind you had before that dreadful morning of September 11!
I truly believe that it is not too late!
And in closing, I thank you all for allowing me to discourse in this fashion.
Looking forward to mutual breakthroughs of understanding, FfG