# Sept. 11 Conspiracy Theorist Offers $100,000 Prize 1. Dec 20, 2004 ### polyb So do we have any takers? Here's the link to the article: http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10574 Jimmy Walter has spent more than$3 million promoting a conspiracy theory the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States were "an inside job" and he is offering more cash to anyone who proves him wrong.

The millionaire activist is so convinced of a government cover-up he is offering a \$100,000 reward to any engineering student who can prove the World Trade Center buildings crashed the way the government says.

In short, all you have to do is prove that the towers fell according to the 'official story' line. 100k, this should be easily worth the time. If you can prove it, I bet it would make a nice stocking stuffer for christmas!

Last edited: Dec 20, 2004
2. Dec 20, 2004

### TheStatutoryApe

I'm not quite sure how willing he'd be to concede defeat on the matter if anyone did supply him with some sort of proof. He seems to be rather set in his ideas on the matter.

3. Dec 20, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

What, precisely, would convince him?

4. Dec 20, 2004

### polyb

He does have the money though! I did a little net search on the guy and apparently this is the son of Jim Walter, most notably of "Jim Walter Homes".

Zogby found it reliable enough to post it on his sight. According to the article he has already advertised this in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker and Newsweek. Apparently he willing to put his money where his mouth is if the full page ads have already been placed. As far as the 'proof' goes, well that very well could be costly and time consuming. Would it be worth it?

Of course I prefer my 'proof' to be around 80 or so, preferebly a scotch blend!

5. Dec 20, 2004

### polyb

I dont know russ, take it up with him. If he can define those paramaters than would you be up for it?

6. Dec 21, 2004

### Chronos

err, I know a little bit about structural supports and heat effects on load factors. Would certified affadavits by credentialled metallurgists and design engineers carry any weight?

7. Dec 21, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

From the article:
He would be hard-pressed to find an "expert engineer" who doesn't already accept the conventional explanation. So convincing and real panel of expert engineers would require only regurgitation of that explanation. Since I find it unlikely that it would be that easy, no, I don't think it'd be worth my time. Also:
If he won't accept any facts, there really isn't anything to discuss with him.

Last edited: Dec 21, 2004
8. Dec 21, 2004

### kcballer21

I think Russ already touched on this, but this panel of expert engineers must themselves be convinced that there is no way to prove the official explanation, right? Or else they could team up with a student and say, "hey kid, you present to this panel this proof that I create , and we'll split the cash 80/20." or something like that. I think this guy could serve his cause a little better if he could gather a large group of expert engineers that all say the official explanation is indeed unprovable. Then bring them to the press.

9. Dec 21, 2004

### cronxeh

this is just a media hype for him. ignore the bastard

10. Dec 21, 2004

### etc

lol, i enjoy how everyone is very dismissive.
because we all know, guys, that everything is how it's portrayed by the gov't.

11. Dec 21, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

9/11 was first explained by scientists and engineers hired by media outlets - a year before the government released its report.

12. Dec 21, 2004

### Burnsys

have anyone seen the Lone Gunmen episode that aired prior to September 11th by FOX in which an inside faction of the government posing as terrorists hijacks a 727 by remote control and targets the World Trade Center???

Transcript of the episode:
http://propagandamatrix.com/The_Lone_Gunmen_Realm_Pilot_Episode.htm
Video of the episode:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/video/lonegunmanpilot.wmv

Lone Gunmen/X-Files actor, Dean Haglund stated that after years of writing the X-files, the FBI and NASA would approach Chris Carter with plots for stories.

interview with Dean Haglund
http://www.prisonplanet.com/audio/181204haglundclip.mp3

13. Dec 21, 2004

### Hurkyl

Staff Emeritus
As I enjoy how you are very naive. Because we all know that nothing the government says can be the truth.

14. Dec 21, 2004

### Burnsys

And what the mass media says? :uhh:

15. Dec 21, 2004

### etc

no dudes, for real, the mass media's right and honourable too.

16. Dec 21, 2004

### cronxeh

mass media is dumb and only wants what sells and raises ratings. would you like religious things included on our TV so you watch us? no problem! here you go, have some fries with that! please, would you like a white man as your anchor? no problem! hey, would you like to keep bill oreily on? no problem! anyway. i dont even want to get into the whole topic of how dumb and pathetic general public is.

Burnsys: hey, thanks! i completely forgot that i saw that Pilot episode. i just now realized the connection after almost 3.5 years! it does seem a bit 'coincidental' but i dont want to jump into any conclusions and urge you not to.

17. Dec 21, 2004

### etc

mass media is a dumb thing for dumb people, i agree, but i don't fully understand your reasoning. bill oreily (sp?) and religion? the more free speach the better, and i'm pretty sure that religion and media aren't suppose to be seperated.

meh, ignore me, i'm alone (so alone) and grumpy. :)

18. Dec 21, 2004

### TheStatutoryApe

I did a quick google search and came up with this...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html
It's an interview with an engineer on the topic. He seems to know what he's talking about and it makes perfect sense to me even though I'm not educated really in engineering.
There are two popular points I have heard from the conspiracy theorists.
1) The building was supposed to be able to withstand a fire and could not have been disturbed to such a degree as to make it collapse from the fire. To which the engineer states...
2) The collapse of the building occured in the same fashion that one does when being demolished by explosives which have to be set up in a very specific fashion to make the building implode and not do collateral damage. To which the engineer states...
It would seem to me that it should be quiet easy for someone to claim that money. Just like Randi's money I doubt anyone will ever claim this money.

Last edited: Dec 21, 2004
19. Dec 22, 2004

### Staff: Mentor

This is something that they say a lot on tv where they show demolitions and I also bought it until I started taking engineerning. It really should be obvious though, that it can only fall straight down - and the taller and skinnier it is, the straighter it falls.

20. Dec 23, 2004

### Esperanto

An article against what the government is saying. And ads and weird stuff also. http://www.the7thfire.com/jet-fuel-WTC.htm

And you might think I would say you are very bad arrogant and ignorant people like the girl screaming outside my house. What in the world. Anyway, bravo and kudos to you.