The point about the buildings not needing to fall was always my favorite objection.
I do like one 9/11 theory, that flight 93 might have been shot down. Here's a piece on it from Stuart Buck (occasional OB contributor) on the idea, dating back to Oct '01.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1001/1001flight93.htm
Add to this Rumsfeld's odd slip that the terrorists "shot down" the plane over Pennsylvania (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0) and I think p=.5 that that plane was shot down and the authorities took advantage of the calls that were made to put forth a more palatable scenario.
"I offer $50 to the AK defense fund..."
Has the offer been amended from $50,000 to $50 since last night, or did I just misread it at 1:00 AM?
A shame, because I was looking forward to seeing the attempt.
Right. Robin doesn't buy the "AI go foom" model or that formulating and instilling a foolproof morality/utility function will be necessary to save humanity.
I do miss the interplay between the two at OB.
What does the fact that when you were celibate you espoused celibacy say about your rationality?
If Omega materialized and told you Robin was correct and you are wrong, what do you do for the next week? The next decade?
Do also consider the fact that even if the story of flight 93 occurred exactly according to the official story, the heroic passengers saved zero lives. Jets had been scrambled. Shoot down orders had been given. The flight was not going to hit its target.
Yes, the passengers may have been heroes in the sense that they did not "freeze up" and tried to save themselves or (possibly) others.
Yet the most popular story presented by the press and government, and lodged in the public consciousness, is that the passengers prevented a final strike.
Realistically, they may have prevented a fighter pilot from having to commit an act that could have scarred him emotionally.
So, yes, I am confident the event was "spun." The question is to what degree.