• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NASA Director and Engineering Executive for more than 37 years speaks of 9/11

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Last edited:

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
and I and I expect others, can bring up countless more who debunk much of the disturbing things. There is a huge difference of stating an opinion and stating facts that can be proven. I challenge the "truthers" to take their evidence and present it in court. When will the opinions be backed up with evidence that is shown to the public or in court?
By the way, what makes a former NASA an expert on controlled demolition? It is just another opinion.
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,388
Reaction score
327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
This is absurd - there are lots of other conspiracies, etc, but it is impossible to enjoy let alone FIND them because Creative keeps on spamming the forums with the same crap over and over instead of dedicating a thread or two or even three to it - and keeping it in those few threads.
 

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
NASA Director and .... <blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda ... endlessly verbatim, unimaginative, boring, moronic, repetitive, regurgitated drivel snipped >

Yawn ... yawn ... yawn ... it it that time again !!!

It's like being stuck inside some endless Mobius strip where you know you will always come back to the exact same spot ... :roll:
 

OscarB63

Farts in Elevators
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
26,526
Reaction score
9,462
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By the way, what makes a former NASA an expert on controlled demolition?

he was the guy that was in charge of the Challenger and Discovery (OK, tasteless on my part...sue me)
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
he was the guy that was in charge of the Challenger and Discovery (OK, tasteless on my part...sue me)

Explosion yes, controlled, not so sure of. :mrgreen:
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Just curious.....why do you so arrogantly cut down such prominent people?

I was responding to a previous comment regarding a shuttle explosion.. So your comment should not be directed towards me. As for your question, I will say it one more time. I will give them more credit when they come forward with the evidence rather than opinion. When the evidence they have, stands up to review. till then what they say is no more than opinion. What part of this don't you understand?

As for you CD, You failed to respond, answer my question in post 2.
Your link to the vid is broken, and
why do you and other so arrogantly dismiss people who oppose your views on 9/11? Why do you dismiss what others have published, reviewed, presented evidence regarding 9/11 which supports the orginal reports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 505

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Just curious.....why do you so arrogantly cut down such prominent people?

Because they are not prominent at all ... they are incompetents, liars, charlatans, deluded and at times downright lunatic ... that's why creative ... they have no credence, and the fact that you are too obtuse to see it surprises no one !!!
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,753
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Because they are not prominent at all ... they are incompetents, liars, charlatans, deluded and at times downright lunatic ... that's why creative ... they have no credence, and the fact that you are too obtuse to see it surprises no one !!!

The problem is that it's not : 'they come to this conclusion because they are incompetent', it's 'they are incompetent BECAUSE of the conclusions.'

Regardless, PressTV - Chomsky: US-led Afghan war, criminal If you can cut down Noam Chomsky, who initially stated to the effect that it did not matter whether the government perpetrated the attacks or not because the results are the same. Which was viewed as a dispute of 9-11 truth...

Now, whether you agree or disagree with Noam Chomsky, he has a VERY WELL researched viewpoint and IS well respected in his field.... and as it's been pointed out NO MATTER where you look concerning 9-11 there's something questionable that arises or some evidence of a cover-up, admissions of cover-ups and lies, distortions, etc... The ONLY reason the official version has any legs to stand on is because people bought into the lies. Literally the reverse of the type of attitude that came about when people came out saying the earth was round the 'flat earthers' (as we would call them today)... though much less in extreme.

Especially given the push for science on one side of the mouth, yet rejecting the principle's of the scientific method that were IGNORED in the NIST reports (which at the very least would have TESTED for explosive materials merely for scientific scrutiny), and the commission report through it's lack of subpoena powers was impotent to find real answers.

BUT, if you raise ANY doubts, about these stories you are demonized first and the position handled in an 'if there's time left' fashion, which in EVERY CASE glosses over the one minute detail of the explanation that violates other aspects of the explanation and focuses on the singular issues rather then the tapestry of information and evidence.
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,753
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"NASA director" =/= structural engineer

Right... but he has 9-11 questions and doubts therefore he's a crazy tin hatter cook that's failed at life.... we should know this one already.

Let's see how else this is perpetrated :
ae911truth
- Gage is unqualified so the whole lot is insta-fail
- a few dozen people have managed to fake so the 1000+ that are real don't count
- etc

I'll keep this short for now.
 

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Right... but he has 9-11 questions and doubts therefore he's a crazy tin hatter cook that's failed at life.... we should know this one already.

Let's see how else this is perpetrated :
ae911truth
- Gage is unqualified so the whole lot is insta-fail
- a few dozen people have managed to fake so the 1000+ that are real don't count
- etc

I'll keep this short for now.

I used to never talk to anyone off the net about 9/11....but I am amazed to hear the reactions and how so many people believe our own government orchestrated it for middle east strategic reasons.

Just from what people say that I talk to....this country is on the tipping point of a revolution....you will never hear our controlled media speak of these growing thoughts....
 
Last edited:

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The problem is that it's not : 'they come to this conclusion because they are incompetent', it's 'they are incompetent BECAUSE of the conclusions.'

Rubbish B'man ... speaking outwith your sphere of expertise IS incompetance.

Making accusation without real evidence IS incompetence.

Using un-definative tests IS incompetence ... the list goes on and on and on and on ... that their "conclusions" are incompetent is therefore not unexpected.

We do not call them incompetent because we do not like their conclusion but rather that they have demonstrated time and again that they ARE incompetent, through simple things like Gages' Gaggle utter FAILURE to do adequate and competent verification ... that is not us not liking what they "say" but a PHYSICAL demonstration that they cannot do simple checks ... or Jones et al USING known poor tests and methodology ... that is not just us not liking what they "say", but again a PHYSICAL demonstration of poor and incompetent work.

Seriously B'man if their conclusions are so flawed by using flawed methodology why do you seem to think we are so naive as just to call them out for incompetence according only to "conclusion" ???

We are smarter than that you know !!!

Regardless, PressTV -

Seriously Press TV ... the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcastings English speaking branch station using an extremely quote-mined part of a bigger interview ... seriously !!!

If you can cut down Noam Chomsky, who initially stated to the effect that it did not matter whether the government perpetrated the attacks or not because the results are the same. Which was viewed as a dispute of 9-11 truth...

Chomsky has never stated that the governement had involvment in 9/11 ... that is the expected gross twisting of words commonly used by truthers.

No-where does he in ANY of his books, interviews, debates or talks make the comment of him saying he believes in any way that the US gubmint was involved ...

Here try find his saying anything like that ...

chomsky.info : The Noam Chomsky Website

Now, whether you agree or disagree with Noam Chomsky, he has a VERY WELL researched viewpoint and IS well respected in his field....

Quite so ... and yet he entirely DISAGREES with conspiracy ... he find truther claims without substance.

"On the conspiracy theories about 9/11, I'll comment, but reluctantly. There are far more important things to be concerned about, and these things can become an awful waste of time.

As for the theories, I don't think they can be taken very seriously. I think they are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of evidence, and also failure to think through the issues clearly
."

"Noam Chomsky: Hard for me to respond to the rest of the letter, because I am not persuaded by the assumption that much documentation and other evidence has been uncovered. To determine that, we'd have to investigate the alleged evidence. Take, say, the physical evidence. There are ways to assess that: submit it to specialists -- of whom there are thousands -- who have the requisite background in civil-mechanical engineering, materials science, building construction, etc., for review and analysis; and one cannot gain the required knowledge by surfing the internet. In fact, that's been done, by the professional association of civil engineers. Or, take the course pursued by anyone who thinks they have made a genuine discovery: submit it to a serious journal for peer review and publication. To my knowledge, there isn't a single submission."

He truly thinks 9/11 conspiracy theories are not even worth discussion !!!

LiveLeak.com - Noam Chomsky on the 911 conspiracy theories

LiveLeak.com - Noam Chomsky Denounces 9/11 Truthers

On 9-11, Noam Chomsky interviewed by Nicholas Holt

On 9-11, Noam Chomsky interviewed by Svetlana Vukovic & Svetlana Lukic

The New War Against Terror, by Noam Chomsky (Talk delivered at The Technology & Culture Forum at MIT)

He is scathing of American foreign policy and imperialistic practises and on the using of 9/11 for political means ... but he finds zero merit in any of the truther claims or inside jobby-job guff !!!

But I do find it amusing that truthers will use him to somehow as jam to their claims when he clearly thinks you are all nuts ... but then again by being extremely SELECTIVE as to what quotes you use it can (once again the inevitable cherry-picking quote-mining tactic so favoured of truthers) be made to "seem" he is in support of you when the reality is the opposite.

This shows my first statement correct ... truthers ARE incompetent !!!

and as it's been pointed out NO MATTER where you look concerning 9-11 there's something questionable that arises or some evidence of a cover-up, admissions of cover-ups and lies, distortions, etc...

And has equally been pointed out failure and incompetance are NOT the same as involvement !!!

Trying (rather feebly as you are here openly discussing this issue) to mitigate the level of failure and ineptitude after the fact is also NOT the same as being the author of the fact !!!

That you fail to see how failure BEFORE and AFTER the fact is not some sort of proof of
causation, shows more your own immaturity of logic and reasoning.

The ONLY reason the official version has any legs to stand on is because people bought into the lies.

Maybe because it was correct ... do you not see still that it is impossible to keep fooling all the people all the time.

You can fool some people some of the time, but you simply cannot in the reality of the world fool everyone ... and you and your beliefs B'man are the "some".

Now I know that the conspiratorial mindset seems to believe themselves keepers of information somehow shielded or hidden, by the utterly inane reason of us being too in awe or fearful of the "them", and that if we were only to "open our minds" to your truth then we would see what mindless drones and sheep we were.

Yet you forget the fact that most of us have heard what you have to say, the same things endlessly repeated for years now ... and still don't believe your "theories".

Yet that fails to answer why so little people whom have proven by ability to think deeply by reason of attainment of professional qualifications ... whom are more than capable of thinking for "themselves" and whom genuinely have nothing to fear from what you say STILL do not support you.

Now I know that you love to tout ae911 as to you having over 1000 "professional" people on there seems like a lot and yet that number is well BELOW one tenth of one percent of ANY of the relevent professions ... it is a completely INSIGNIFICANT level of support they have ... they just have not managed to garnish greater because they are WRONG !!!

Simply because you are unable to convince other people that you are right doesn't make you more right and everyone else more stupid ... none of us here B'man find yours or creatives arguments "compelling" because (despite creatives lame appeals to higher IQ) they FAIL at every standard of scientific, engineering and genuine inquiry.

You have flawed and false science ... you have great reliance on the weakest kinds of "evidence" and you have total dependency on "possibilities" as opposed to realities ...

If your theories did have validity then why have you to date failed to ignite the populace in general and why have you failed utterly to garnish a properly professional level of support from those considered REAL experts in the relevent fields ???

Why is every single one of the front faces of Da Twoof speaking OUTSIDE their fields ???

Does that not give you cause for concern that concerning matters of building forensics and collapse they ONLY have radio hosts, teenagers, theologians, low-rise architects, water-testers, self-appointed DJ's (CIT), etc upfront of the cause ???

Why do you NOT have people of the calibre of Bazant on your side ???

You (truthers), without any technical education comparable to the scientists that supported the NIST report, will call them liars and you fail to see the infancy of that !!!

Literally the reverse of the type of attitude that came about when people came out saying the earth was round the 'flat earthers' (as we would call them today)... though much less in extreme.

Why do people like you always like to equate yourself with stuff like this ... that you are the lone voice of reason swimming against the tide of resistance stuff ... :roll:

Especially given the push for science on one side of the mouth, yet rejecting the principle's of the scientific method that were IGNORED in the NIST reports (which at the very least would have TESTED for explosive materials merely for scientific scrutiny),

Why do you still state that the scientific method was ignored ... do you have the necessary education in science to make that claim ???

No, you do not ... and the simple fact is that NIST were not remiss in any part of their invesitgation.

You seem hung up on them having needed test for explosives citing ONLY eyewitness testimony ... the WEAKEST of all evidence ... so please do explain in what universe where there is ZERO physical trace of explosives in what would be an ENORMOUS demolition and why without that required PHYSICAL evidence NIST or anyone else should have done testing for stuff with ZERO physical evidence of ???

Do you test for a broken leg when examining your dental patient ???

Not without signs of physical injury to that leg you don't !!!

You are desperatly clinging to a non-issue here B'man ... for there simply was ZERO/NADA/ZILCH physical evidence of explosives present ... which would be impossible were they actually there !!!

Why can you not understand this ... are you so desperate to hold on to any point no matter how weak or impossible to keep alive the utter fantasy of explosives ???

and the commission report through it's lack of subpoena powers was impotent to find real answers.

Bollocks ... do you really think the conclusion would be different were those powers there at that time then ???

BUT, if you raise ANY doubts, about these stories you are demonized first and the position handled in an 'if there's time left' fashion,

And maybe so B'man because, like the Flat Earthers of today, you are just plain wrong !!!

The Flat Earth Society

which in EVERY CASE glosses over the one minute detail of the explanation that violates other aspects of the explanation and focuses on the singular issues rather then the tapestry of information and evidence.

Proper examination requires such ... just as looking at the "tapestry" of rape cases shows overwhelming men to be the cause so minute investigation shows not all men guilty.

Minute detail investigation AND the whole picture clearly show "outside job" ... period !!!
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,753
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
Making accusation without real evidence IS incompetence.

But we made the accusation that al-quaida perpetrated 9-11 without any real evidence of that... so what does that say of the start of the government investigation?

Using un-definative tests IS incompetence ... the list goes on and on and on and on ... that their "conclusions" are incompetent is therefore not unexpected.

Ya, um... I wasn't talking specifics, and was making the point that it's the belief that makes them kooks, not that there's any definitive way to PROVE they are kooks, it's just a blanket term to avoid dealing with the actual issues rather then the actual points raised.

We do not call them incompetent because we do not like their conclusion but rather that they have demonstrated time and again that they ARE incompetent,

You've explained how they make incompetent lawyers; you've explained how GAGE personally speaks out of his experience.... THOUGH, the principles of physics never change, only the scale and materials needed change... the point however, was how it's a demonization campaign... it does not matter how accredited a person is, if they are associated with 911 truth they are incompetent.

through simple things like Gages' Gaggle utter FAILURE to do adequate and competent verification ... that is not us not liking what they "say" but a PHYSICAL demonstration that they cannot do simple checks ... or Jones et al USING known poor tests and methodology ... that is not just us not liking what they "say", but again a PHYSICAL demonstration of poor and incompetent work.

Yes, and by saying 'I found a hangnail' and then use and twist that as a demonization of the entire group is pushing that incompetence... is it the legitimate renowned and accredited engineers fault that Gage engages in stupid tactics that hurt his cause??? Is it that engineers fault that Gage has slipped on his verification process in a few cases so we need not mention ANY LEGITIMATE signatories, NOR disprove their statements???

Seriously B'man if their conclusions are so flawed by using flawed methodology why do you seem to think we are so naive as just to call them out for incompetence according only to "conclusion" ???

Because you are looking at TOTAL IRRELEVANCE as a strawman to attack the PEOPLE involved in prominence of the discussion... RATHER THEN taking ANY attempts to actually HONESTLY disrpove their statements... WHICH, give how 'tin hatter crazy', foolish, etc, they are the EASIER it would be to honestly decimate the arguments...

But ITS CONSTANT, blending just enough truth into the lies so that it SEEMS correct.

We are smarter than that you know !!!

Yes, I expect that... which is WHY I KNOW that this is a DELIBERATE tactic... you've shown that you have the intelligence to grasp, YET it's just blanket denials of reality that might be uncomfortable...

Seriously Press TV ... the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcastings English speaking branch station using an extremely quote-mined part of a bigger interview ... seriously !!!

Case and point.

You claim 'out of context' out of hand... you don't even KNOW the context and you just ASSUME that it MUST be wrong because it doesn't come from your prescription dose of 'reality' from the MSM news services. Remember that one time you claimed out of context given several pages of the document showing the context to be PRECISELY the meaning that I described it as??

Chomsky has never stated that the governement had involvment in 9/11 ... that is the expected gross twisting of words commonly used by truthers.

Ya... they been twisting those words for YEARS, even though this was from an interview last WEEK....

No-where does he in ANY of his books, interviews, debates or talks make the comment of him saying he believes in any way that the US gubmint was involved ...

You're right... previously to coming out and saying 'NO EVIDENCE of al-quaida' THAT IS NOT saying 'big conspiracy'... BUT IT IS SAYING, EVEN assuming the official story is correct, that 9-11 was used as a PRETEXT BEFORE looking into the actual perpetrators.

ALSO, how can you claim out of context like this when it's 'simple question'... and there's NOT ONE of those details he mentions that is in ANY WAY inaccurate (though you need several articles from the MSM to demonstrate that over years).

Here try find his saying anything like that ...

chomsky.info : The Noam Chomsky Website

I'm well aware of Chomsky's statements... and I DO EXPECT (reading his previous books and his demonstrable knowledge of geopolitics) that he held his tongue to be palatable and to not ruffle too many feathers... but since I can't prove that... though even now he's not saying A THING about foreknowledge, he's discussing the AFTER THE FACT proof of wrongdoing. Going to war with 0 evidence is a bit of a big deal... at least it should be.

The thing is that EVEN THOUGH I'm no longer a fan of Chomsky (since well before 9-11) for him, this IS a step in the direction of the '9-11 doesn't add up crowd' (as opposed to 'alquaida did 9-11 so sit down and shut up crowd),

Quite so ... and yet he entirely DISAGREES with conspiracy ... he find truther claims without substance.

"On the conspiracy theories about 9/11, I'll comment, but reluctantly. There are far more important things to be concerned about, and these things can become an awful waste of time.

Yes... this was the portion of the quote I remembered.

As for the theories, I don't think they can be taken very seriously. I think they are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of evidence, and also failure to think through the issues clearly."

If you approach this whole quote from a linguistic point of view (his real expertise), his statements, while not endorsing 'conspiracy theories' is STILL much closer to a segment of 'truthers' then he is to the government version.

With a man of Chomsky's caliber mind, you would have to consider the potentials :
a - he actually sides with truthers, but is making a politcal / cowardly decision on his vocal opinions.
b - This is as he states (in honesty most likely)
c - He's making an economic decision understanding the minds of his readers and appealing to his perception of their beliefs.

Essentially ditto for the second one.

He truly thinks 9/11 conspiracy theories are not even worth discussion !!!

In many ways it's NOT worth discussing... and when he mentions this irrelevance he does so in a very specific way. One that doesn't so much denounces the 'conspiracy theories', but is accepting of the truly verifiable and known facts of the situation.

He is scathing of American foreign policy and imperialistic practises and on the using of 9/11 for political means ... but he finds zero merit in any of the truther claims or inside jobby-job guff !!!

Right... but what you describe is called 'profiteering' given the nature of the military industrial complex in america... EVEN WITH only after-the-fact knowledge.

But I do find it amusing that truthers will use him to somehow as jam to their claims when he clearly thinks you are all nuts ... but then again by being extremely SELECTIVE as to what quotes you use it can (once again the inevitable cherry-picking quote-mining tactic so favoured of truthers) be made to "seem" he is in support of you when the reality is the opposite.

Um... nice try, but NO. His statements speak for themselves... I had hoped you'd have gone with that... but thanks for making my points for me.

That you fail to see how failure BEFORE and AFTER the fact is not some sort of proof of
causation, shows more your own immaturity of logic and reasoning.

Except what that's a complete strawman and has drifted so far off the topic I was raising that the only response is that you are attacking YOUR STRAWMAN of my points and not my points.

Maybe because it was correct ... do you not see still that it is impossible to keep fooling all the people all the time.

No, but the lies are fooling less and less people ALL the time.... think about that.

You can fool some people some of the time, but you simply cannot in the reality of the world fool everyone ... and you and your beliefs B'man are the "some".

Which you state in complete defiance of the complete series of global opinions of the matter where it's averaged out at about 50% believing the official version and the remaining 50% as 'anything but' the official version (with 7% don't knows)

Now I know that the conspiratorial mindset seems to believe themselves keepers of information somehow shielded or hidden, by the utterly inane reason of us being too in awe or fearful of the "them", and that if we were only to "open our minds" to your truth then we would see what mindless drones and sheep we were.

BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

No, it's not even hidden... it's like before there was a 'CFR conspiracy'... this group of people didn't exist, even though their documents were public but not publicized, it was a 'conspiracy theory' to say the group existed. Now, it's publicly known that much of the government officials are members of that and/ or other groups...

It's being able to understand the networking of these vast and independent groups, the little details, like in america there are 5 media companies that control 98% of ALL radio, internet, television and print media out there (for market share).

Or, how there are 6 banks that are the biggest banks, and they all have membership in the pseudo governmental board called the 'federal reserve'... when the reality is it's much closer to a cartel or a counterfeiting scheme by definition.

The problem is that most people don't seem to grasp the importance of such inter-connectivity.
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,753
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yet you forget the fact that most of us have heard what you have to say, the same things endlessly repeated for years now ... and still don't believe your "theories".

That's fine, have your own opinion... draw your own conclusions... but let's not be delusional about facts.

Example with the Chomsky reference you could have said 'he's only saying there's no evidence of al-quaida, not 'massive conspiracy'' I would have been forced to agree... but still noting that something 'went wrong' on some level (S) to not have any proper evidence??

Yet that fails to answer why so little people whom have proven by ability to think deeply by reason of attainment of professional qualifications ... whom are more than capable of thinking for "themselves" and whom genuinely have nothing to fear from what you say STILL do not support you.

I wasn't about to change his words... though you did manage to change my words to make it out that this was my intention.

Simply because you are unable to convince other people that you are right ...genuine inquiry.

No, it's not a matter of 'intellect'... well, sometimes it feels like a factor, but no... for the most part it's just a matter of this strange belief that governments are benevolent. Not that they are necessarily malevolent, but they must be kept in check or like a fire can grow out of control.

Yes, but just because NIST has a good reputation and on the othe r99.99% of projects that reputation is solid, they were able to slip through, like a fart in church this pseudo-scientific hoax. I mean, you put just enough truth that it seems realistic, then you take a little leeway in a few of the assumptions, that you KNOW never happened, and you take 500 pages or more to detail it, the VAST MAJORITY only got the details from MSM... except the talking point of 'brought down by fire' was implanted into public consciousness before the reports came out...

It makes me want to get into the whole series of media examples of pre-implanting the images of the world trade attacks...

You have flawed and false science ... you have great reliance on the weakest kinds of "evidence" and you have total dependency on "possibilities" as opposed to realities ...

Reality : 9-11 commission report was rebuked by many of it's members after the fact... therefore it is UNRELIABLE. End of story.

NIST makes the 3 layered FALSE assumptions to come to the 'collapse initiation', it ignores any mention of details like FBI investigations, molten material, police radios, etc... EVEN THOUGH it had ACCESS to this information with which they could make a proper rebuttal. therefore, they lack any true scientific objectivity and the document is unreliable. End of story

Why is every single one of the front faces of Da Twoof speaking OUTSIDE their fields ???

Because they are the easiest to demonize so that you don't have to examine what the REAL EXPERTS are saying...

Why do you NOT have people of the calibre of Bazant on your side ???

Bazant would be called just as much of a douchebag if he came to a different conclusion... you'd categorize him under 'gage'.

Why do people like you always like to equate yourself with stuff like this ... that you are the lone voice of reason swimming against the tide of resistance stuff ...

Not a lone voice... CLOSE TO HALF of people believe ANYTHING BUT the official version.... Think about that....

Or the person that was viewed as number 3 commander of al-quaida months after 9-11, not only does he get in he gets the wined and dined by the millitary brass.

USDA still thinks I'm a liar because I posted the link.


Why do you still state that the scientific method was ignored ... do you have the necessary education in science to make that claim ???

I'm not a lawyer, but I still know when I cop is violating the law.

There's a certain point of basic understanding... there's an innate intelligence of people that let's them know what a fraud is when they see one.

No, you do not ... and the simple fact is that NIST were not remiss in any part of their invesitgation.

Ya, they had to publish their conclusions in a believable way then in the end they concede that WTC 7 actually did collapse within 3% of free-fall for the measurable distance... but that's not a problem... 3% free fall is probably wind resistance for someting the size of a building. It is a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to puliverize concrete under the force of gravity and see the acceleration reduced ONLY by 3%.

NOT POSSIBLE!!!! No matter how you spin it, it is IMPOSSIBLE VIOLATION of the laws of physics. END OF STORY.

You seem hung up on them having needed test for explosives citing ONLY eyewitness testimony ... the WEAKEST of all evidence ...

If the EYEWITNESSES are all saying 'ya sh&t blew up', that the MINIMUM that should be done is to test for explosives and write the conclusions (if you're going to be publishing a well researched document)... you would look into and discuss the molten metal, when it's brought up early on in the investigation.

It's not 'evidence'... it's ok, we got a bunch of people saying something LETS FIND OUT FOR SURE.

so please do explain in what universe where there is ZERO physical trace of explosives in what would be an ENORMOUS demolition and why without that required PHYSICAL evidence NIST or anyone else should have done testing for stuff with ZERO physical evidence of ???

The universe we live in where there was NO TESTING FOR explosives in the first place. A VISUAL examination IS NOT equivalent to a proper test for explosives... It doesn't matter how many people walked their dogs past the debris it was NOT included by NIST. REGARDLESS if it came out positive or negative.

Do you test for a broken leg when examining your dental patient ???

No, but you'd send him to the hospital to get his leg checked if him and other people are talking about how beat up his leg got...

Bollocks ... do you really think the conclusion would be different were those powers there at that time then ???

Maybe not BUT then we would have testimony ON RECORD.

And maybe so B'man because, like the Flat Earthers of today, you are just plain wrong !!!

The Flat Earth Society

Clever twist...

Proper examination requires such ... just as looking at the "tapestry" of rape cases shows overwhelming men to be the cause so minute investigation shows not all men guilty.

That's NOT AT ALL a proper analogy even...

What I'm saying is that if you look at ALL THE EVIDENCE and treat it all equally, there's not a reasonable person in the world that won't see that the government violated their trust... AT BARE MINIMUM.

You don't seem to realize that by denying the existence of literally dozens of different potential cover-ups, etc, by the government... you not only accept that this is somehow 'normal', but deny the ever increasing odds required of so many independent and coinciding coincidences... it'd be like the odds that I'll get on a bus that will be packed full of people I went to high school with... or winning the jackpot lottery for 3 draws in a row.

Minute detail investigation AND the whole picture clearly show "outside job" ... period !!!

With your laser gun type denial powers

DENY DENY!
DENY!
DENY!
DENY!
DENY!
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
USDA still thinks I'm a liar because I posted the link.

No, I KNOW you're a liar because you said you'd do one thing and did the exact opposite. That is a lie.

I also will point out that you admit that you are a liar.

Sorry, I don't have as much free time as you and have to limit my debating to those among us that have enough self-respect to stand by what they say. Only the lowest type of persons cannot keep their word; No, all you had to do was not post on a message board and you didn't have the scruples to keep your word when the only penalty for not doing so was to not post here. I can imagine what people who know you have to put up with. "Oh, B-man said he'd pay for dinner" meanwhile they are thinking **I'd better pack some dishwashing liquid; we'll be scrubbing pots and pans**
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,753
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, I KNOW you're a liar because you said you'd do one thing and did the exact opposite. That is a lie.
Oh well... everybody lies at some point like that... but you neglect the fact that I asked you to not look at my words, but to read the sources and make a counterpoint OFF THE SOURCE... did you do your part in that agreement??? No, not that expected much more.

I also will point out that you admit that you are a liar.

Yes... except I said "Fine, call me a liar, but at least read the sources see how much of a liar I really am." All you saw was 'fine call me a liar' and have been trolling around any thread I post in

Sorry, I don't have as much free time as you and have to limit my debating to those among us that have enough self-respect to stand by what they say.

Then why do you even bother wasting your time trolling around every post I make not even reading more then a sentence at best??? I mean seriously... Ok, I'm sorry that I started posting about 9-11 after about a 2 week hiatus...

Only the lowest type of persons cannot keep their word;

HAHA!!! I could think of a good number of people that are lower value of character over someone that once on an internet forum didn't keep his word to self-censor. Beyond that you have no basis through which to attack my character and self-respect... although you may simply be projecting your self-worth onto me...

No, all you had to do was not post on a message board and you didn't have the scruples to keep your word when the only penalty for not doing so was to not post here.

Wow... you're really reaching... so the real reason you won't actually address any points I make with counter-points and a logical and cohesive argument is because you're so deeply offended that my decision to turn 'I'm not going to post about 9-11' into '... for a few weeks'??

And so you're going to 'punish me' by showing yourself to be a troll who searches out where I post so that you can point out something irrelevant to the current topic??

I can imagine what people who know you have to put up with. "Oh, B-man said he'd pay for dinner" meanwhile they are thinking **I'd better pack some dishwashing liquid; we'll be scrubbing pots and pans**

And with the level of you demonstrated capacity to come up with cohesive arguments that are relevant to the thread and the issues of discussion, that take up more then 1 line of space, leads me to imagine you walking through school with your helmet on for safety, but I don't really need to make up attacks like that because your posts speak for themselves.
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Oh well... everybody lies at some point like that...
No, just you.

but you neglect the fact that I asked you to not look at my words, but to read the sources and make a counterpoint OFF THE SOURCE... did you do your part in that agreement??? No, not that expected much more.
Why would I listen to the words of an admitted liar like yourself?

Yes... except I said "Fine, call me a liar, but at least read the sources see how much of a liar I really am." All you saw was 'fine call me a liar' and have been trolling around any thread I post in
See above for an explanation.

Then why do you even bother wasting your time trolling around every post I make not even reading more then a sentence at best??? I mean seriously... Ok, I'm sorry that I started posting about 9-11 after about a 2 week hiatus...
Why do you continue to mention my name? What is REALLY sad is that often times when some people break their words they do so because of extenuating circumstances....the father who promises his dying wife that he'll send the kids to college and can't afford it....the mother who says she'll find out who killed her child but can't follow through....the quarterback who swears that his team won't lose another game only to come up short... The physical limitations overwhelms the vow. All you had to do was refrain from posting on a message board and you're too weak to keep your word and not lie. Pathetic.
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
But we made the accusation that al-quaida perpetrated 9-11 without any real evidence of that... so what does that say of the start of the government investigation?

How so ... for not only is there the express FATWA issued against the US by bin Laden, as well as him claiming, numerous times authorship of 9/11, there is also the MARTYR WILL VIDEOS of all the hijackers and that several people, including KSM have ADMITTED they were behind it.

We have numerous pieces of evidence, physical and metaphorical, linking al-Qaeda to 9/11 ... enough to convince a jury of Moussaoui's peers that not only was al-Qaeda guilty of 9/11, but that Moussaoui's association with the terrorists was enough to put him away for life.

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

There is, in the real world, ample evidence which has already passed the scrutiny of law.

Ya, um... I wasn't talking specifics, and was making the point that it's the belief that makes them kooks, not that there's any definitive way to PROVE they are kooks, it's just a blanket term to avoid dealing with the actual issues rather then the actual points raised.

Bull**** and you know it !!!

You've explained how they make incompetent lawyers; you've explained how GAGE personally speaks out of his experience.... THOUGH, the principles of physics never change, only the scale and materials needed change...

You see B'man, this is where you and Gage are wholly wrong for Gage does NOT have the necessary technical expertise to properly assess what he is spouting ... and nothing he says is valid in the sense of principles of physics ... for he never explains how explosives can be used in such a HUGE structure and not blow out every window for blocks as well as bursting eardrums ... simple things like that are ignored, for if he had to deal with them then his whole theories would be shown for the idiocy they are !!!

Do you never wonder why Gage never gets involved in the Pentagon or Shanksville side of things ... he stick rigidly to the WTC ... and yet IF they were deliberate then so should the others !!!

Seems he also is making a tidy sum from ae911 ... having no job now he is funded entirely by donations ... last year garnishing $75,450 for "personal" salary which works out at 21% of all revenues recieved.

AE911Truth.INFO » $75,450

AE911Truth.INFO » AE911Truth 2007 Form 990-EZ

ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9-11 TRUTH INC [26-1532493] GuideStar Report

And is comprable to what other architects earn ... $78,880 per annum ... so seems he is still as comfortable financially as before, fighting for Da Twoof has cost him nothing then ...

Architects, Except Landscape and Naval

the point however, was how it's a demonization campaign... it does not matter how accredited a person is, if they are associated with 911 truth they are incompetent.

If incompetence is proven then they really are incompetent, guilty by association ... how is that demonization ???

If you can clearly show that someone FAILS in something ... pointing that out is not a smear campaign.

If you fail in an exam, you fail ... saying so IS a "truth" then and not some attempt at discrediting.

Come on here now B'man ... some simple old-fashioned common sense please ... failure IS failure !!!

Yes, and by saying 'I found a hangnail' and then use and twist that as a demonization of the entire group is pushing that incompetence...

Wrong is wrong ... and by not fixing these faults then, YES, it entirely shows a continuation of incomptence.

It is not as if this is some new finding ... the failures of various parts of his group have been many times pointed out and they FAIL to fix them.

That show gross incompetence ... for if a flaw is pointed out and proven then the onus IS on you to correct it ... not correcting flaws shows a wilful incompetence.

is it the legitimate renowned and accredited engineers fault that Gage engages in stupid tactics that hurt his cause???

First point out to one single renowned engineer on his list ... bet you can't ???

But YES ... as a group they SHARE collective responsibility ... more so because they are supposedly engaged in some noble quest, where they SHOULD be able to demonstrate they are above and beyond reproach.

WHY would you not "expect" the highest of all possible standards from this group, considering what it is supposedly about ... the vast majority of people recognise that this group is nothing more than a "cash cow" for Gage to get his passport stamped and hotel living paid for ... but you think it some noble group fighting the good fight ... so they SHOULD be better and more competent and more professional and more accountable and more qualified and have higher quality of standards than they have so far demonstrated ... FOR YOU ???

Is it that engineers fault that Gage has slipped on his verification process in a few cases so we need not mention ANY LEGITIMATE signatories, NOR disprove their statements???

Yes ... because as a group they SHOULD monitor the whole process ... it is a very small group really, and as a bunch of "supposed" professionals they should know how to do better verification and ensure any problems and failures are addressed.

Because you are looking at TOTAL IRRELEVANCE as a strawman to attack the PEOPLE involved in prominence of the discussion...RATHER THEN taking ANY attempts to actually HONESTLY disrpove their statements... WHICH, give how 'tin hatter crazy', foolish, etc, they are the EASIER it would be to honestly decimate the arguments...

Bollocks B'man ... do you suffer from some short-term memory problem, for I specifically remember doing a point-by-point debunk of their list of "claims".

I showed where their science and understanding was wrong ... once again, to preserve your ego you have entirely ignored and avoided it.

This discussion (here and now) is more about the principles of the group themselves ... for you to try to deflect from that by calling my arguments your regular "strawman" shows a certain desperation and weak defence ... as well as the supreme irony of you calling me out for this when your replies are mostly mired in a bog of esoteric psycho-babble which avoids direct answers to direct questions.

But NONE of that detracts from that if the PEOPLE involved are incompetent then their findings and claims will also show such too.

Ergo, pointing out personal incompetence IS part of a wider debate regarding their work too, this argument against them still counts B'man !!!
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Yes, I expect that... which is WHY I KNOW that this is a DELIBERATE tactic... you've shown that you have the intelligence to grasp, YET it's just blanket denials of reality that might be uncomfortable...

Why do young people do this ****e ... B'man I am a mother, grand-mother and with the benefit and hindsight of a career in a scientific/medical field there is simply NOTHING about human nature or scientific principles you can either teach me or that I feel "uncomfortable" with.

Your jejune understanding of the world holds no fear for me ... I am a wise old bird, with greater insight into this world than you presently have.

OnE day you may have developed the maturation of logic to see this ... but to me you are still like the child whom does not yet "grasp" how to tie his shoelaces !!!

Sorry B'man ... but I "fear" nothing, especially anything you have to say, you will provide no great insight or tutelage into the workings of this world or humanity ... you are commiting that great mistake of many young people in thinking that as you have learnt a little you "know" a lot !!!

You claim 'out of context' out of hand... you don't even KNOW the context and you just ASSUME that it MUST be wrong because it doesn't come from your prescription dose of 'reality' from the MSM news services.

And how so ... did I NOT qualify it with saying that they cherry-picked parts of a longer more explanative interview ???

Do you even know which interview this came from ???

Remember that one time you claimed out of context given several pages of the document showing the context to be PRECISELY the meaning that I described it as??

Nope !!!

Refresh my old memory !!!

Ya... they been twisting those words for YEARS, even though this was from an interview last WEEK....

Ah! so you can only twist "old" words ... gotcha !!!

You're right... previously to coming out and saying 'NO EVIDENCE of al-quaida' THAT IS NOT saying 'big conspiracy'... BUT IT IS SAYING, EVEN assuming the official story is correct, that 9-11 was used as a PRETEXT BEFORE looking into the actual perpetrators.

And once again B'man, HOW is using the event AFTERWARDS somehow proof of you doing it ???

You keep (as usual) dodging questions asked DIRECTLY of you ... why ???

Do you just not have any good answer or is it, more likely, that in answering would mean you facing a few uncomfortable truths about yourself ???

ALSO, how can you claim out of context like this when it's 'simple question'...

That was just the name of the programme itself !!!

and there's NOT ONE of those details he mentions that is in ANY WAY inaccurate (though you need several articles from the MSM to demonstrate that over years).

But the MSM is just my prescription "dose of reality", isn't it B'man, so what would looking over this show then ...:roll:

I'm well aware of Chomsky's statements... and I DO EXPECT (reading his previous books and his demonstrable knowledge of geopolitics) that he held his tongue to be palatable and to not ruffle too many feathers...


Ah! Chomsky doesn't like to "ruffle" feathers which must be why he was severely castigated by many over his DENIAL of the Kymer Rouge regime and the "killing fields" of Cambodias very existance ...

Chomsky lies: denial of the Khmer Rouge holocaust in Cambodia.

Noam Chomsky on Cambodia

but since I can't prove that...

And B'man this is the entire crux of everything ... you cannot prove anything in what you say for you exist solely in Suppositionville.

To you, the fact that something is merely "possible" is enough in your mind to make it reality ... but some others of us, are more sagacious than that and have higher demands of proof than mere possibility.

Possibilities are NOT the same as probabilites ... this is a lesson you need learn !!!

The thing is that EVEN THOUGH I'm no longer a fan of Chomsky (since well before 9-11) for him, this IS a step in the direction of the '9-11 doesn't add up crowd' (as opposed to 'alquaida did 9-11 so sit down and shut up crowd),

How so ... that is entirely "your" interpretation ... and as usual it is simplistic and wrong.

Chomsky fully believes the US had no significant evidence to connect Afghanistan to 9/11 at the TIME of the invasion, but that there is ample evidence of it being an attack BY al-Qaeda ... he's just talking about what has been uncovered about the Al-Qaeda network after 9/11, and that it didn't really exist as a network prior to 2001.

He is saying that Al-Qaeda cells are really just individuals connected by an idea rather than a solid structure, that there's no "army" of terrorists.

Note that he isn't saying anyone other than Muslim extremists committed the terrorist attacks, just not the Muslim extremists in Afghanistan.

Chomsky, in effect says that, according to the FBI, the operational planning and preparation of 9/11 wasn't done by residents of Afghanistan, and that therefore the Taliban are not to be blamed with hosting that particular terror cell ... because that operational cell were residents of Germany and then the United Arab Emirates.




The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda's Road to 9/11: Amazon.co.uk: Lawrence Wright: Books

If you approach this whole quote from a linguistic point of view (his real expertise), his statements, while not endorsing 'conspiracy theories' is STILL much closer to a segment of 'truthers' then he is to the government version.

"Oh! what a tangled web we weave when at first we practice to decieve"

You are so,so, so, so wrong B'man, for Chomsky finds truther arguments entirely WITHOUT merit ... he does, strongly, make the case that trying to avoid examination of incompetance and failure is something that does need addressed without that meaning conspiracy is correct.

You can attempt to spin linguistically all you want B'man, but the simple reality is Chomsky thinks truthers are all nuts ... it takes a special kind of obtuse to spin that "into" support !!!

With a man of Chomsky's caliber mind, you would have to consider the potentials :

The man CLEARLY thinks your nuts ... how vapid is it to try to place yourselves in a positive of light from that ... he clearly and unequivocably says you FAIL to understand your case never mind present it properly.

How delusive does someone have to be to think that "support" ???

Chomsky clearly, unequivocably, indubitably, manifestly thinks truthers are wrong ... how can you twist it to make it different, what sort of convoluted mental gymnastics are required to justify within yourself that he is on your side ???

The man is a plain speaker ... he says your nuts ... how much clearer can it be said ???

(The rest of this part of your reply is just your usual attempt at psuedo-intellectualism and esoterism.)

No, but the lies are fooling less and less people ALL the time.... think about that.

And how so ... for year on year support is LESSENING ... internet traffic is FALLING ... even here in the UK, and Europe-wide there is very little interest or activism from truther groups ... bare HANDFULS of people turn up for truther events ... your dying B'man ... fading to irrelevence to exist solely, like most other nutty conspiracies, the preserve of the disturbed and young rebellious teenagers for a while until they grow up.

Which you state in complete defiance of the complete series of global opinions of the matter where it's averaged out at about 50% believing the official version and the remaining 50% as 'anything but' the official version (with 7% don't knows)

Prove it ... bet you can't ... well, without those OLD and tired minor poll figures from years ago which have zero relevence to here and now, you can't !!!

The problem is that most people don't seem to grasp the importance of such inter-connectivity.

Oh! people certainly "grasp" this, it's just that as you get older and wiser you see it as having nowhere near the importance you, in youth and/or immature logic. "thought" it did !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 505

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
... but let's not be delusional about facts.

I leave that to you !!!

Example with the Chomsky reference you could have said 'he's only saying there's no evidence of al-quaida, not 'massive conspiracy'' I would have been forced to agree...

But the big problem you have there B'man is that Chomsky clearly believes al-Qaeda behind it ... originating from Germany and the UAE, but NOT from Afghanistan ... there is a difference !!!

I wasn't about to change his words... though you did manage to change my words to make it out that this was my intention.

Where ???

... for the most part it's just a matter of this strange belief that governments are benevolent. Not that they are necessarily malevolent, but they must be kept in check or like a fire can grow out of control.

And whom here is unaware of this ???

Why do you think we do not already know that government is a mix of good and bad ... and the need for checks and balances ... just like in the everday, there are good and bad people with good and bad intentions ... why do you think you are educating us with knowledge and insight we do not already possess B'man ???

You have an entirely and unjustified belief that we are all naive and ignorant of things ... it is not so !!!

Yes, but just because NIST has a good reputation and on the othe r99.99% of projects that reputation is solid, they were able to slip through, like a fart in church this pseudo-scientific hoax.

Then why can you not prove this "hoax" then ... why so long after publication can you STILL not point out one single factual thing they got wrong ???

How come, with the benefit of such "esteemed" expert scientists and engineers in various groups you have still FAILED to produce one single scientific paper which is professional enough to be accepted for legitimate review and publication ???

How come nobody on the truther side has won the Booker or Nobel Prize for demonstrating and proving there was this scientific "hoax" committed ???

Don't dare mention fear of career ... as that is compete crud, for anyone bringing such information to bear would be a HERO in science ... they would be lauded in nations far and wide whom would RELISH the opportunity and chance to destroy US credibility and influence on the world stage !!!

If such a hoax has been committed then how come truthers cannot take it to other countries where their careers and safety would be ensured and continuing ???

How come you always avoid answering this ... how can truther groups not get together and pool resourses to fund an independant scientific inquiry to prove this "hoax" in another country ???

How come you have not taken such a simple proposal to them ???

I mean, you put just enough truth that it seems realistic, then you take a little leeway in a few of the assumptions, that you KNOW never happened, and you take 500 pages or more to detail it,

Grow up B'man ... facts are facts ... nothing can change that !!!

And at the end of the day, I have always presented more factual information than you ... to try to twist that into this guff is moronic and teenage level psuedo-science because you need to deny what truths are told to you.

Your stubborness over-rides reason too often ... I do not need to embelish facts with garnish ... they stand on their own merit.

But you need to deny the facts in the first place, to preserve this mindset which you have held for so long, which is why you are trying this, actually very weak, tactic of negation ... seriously, grow up !!!

... except the talking point of 'brought down by fire' was implanted into public consciousness before the reports came out...

This just has to be "the" most infantile rationale ... ever !!!

Just how stupid does someone have to be to watch events unfolding live on television all over the planet ... where two heavy, large aircraft IMPACT two buildings ... which are then INGULFED in enormous fireballs ... igniting the many contents and floors of the impact regions ... which then show clear signs of huge FIRES ... to then later watch those self-same buildings collapse FROM the points of impact and fire ... and yet still not think fire had something to do with it ???

Just how stupid do you have to be to not see how idiotic that is ???

It makes me want to get into the whole series of media examples of pre-implanting the images of the world trade attacks...

Please don't ... for it will be the predicatably weak stuff like the Towers being used in movies ... it is infantile nonsense to think that the "ebil them" would waste time, money and effort into "pre-planting" imagery ... because if these people are so ebil, enough to do 9/11, they sure as Hades do not care enough to pre-plant anything ... that is comic-book thinking where the baddie always lets you know his ebil plan before annihilation !!!

187418.jpg


<Delusion> : 9-11 commission report was rebuked by many of it's members after the fact... therefore it is UNRELIABLE. End of story.

Then prove it ... prove they said the report "itself" was unreliable ???

Bet you can't ... for every single member of that Commission SIGNED OFF on the report "itself" ... that shows agreement with the report "itself" ... and what they were talking about was the PROCESS of acquiring information NOT the information "itself" !!!

NIST makes the 3 layered FALSE assumptions to come to the 'collapse initiation',

Prove it ... show where they do any such thing ... exactly ???

it ignores any mention of details like FBI investigations, molten material, police radios, etc...

Seriously. WTF has any of that got to do with engineering principles, calculations and equations ???

WTF would a police radio report add to an engineering report regarding engineering ???

EVEN THOUGH it had ACCESS to this information with which they could make a proper rebuttal. therefore, they lack any true scientific objectivity and the document is unreliable. End of story

Explain exactly how this infomation should have been part of a SCIENTIFIC inquiry into an ENGINEERING problem ... how does eyewitness reports and radio reports somehow need be included into or add to a report full of CALCULUS, EQUATIONS, MATHEMATICAL DATA and FEA's???

You really truly have no idea what an engineering or scientific report entails, do you ???

This is stupid B'man ... a completely idiotic point, and demonstrates the great flaw of arguing from ignorance !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 505

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Because they are the easiest to demonize so that you don't have to examine what the REAL EXPERTS are saying...

Which REAL EXPERTS ???

I would just like to point out here that just 1355 *ahem* "architects and engineers" worldwide is a pathetic laughable figure of supporters when approx 17,000 engineers are newly credentialed every year just in the US alone ... so which are the renowned ones of Gages Gaggle then ???

Saying what ???

And how does telling the truth about Gages' and Jones' incompetence stop anyone from listening to anything by a real expert ???

Are you really this dense ???

Bazant would be called just as much of a douchebag if he came to a different conclusion... you'd categorize him under 'gage'.

Aside from the simple fact that he would NEVER come to the same conclusion as Gage ... because Bazant actually does know what he is talking about !!!

Not a lone voice... CLOSE TO HALF of people believe ANYTHING BUT the official version.... Think about that....

Prove it and then I may "think about it" ???

Not that I have any worries there, for I am entirely secure in the knowledge that you cannot, in honesty and reality, do such a thing as prove this !!!

For the anniversary meet-up just 22 attended from London ... all just kids ...

***September 11th 2010 - London Truth Rising*** - londontruthaction.org - Taking Action for 9/11 Truth & Peace (London, England) - Meetup

In Glasgow just TWO ...

Sovereign Saturdays - We Are Change Glasgow (Glasgow, Scotland) - Meetup

With Birmingham having had nothing since last year ... when ONLY ONE ATTENDED ...

9/11 Truth Street Action - We Are Change Birmingham & Midlands (Birmingham, England) - Meetup

In Manchester just EIGHT, and again all young kids playing at being "radicals" ...

9/11 truth action!! - We Are Change Manchester (Manchester, England) - Meetup

All of these cities have a combined population of near NINE million and yet the level of support and/or action for 9/11 issues is shown to be negligable ... no-one is interested B'man, that is the reality !!!

WeAreChange Bedfordshire covers a whole county and yet they just have FIVE kids as "activists" and have done NOTHING since January of this year when they had a "SNOW DAY" and took two photographs of the two signs they pegged out about climate change ...

Snow day with W.A.C.B. « We Are Change: Bedfordshire Division

WeAreChange WALES supposedly covers a whole nation and again NOTHING happened ... they exist soley as a FACEBOOK page and have done nothing real ... not even having comments later than 2008 ...

We Are Change Wales | Facebook

Europe-wide it was the same ... internet movement and traffic IS nil, nobody turns up for street actions in anything more than a bare handful and they ARE all just kids ... it is a pathetic movement really, and I can guarantee when those kids grow up and leave they feel shame-faced for falling for such guff !!!

9/11 truth europe - Information from Alexa Internet

http://911truth.eu/forum/

9/11 Truth Europe | Welcome to 911truth.eu

Hopefully you notice too how most of these groups are moving away from 9/11 and focusing more on other things like anti-globalisation and anti-war footings ... tells me and most other people support for 9/11 conspiracy if falling ... fast !!!

Confessions of an Ex-Truther: To Noah P. Tefft, cofounder 9/11 Truth UAlbany

Ae911truth.org Site Info

buildingwhatcheeznov910.jpg


Seriously B'man 9/11 truthers are wholeheartedly considered a joke and bunch of idiots ... a tiny flea on the dogs body of politics and world issues !!!

Or the person that was viewed as number 3 commander of al-quaida months after 9-11, not only does he get in he gets the wined and dined by the millitary brass.

What has that got to do with 9/11 ???

That politics is a dirty business is not unknown to us or unexpected ... so how does any of this relate to the ebil gubmint doing 9/11 ???

I'm not a lawyer, but I still know when I cop is violating the law.

You only think you know, for aside from some very commonly held laws your understanding is low, with no deep insight or finesse ,and, as such, still holds no real validity or commonality with a real lawyer.

Weak non-issue here B'man !!!

There's a certain point of basic understanding...

Bollocks ... some things NEED a higher level of techncal understanding to legitimately say that !!!

there's an innate intelligence of people that let's them know what a fraud is when they see one.

So that is why so many fall for all kinds of different scams, from fake lotteries to 419 scams, false bank sites wanting updated information (for your security) to identify fraud, and that is why fraud is one of the fastest growing crimes ... because people have an "innate" sense of fraud ... don't make me laugh !!!

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/11/cifas-reveals-bleak-fraud-figures-235389/
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
444
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Ya, they had to publish their conclusions in a believable way

B'man it is easy to make claims against technical and scientific reports based on untutoured appearances ... throw in a healthy dose of basic ignorance ... which some see as not being ignorance as from garnishing a little information by watching things like TV and the Internet which give TASTES of many experiences ... some people take that TINY exposure and assume they therefore have a real good grip on how these things really work !!!

They don't recognize that that TINY exposure is not enough and so have a distorted level of their own competence.

So, now that they "know it all", they can develop various viewpoints and assumptions, and arguments about the subject.

The simple FACT that they really aren't "experts" or even very knowledgable on the subject, doesn't matter.

They saw it on YouTube , Google videos, blogs ... after all !!!

Real knowledge, developed in an education somewhere BEYOND school doesn't count to the shallow thinker.

The intricate, detailed knowledge and experience base of the experts is seen as "superfluous" in the argument.

Some things require a decent KNOWLEDGE base to argue, and many just don't either have that nor wish to gain it.

Some know little (if any) and erroneously ASSUME that what they THINK or can "SEE" is sufficient.

And that is blatant ignorance B'man ... so, remind me again of what tutoring or expertise in science or engineering gives you the ability to "judge" the validity of a scientific standard engineering report ???

then in the end they concede that WTC 7 actually did collapse within 3% of free-fall for the measurable distance... but that's not a problem... 3% free fall is probably wind resistance for someting the size of a building.

See this is where you go completely wrong too ... WTC 7 did not collapse within 3% of freefall ... a SMALL PART of WTC 7 did ... what part of small means the entire building ???

158844021.jpg


626148965.gif


It is a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to puliverize concrete under the force of gravity and see the acceleration reduced ONLY by 3%.

How so ... do explain ???

NOT POSSIBLE!!!! No matter how you spin it, it is IMPOSSIBLE VIOLATION of the laws of physics. END OF STORY.

And you think this how ... because a conspiracy site told you ... NOT because of your articulation of physics and your own calculations anyway !!!

Explain how it is impossible for a small section to fall such ... EXACTLY B'man not the old regurgitation of conspiracy sites ... but using physics language and data ???

Yes, isn't it funny that there is no resistance after things BUCKLE, but there is just before ???

You should by now have learned enopugh about failure modes to understand that when something buckles it offers almost zero resistance ... which simply and elegantly explains why there was a TINY period of virtually no resistance at a TINY portion of the building over a TINY part of the collapse times ... a part inside buckled earlier than the rest

Funny how physics works, innit ???

If the EYEWITNESSES are all saying 'ya sh&t blew up', that the MINIMUM that should be done is to test for explosives

Why ... does eyewitness testimony supercede physical signs of explosives ???
 
Top Bottom