Who Are These People?

[sKiTzo]

Why do you refuse to admit buildings have collapsed due to fire?

Refer to post 180. I scored major points providing irrefutable evidence which I derived from the very evidence you or someone else had posted that was supposed to prove that similar collapses have occurred. I've reposted a few times and noone will address it. Each posting of it is met with cricket sounds which must mean that we can move on. Similar collapses have not occurred has now been estzblished.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Refer to post 180. I scored major points providing irrefutable evidence which I derived from the very evidence you or someone else had posted that was supposed to prove that similar collapses have occurred. I've reposted a few times and noone will address it. Each posting of it is met with cricket sounds which must mean that we can move on. Similar collapses have not occurred has now been estzblished.

We refuse because most of us see this as nothing but more conspiracy theory nonsense.

There are several things I have learned over the years. And one is that you can never talk sense to a conspiracy theorist.

Another, is that conspiracy theorists travel in packs.

Yet another, is that once you have identified a conspiracy theorist, you will normally discover that they have rarely met a conspiracy they don't like. In fact, the CT threads are full of the same people posting over and over again. Vapor Trails, JFK, Moon Landing, 9-11, the list just goes on and on and on. I am among those that considered people that hold such fanatical beliefs to be a sign of mental illness.

Personality and Conspiracy Theories: What Your Beliefs Say About You | Psychology Today

Field Guide to the Conspiracy Theorist: Dark Minds | Psychology Today

Then after the above article, you ironically get "Alex Jones Prison Planet", which goes and claims that the article itself is part of a conspiracy theory (with paragraphs that are nothing but single gigantic run-on sentences). In fact, the first several paragraphs are nothing but horribly long and disjointed sentences that attack the article because it refuses to accept the conspiracy theories of this site.

The nature of this vicious hit piece (PDF link) is confirmed when Gartner laments that Jones refused to provide him with phone numbers for friends he grew up with, presumably frustrated that he couldn’t dig up some dirt from an old girlfriend to throw into the mix of what is nothing more than a personal attack on Jones’ character, and a complete departure from any debate about the issues Jones covers on his radio show, which is the phony pretext that Gartner used in order to secure the interview in the first place.

Prison Planet.com » Psychology Today Hit Piece Labels Conspiracy Thinking A Psychotic Illness

This is why the majority of us simply shake our heads and laugh at such claims. And the more the Conspiricy Theorists scream that they are not the crazy ones, the more that they show to us that they are.

9/11, Truthers, "70% would vote for XXX XXXX if not for a conspiracy", October Surprise, the list to me just goes on and on and on. And I have almost never met a conspiracy theorist that believes just one, they always believe in multiple conspiracies.

 

[sKiTzo]

What a dishonest little conspiracist you are ... you IGNORE the video by the HOAX MAKER.

Now you might be able to "pretend" to yourself it doesn't exist and that you haven't been shown wholly wrong ... but cold harsh reality of black-and-white shows it does and that you HAVE been proven wrong ... you are just willfully "pretending" not to see it ... shows how little you have !!!

Refer to post 212 where I easily debunked this, This guy is a hoaxer alright, but the hoax is THIS video, not the original footage of exploding charges. You get the award for providing the most easily debunkable evidence. I find it strange that you so readily accept this feeble attempt to refute the smoking gun, but will deem evidence I have posted from scientists as unworthy. I posted a video that showed the FDNY firemen describing the bombs they saw and heard, and you "debunked" it by saying that I couldn't tell you their names. Then you post ridiculously weak "evidence" consisting of 95% statements that are unbacked, and then you pretend you scored points. Refer to post #212 to see why the "hoax" is on you!

 

[sKiTzo]

You obviously are a bad reader. I said for non-members and members can log out and pose as non-members, thus gaining this ability.
This is why I avoid trying to engage any conspiracy theorist. Simple things suddenly becomes hard to explain

Well, there you go. I had no idea that you could do that and never really thought about it. The only reason someone would do that is if they didn't care about the issue at hand. I, personally, want to see true and accurate poll results.

 

[sKiTzo]

Refer to post 212 where I easily debunked this, This guy is a hoaxer alright, but the hoax is THIS video, not the original footage of exploding charges. You get the award for providing the most easily debunkable evidence. I find it strange that you so readily accept this feeble attempt to refute the smoking gun, but will deem evidence I have posted from scientists as unworthy. I posted a video that showed the FDNY firemen describing the bombs they saw and heard, and you "debunked" it by saying that I couldn't tell you their names. Then you post ridiculously weak "evidence" consisting of 95% statements that are unbacked, and then you pretend you scored points. Refer to post #212 to see why the "hoax" is on you!

He posted this video on September 22nd, 2011. He says he included a message in the original "hoax" video that "he made". Some sideways lettering on the right side of the screen that says "this is a hoax nutjob" (or something to that effect). Simply post a link to the original hoax video that shows the secret message and you win! The date posted has to be before September 22nd, 2011. Good luck on that one!!

 

[sKiTzo]

conspiracy theorists travel in packs.

Obviously then, I'm not one of those. Amusingly ironic that every thread I've started, it has been just me against a "pack".

most of us see this as nothing but more conspiracy theory nonsense.

Call it what you will and pretend otherwise, but my "nonsense" meshes with reality and correlates to current events. I would not waste my time if the facts weren't there and were not being played out as we speak, I understand people do not want to accept what is implicated but it's a grave mistake not to. You think I 'm talking years down the line but they've already got tanks rolling down the street in St. Louis. They're getting ready to come around with our own military and try to take our guns away and we're sitting here arguing whether it's true or not. I don't wanna know what they plan to do after that. The only way we'll have half a chance is with numbers but, again, "a conspiracy so monstrous, noone will believe it exists" -J.Edgar Hoover Oh, I guess Hoover was a "conspiracy theorist."

 

[505]

Simply post a link to the original hoax video that shows the secret message and you win! The date posted has to be before September 22nd, 2011. Good luck on that one!!

YOU posted the video with the fake UFO and text... What the **** are you talking about?


ETA - Yup, right here:

Yeah, you're wrong.

Checkmate in 2 minutes, 25 seconds Click link below V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

For those needing an explanation of what you just watched - the first segment was a BBC broadcast that shows them reporting the collapse of building 7, yet building 7 is still standing in the background. The segment that follows is amateur video of building 7 collapse. This view shows the demolition charges. Sorry.... GAME OVER - thank you for playing

 

[Oozlefinch]

You think I 'm talking years down the line but they've already got tanks rolling down the street in St. Louis. They're getting ready to come around with our own military and try to take our guns away and we're sitting here arguing whether it's true or not.

And do I need to ask who "they" are?

And yea, those "tanks". Although they were not tanks at all. And it is not like there are never any kind of military training operations inside the US. I certainly have never been involved in massive convoys of heavy military equipment through the states of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.

Tank:

Not a tank:

 

[505]

And yea, those "tanks". Although they were not tanks at all. And it is not like there are never any kind of military training operations inside the US. I certainly have never been involved in massive convoys of heavy military equipment through the states of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.

Neither have I, and I certainly have never seen anything like the vehicles in your pics. Must be some sort of martian vehicle or something.

 

[sKiTzo]

And do I need to ask who "they" are?

And yea, those "tanks". Although they were not tanks at all.

yea they were tanks. They always learned how to drive them before without having to be on public streets. That reason is BS.

 

[sKiTzo]

YOU posted the video with the fake UFO and text... What the **** are you talking about?


ETA - Yup, right here:

Oh that's right (duh). Just refer ro the one I posted and there is neither UFO nor writing. Then, feel really dumb!

 

[505]

Oh that's right (duh). Just refer ro the one I posted and there is neither UFO nor writing. Then, feel really dumb!

2:08 - 2:09. It's right there in your link. Duh.

 

[Quag]

This is not a skyscraper. The contention is that SKYSCRAPERS have burned for days and never collapsed. We already know that 2 story buildings have collapsed from fire



Another 1 or 2 floored building.



This is a duplicate of the first one talking about the same 2 floor building.




This just links to a page that talks about collapses of small, cheaply made structures.




This was put out by Hughes and Associates who, after some digging around to make a credibility assessment, I found that they were contracted by NIST, who have shown only their intent to blow smoke up our asses. Nevertheless, I scanned the content of this link and had a hard time finding something that met the criteria of a TOTAL collapse, not just partial, and something comparable to a skyscraper in order to somewhat have similar thicknesses of materials, etc.. I found one - 9 stories - hardly a skyscraper but it would have to do because that was the closest I could find. It happened in St. Petersburg, Russia in 2002 and reported by the BBC, I could find no mention of it anywhere until I went to the BBC website and searched for it. I found it and thought I'd have to admit defeat, until I read the article. This will blow your mind that they tried to slip this in as "proof" that buildings collapse by fire. Nice try. Here is an excerpt from the article which says that the fire started because of a collapse, not the other way around!:

The first sign of trouble was a large crack in a flat on one of the upper floors. The top three floors collapsed within an hour, sparking a fire. The entire building eventually gave way.

and now the link: BBC NEWS | Europe | Russian apartment block collapses

Shame on you Hughes and Associates!! OOPS!


This was derived from evidence YOU posted yourself. It was an attempt to deceive us into believing that fires can bring down skyscrapers. They must have assumed nobody would try to micro-verify the info because who's going to question this official looking carefully prepared document by someone as official-sounding as "Hughes and Associates"? For most, the picture and headline will do. They counted on this. It really does look just like what they say it is until you actually read the article. So, you can't say it's not credible now because you've already endorsed it by posting it. You have no other option now but to agree that skyscrapers do not collapse from fire. If they did, Hughes and Associates would not have had to concoct this tomfoolery.

So if someone has any link to NIST they have to be in on the conspiracy and are to be considered unreliable but some moron who has 0 actual credibility ios to be believed???
Please come back to earth!
Please reread the hughes report they list the buildings that collapsed rom fire 100% CHECKMATE
Stop deflecting and admit buildings have collapsed from fire!
I have provided you proof I have provided you severallinks no moere changing subjects admit you were wrong!!

 

[Quag]

Are you suggesting people on DP lie in the polls? I've already challenged you to start a poll wherever you want. I don't care if you start one on the Mitt Romney homepage, you'll still see the same results.

You really really really need to understand how polls work before you try and use any to support your conspiracy theories

 

[Quag]

Refer to post 180. I scored major points providing irrefutable evidence which I derived from the very evidence you or someone else had posted that was supposed to prove that similar collapses have occurred. I've reposted a few times and noone will address it. Each posting of it is met with cricket sounds which must mean that we can move on. Similar collapses have not occurred has now been estzblished.

You scored 0 points I have provided you proof that you are wrogn and you are just trying to pretend it doesnt exist. Sorry but it does and you are wrong. As to crickets. I did mention I was going on vacation, sorry I didnt log on during my stay at the beach to point out how far from reality you are. I am back now to ask you again to admit that buildings have collapsed from fire and ask you to admit that any site that ios so incredibly incompetant to not realiz te that is either sompletely ignorant or purposly misleading or both.

 

[Oozlefinch]

View attachment 67132121

yea they were tanks. They always learned how to drive them before without having to be on public streets. That reason is BS.

OMG, what an absolute total fail!

Look, if you are going to claim that tanks were driving through St. Louis, then you had better provide a photograph from St. Louis that supports your claim!

Now I know I am in the military, and according to you I must not be very bright. But I can tell by the license plate of the car in that unsourced photograph that it was not taken in the US (European license plates are very different from those in the US). And a momentary look at the uniforms tells me that that photograph is not from this year, but probably more like 10+ years old (BDU and ACU look very different). You had better provide photographs that actually prove or back up your view, not just some random coprolite photograph that you feel like posting.

Now give us photographs of a tank from St. Louis, or this is pretty much over. This is why I almost never engage in debates with conspiracy theorists, they have almost no contact with reality. And the longer this goes on, the more I am questioning that fact.

I mean, might as well try this:

There are too tanks in St. Louis, and here is a photograph to prove it:

 

[sKiTzo]

OMG, what an absolute total fail!

Look, if you are going to claim that tanks were driving through St. Louis, then you had better provide a photograph from St. Louis that supports your claim!

Now I know I am in the military, and according to you I must not be very bright. But I can tell by the license plate of the car in that unsourced photograph that it was not taken in the US (European license plates are very different from those in the US). And a momentary look at the uniforms tells me that that photograph is not from this year, but probably more like 10+ years old (BDU and ACU look very different). You had better provide photographs that actually prove or back up your view, not just some random coprolite photograph that you feel like posting.

Now give us photographs of a tank from St. Louis, or this is pretty much over. This is why I almost never engage in debates with conspiracy theorists, they have almost no contact with reality. And the longer this goes on, the more I am questioning that fact.

I mean, might as well try this:

There are too tanks in St. Louis, and here is a photograph to prove it:

Hey, that's not St Louis! Thanks for pointing that out. I just posted the pic that was next to the following news story - I assumed it would be St Louis.

Military Training Exercises Bring Tanks To Streets Of St. Louis

Late last week and through the weekend, citizens of St. Louis, Mo., were told not to be alarmed should they see military tanks roll by their home. Even with this warning, though, some wondered why the U.S. Army was taking the vehicles off the base and to the streets in the first place.

According to KSDK-TV, Army specialists from Fort Meade came into town for a training exercise for members of the 354 MP company. As the reporter states, this “drivers’ ed.” for tanks will take place on city streets and the highway

 

[Oozlefinch]

Hey, that's not St Louis! Thanks for pointing that out. I just posted the pic that was next to the following news story - I assumed it would be St Louis.

Military Training Exercises Bring Tanks To Streets Of St. Louis

Late last week and through the weekend, citizens of St. Louis, Mo., were told not to be alarmed should they see military tanks roll by their home. Even with this warning, though, some wondered why the U.S. Army was taking the vehicles off the base and to the streets in the first place.

According to KSDK-TV, Army specialists from Fort Meade came into town for a training exercise for members of the 354 MP company. As the reporter states, this “drivers’ ed.” for tanks will take place on city streets and the highway

Nice, taking your "gospel truth" from a website dedicated to hip-hop music. That is a real rightous source there. And their use of an old European photograph that shows a tank is even worse. And you fif not even pick up on a key part in your quote. Here, let me show you what you missed:

As the reporter states, this “drivers’ ed.” for tanks will take place on city streets and the highway.

Notice, in the original video nobody calls it a "tank". So no, the reporter actually never stated that, that is the opinion of whoever made that article for your source. And certainly not the Sergeant that was interviewed. And they are in St. Louis to train a local Army Reserve unit. It is a lot cheaper to have a group take vehicles to Missouri from Maryland, then it is to take the unit from Missouri to Maryland for this training.

Once again, these were not tanks. I guess this should be a lesson to not take your information on serious news from hip-hop sites. They can't even quote an original source correctly.

 

[sKiTzo]

2:08 - 2:09. It's right there in your link. Duh.

Okay sorry, I had to adjust the contrast and there actually is a flyover of what appears to be a Northrop Grumman military aircraft. You think that's a flying saucer?? LoL I want some of what you're on. Also, even after the contrast adjustment there is still no "secret message"anywhere or anytime and you continue to avoid filling us in as to why the BBC reporter is reporting building 7's collapse with building 7 standing tall in the background.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Okay sorry, I had to adjust the contrast and there actually is a flyover of what appears to be a Northrop Grumman military aircraft. You think that's a flying saucer?? LoL I want some of what you're on. Also, even after the contrast adjustment there is still no "secret message"anywhere or anytime and you continue to avoid filling us in as to why the BBC reporter is reporting building 7's collapse with building 7 standing tall in the background.

Have you not watched the follow-up by the creator of one of the videos?

They Fell For My Hoax 9/11 Video - YouTube

First, let's look at the BBC Video. You have to realize, things like this are nothing new in the reporting of ongoing events. I remember individuals who were shot during the President Reagan assassination attempt being reported as being dead when they were not. And it was not all that long ago that the networks were telling everybody that 12 of 13 miners in West Virginia were recovered alive (when in fact, 12 of 13 had died).

Dead WV miners reported alive - WABC-TV Jan 4, 2006 11pm - YouTube

And almost anybody should be able to give similar mistakes made during live broadcasting of major ongoing events.

Now here we have a classic case of "broken telephone". The BBC was mostly getting it's information from other news reports, especially ABC. The major US networks had been informed that Tower 7 was in danger of "imminant collapse", and told that the area was being evacuated. The CNN reporting at the time claim it had either "collapsed, or was is collapsing". And that was typical of the reports of that chaotic day (much like the various reports of "additional hijacked airliners" flying around the country).

And then there is the second part of that video. Have you not even watched the posting by the person that made it? Here, let me link to it again, since you obviously missed it.

They Fell For My Hoax 9/11 Video - YouTube

This is what I find really amazing. You still continue to tell us we need to watch a video that even the creator admits he faked! And "truthers" continue to this day to post this fake video as "proof", and even explain away the plants placed into the video (you see a jet fighter instead of a UFO).

Watch this "how it was made" documentary, at about the 1:40 point.

http://youtu.be/k8VAsoVuShM

 

[505]

Okay sorry, I had to adjust the contrast and there actually is a flyover of what appears to be a Northrop Grumman military aircraft.

Hahahahaha. Priceless.

 

[Quag]

Hey, that's not St Louis! Thanks for pointing that out. I just posted the pic that was next to the following news story - I assumed it would be St Louis.

Military Training Exercises Bring Tanks To Streets Of St. Louis

Late last week and through the weekend, citizens of St. Louis, Mo., were told not to be alarmed should they see military tanks roll by their home. Even with this warning, though, some wondered why the U.S. Army was taking the vehicles off the base and to the streets in the first place.

According to KSDK-TV, Army specialists from Fort Meade came into town for a training exercise for members of the 354 MP company. As the reporter states, this “drivers’ ed.” for tanks will take place on city streets and the highway

Like everythign else you post either you take it out of context or it is 100% wrong!
Now admit buildings have collapsed due to fire!
admit admit admit admit admit!

 

[sKiTzo]

So if someone has any link to NIST they have to be in on the conspiracy and are to be considered unreliable but some moron who has 0 actual credibility ios to be believed???
Please come back to earth!
Please reread the hughes report they list the buildings that collapsed rom fire 100% CHECKMATE
Stop deflecting and admit buildings have collapsed from fire!
I have provided you proof I have provided you severallinks no moere changing subjects admit you were wrong!!

I said that NIST hired Hughes and Associates for the sole purpose of preparing a report that would convey the results of the research Hughes undertook to try to identify every building that has ever collapsed because of fire. Of the 29 they came up with, only 7 were TOTAL collapses and 3 of those 7 were the WTC buildings on 911. Of the remaining 4, one of them was a 5 story wood-frame building still under construction (wood doesn't count of course). That leaves 3. Of those 3, one of them lists the construction type and material as "unknown" so we can't compare that one - it was only 4 stories. One of the 2 that are left was the one in Egypt. It was six stories and made of steel-reinforced concrete. They said the fire was pretty much out when it collapsed and we know it didn't collapse by fire because you non-truthers have already made that pretty clear:

And yet even more fail for you ... the Mandarin Hotel in Beijing was a what again ???

Oh! that's right ... a steel-reinforced CONCRETE one ...

So all we're left with is the one that Hughes tried to slip in not thinking anyone would bother reading the article. They should've figured that someone with the extraordinarily impeccable debunking skills of such a stellar calibre would eventually come along and shed light where darkness they have attempted to create.

Now, how many does that leave? ZERO. ZERO buildings that have collapsed because of fire. Is there some other exhibit you would like to enter in as evidence? Because Hughes and Associates are DONE! I wonder if they lied knowingly in order to have at least one in there with somewhat similar attributes to the WTC, or if they just failed to investigate details?

 

[sKiTzo]

Have you not watched the follow-up by the creator of one of the videos?

They Fell For My Hoax 9/11 Video - YouTube

First, let's look at the BBC Video. You have to realize, things like this are nothing new in the reporting of ongoing events. I remember individuals who were shot during the President Reagan assassination attempt being reported as being dead when they were not. And it was not all that long ago that the networks were telling everybody that 12 of 13 miners in West Virginia were recovered alive (when in fact, 12 of 13 had died).

Dead WV miners reported alive - WABC-TV Jan 4, 2006 11pm - YouTube

And almost anybody should be able to give similar mistakes made during live broadcasting of major ongoing events.

Now here we have a classic case of "broken telephone". The BBC was mostly getting it's information from other news reports, especially ABC. The major US networks had been informed that Tower 7 was in danger of "imminant collapse", and told that the area was being evacuated. The CNN reporting at the time claim it had either "collapsed, or was is collapsing". And that was typical of the reports of that chaotic day (much like the various reports of "additional hijacked airliners" flying around the country).

And then there is the second part of that video. Have you not even watched the posting by the person that made it? Here, let me link to it again, since you obviously missed it.

They Fell For My Hoax 9/11 Video - YouTube

This is what I find really amazing. You still continue to tell us we need to watch a video that even the creator admits he faked! And "truthers" continue to this day to post this fake video as "proof", and even explain away the plants placed into the video (you see a jet fighter instead of a UFO).

 

[Oozlefinch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k
VAsoVuShM&feature=youtu.be

And here is the youtube username of the person who posted the original video:

Uploaded by TheLipperTube on Sep 18, 2011

and I wouldn't dream of not providing the link to see for yourself:

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

Okay, now is there anything ....different ? The one who posted the video isn't the moron who posted the hoax you fell for. Get a clue! It's unbelievable how easily fooled you are into believing something that's not there but you refuse to believe what your 5 senses tell you. Maybe you just need that sixth sense....

Wow, other then the spectacular link fail, you just do not get it. You have not posted the original video either. What you have posted is one of dozens of people who have copied his faked video.

Here is another.

BREAKING UNSEEN FOOTAGE VISIBLE EXPLOSIONS 911 CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF WTC 7 - YouTube

Notice, the video at the end, it is flipped 180 degrees, a mirror image of the first video. Does this alone not tell you something? The UFU is much more visible here. And now I invite you to go and look at the hundreds of other videos of this collapse, from multiple angles. Wow, no airplane!

UPDATE: Possibly FAKE! (Visible Explosions) NEW VIDEO SEPT 2011. WTC Building 7. - YouTube

Here is a different angle, notice, no jet fighter!

WTC 7 Explosion - YouTube

What amazes me is we have the creator of this video claiming credit, and you still insist it is real. There have even been multiple threads about this in various Truther web sites. With a lot of people claiming it is real, then slowly realizing that they have been fooled.

The source of the NEW WTC 7 video footage

This is why I reject conspiracies. You can even have the creater of a fraud telling you how he did it, and people will still believe it is real.

To me, this is kind of like the Cottingley Fairies. The girls who made the photographs even admitted that they were fakes, but people still believe they are real to this day. Some people just have such a loose grip with reality I guess that they want to believe anything.