It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Former George Bush Chief Economist Says 911 Was An Inside Job

page: 53
55
<< 50  51  52    54  55  56 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildb
a reply to: pteridine




If you have any solid basis for your position, state it. Thermite, explosives, rays from space, etc. As you stated previously, "suck it up."


What part of I cant do that do you not understand, trolling again..


I'm leaning toward rays from space...



(Have fun with that video.)

Ya anyway, people sure want to herd people into the explosives or thermite camps IMO. Choose one or the other I guess. Or the other one, the fire/gravity option. Man, so many choices what to pick!

I've always been bothered by crop circles, just like the pyramids at Giza bother me. Oh and 9/11. 9/11 bothers me.

A while back I watched a crop circle video (did I mention crop circles bother me) and in it some 'researcher' found iron micro-spheres in some of them. Interesting. Now maybe mother nature puts iron micro-spheres in everything like we put fructose corn syrup in everything, I dunno, I'm just saying I don't think crop circles are created by explosives, thermite, fire or gravity.

In fact if I had to guess what makes the really perplexing ones not made with simple planks of wood, I'd have to go with rays from space for 500 Alex.

Now when it comes to decent deception it's good to mix things up see. Have a bunch of stuff going on, some false some true but taken together just well, confuses you. Or you know, us.

There was a lack of heat on 9/11 for all the you know, explosions. Just like crops aren't burned when crop circles are mysteriously created. So they're finding some crop circles are not like the others and dare I say it neither are some building collapses, I dunno, you know?

What I'm saying is a crop circle is formed in a blink of an eye and no one really knows how. Just like a couple of buildings fall down in the blink of an eye and again nobody knows how.

But then people 'suggest' it's just some unknown pranksters out for a laugh good with graph paper and twine stomping their way through a field. Well ok. Some, possibly even most crop circles can and even have been created this way. That's like saying though that most building demolitions are caused by some kind of explosives right? Right.

So what we learning? You see a crop circle it was made by pranksters with planks of wood and if you see a couple three buildings come down it was done with explosives!

That's obvious, no?

Cheers




posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NWOwned

I'm thinking that airplanes and fire are part of it in the case of WTC. Then there's the key -- gravity. Some in Congress want to repeal that law but don't want to be known as light weights. Additionally, enforcement has always been a problem. Removing oxygen from the air to prevent fire seemed like such a good idea, it left Congress breathless.

Maybe I should go with rays from space, too. I heard that Judy Wood was a hot number in a previous life.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: NWOwned



... and if you see a couple three buildings come down it was done with explosives!


No, that it not correct. Explosives make a lot of noise, so please point out the time line where explosions are heard in the following video.



If you can't provide such a time line where explosions are heard during the collapse, the case will be made that there is no evidence of explosives.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: wildb

Not in this case because they did not collapse at near-free fall speed either.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: madenusa



The film is intended to act as a practical aid in combating the mainstream media's propaganda and outright lies concerning the attacks on September 11th 2001


What do you call it when 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim that nukes and space beams took out the WTC buildings? What do you call it when 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim that explosives and thermite took out the WTC buildings without a shred of evidence?

What do you call it when there are 9/11 theorist claiming that United 93 was shot down at Shanksville while other 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim that no aircraft crashed? What do you call it when 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim that missiles took down the WTC buildings and struck the Pentagon despite the fact that no wreckage of a missile was ever recovered at either crash site?

You have 9/11 conspiracy theorist claiming that thermite took down the WTC building and other 9/11 conspiracy theorist debunking thermite.

To sum it up, the 9/11 conspiracy theorist have shown, and proven, that they are more than willing to accept and pass disinformation and outright lies on the Internet. Do I need to post a list that backup what I say in that regard?



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: NWOwned



Now maybe mother nature puts iron micro-spheres in everything like we put fructose corn syrup in everything, I dunno, I'm just saying I don't think crop circles are created by explosives, thermite, fire or gravity.


Now, for a science lesson on how to create your own microspheres in your home and all it takes is a lighter and steel wool. Or, if you want to create microspheres in your backyard, all you need is a steel beam and a barrel of wood. Light the wood and after the fire out, count how many microspheres are in the mix.

Bottom line is, someone has done a fantastic job of taking 9/11 conspiracy theorist for a ride to the cleaners over microspheres and therrmite. Never mind that Richard Gage, Steven Jones and other 9/11 conspiracy theorist got caught lying about microspheres and thermite. Have you ever wondered why thermite is not used by the demolition community to demolish tall steel frame buildings? Think about it before you decide to ridicule something for which you are not knowledgeable enough to understand.

.
edit on 27-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




You may want no part of it but you, as a conspiracist, are already a part of it. "Recent work has provided some support for the idea that conspiracy theorists have particular personality profiles marked by paranoia and delusional thinking."


'The research showed that people who favored the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile'


The most recent study was published in July 2013 by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent in the UK. Entitled "'What about Building 7?' A Social Psychological Study of Online Discussion of 9/11 Conspiracy Theories," the study compared "conspiracist," or pro-conspiracy theory, and "conventionalist," or anti-conspiracy, comments on news websites.

The researchers noted that they were surprised to find that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventional ones.

"Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist," the researchers wrote.


Also, it seems that those who do not believe in the conspiracies were not just hostile but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. The researchers said that, according to the anti-conspiracy holders, their own theory of 9/11 -- one which says 19 Muslims, none of whom could fly commercial airliners with any proficiency, pulled off an amazing surprise attack under the direction of a man on dialysis (Osama bin Laden) who was living in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan -- is unwaveringly true.




If you have any solid basis for your position, state it. Thermite, explosives, rays from space, etc. As you stated previously, "suck it up."




Meanwhile, "conspiracists," on the hand, did not have to pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11. "For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb

From your previous post "Meanwhile, "conspiracists," on the hand, did not have to pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11. "For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said."

This certainly fits most of the truthers on this site. Very few can commit to anything specific because there is no "specific rival theory" that any conspiracists can defend. They have the conviction that the Government is hiding something which, as is seen below, is part of the delusional thinking that drives them.

In a more recent paper that references your referenced paper www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... we find the following:

"Endorsement of conspiracies, therefore, results from deference to higher-order beliefs and the failure to thoroughly appraise evidence. Thus, it would appear that elements of conspiracist ideation are adversative to conventional reasoning and scientific thinking."

This certainly fits the truthers on this site. Reasoning and scientific thinking are trumped by conspiracy beliefs. Further,

"Clearly, delusional ideation, and belief in conspiracies share important cognitive characteristics (i.e., unusual beliefs, magical thinking, fear of external agencies and persecutions). This is evident when typical features of conspiratorial thinking (worldview) are considered. Particularly, the conviction that unorthodox theories/explanations are true, in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence, and the presumption of deception are prominent features of conspiracist thinking."

I think that these papers accurately explain the psyches of many truthers.

As you have no theories that explain the events better than the NIST report and no evidence that the NIST report is incorrect, your position is also seen as being consistent with the above paper.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




As you have no theories that explain the events better than the NIST report and no evidence that the NIST report is incorrect



There is plenty of evidence to show the NIST report is false, and they have been called out on there lies as well.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



one which says 19 Muslims, none of whom could fly commercial airliners with any proficiency,...


Apparently, they had enough flying experience to do what they did during 9/11. Even Hani Hanjour obtained a commercial pilot license and then continued toward a B-737-type rating.

How difficult is it to fly an airliner? Let's ask this 7-year old girl and keep in mind that Hani Hanjour had over 200 flying hours.




posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



There is plenty of evidence to show the NIST report is false, and they have been called out on there lies as well.


List them and then, you can compare your list with statements from structural and civil engineers, demolition experts, architects, firefighters and other experts with no ties to the U.S. Government.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb



There is plenty of evidence to show the NIST report is false, and they have been called out on there lies as well.


List them and then, you can compare your list with statements from structural and civil engineers, demolition experts, architects, firefighters and other experts with no ties to the U.S. Government.


Yep, those are the people I'm talking about, for those who want to know google is your friend, why the nist report is false will do the job..



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



Yep, those are the people I'm talking about, for those who want to know google is your friend, why the nist report is false will do the job..


Now, let's take a look at the real numbers.



* There are 120,000 members of ASME(American Society of Mechanical Engineers) who do not question the NIST report.

* There are also 370,000 members of IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) who do not question the NIST report.

* There are also 40,000 members of AIChE(American Institute of Chemical Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report.

* There are also 35,000 members of AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) who do not question the NIST report.

* There are123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report.

* There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.


The Structural Engineering Community Rejects the Controlled-Demolition Conspiracy Theory

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

sites.google.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

vincentdunn.com...


WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

www.representativepress.org...


The World Trade Center's Steel Structure Was Buckling Before the Collapse

Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001

www.skyscrapersafety.org...


The overwhelming number of experts do not support 9/11 conspiracy theorist.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildb
a reply to: pteridine




As you have no theories that explain the events better than the NIST report and no evidence that the NIST report is incorrect



There is plenty of evidence to show the NIST report is false, and they have been called out on there lies as well.


I thought that might be your reply. I have you to thank for those psychology papers that explain why truthers don't propose and defend an alternate theory.

"Particularly, the conviction that unorthodox theories/explanations are true, in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence, and the presumption of deception are prominent features of conspiracist thinking."

"For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said."



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: wildb



...for those who want to know google is your friend, why the nist report is false will do the job..


Let's take a look.



Why did NIST not Consider a “Controlled Demolition

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because:

(1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors;

(2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers.

Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

www.webcitation.org...

edit on 27-12-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said."


This is only logical as the first step. I have posted my theorys, in written form and in the videos I post.

You OS defenders make me laugh , its so simple, apply Newton's Third Law to the towers and the OS goes out the door.



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildb
a reply to: pteridine




As you have no theories that explain the events better than the NIST report and no evidence that the NIST report is incorrect



There is plenty of evidence to show the NIST report is false, and they have been called out on there lies as well.


As expected. I have you to thank for those references that explain things.

"Particularly, the conviction that unorthodox theories/explanations are true, in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence, and the presumption of deception are prominent features of conspiracist thinking."



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence


Right, certainly applys to the NIST report..



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine




This certainly fits the truthers on this site. Reasoning and scientific thinking are trumped by conspiracy beliefs. Further,


Nothing could be further from the truth, in fact it is the science we stand behind, it is the science that proves the OS false..



posted on Dec, 27 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildb
a reply to: pteridine




For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account," the researchers said."


This is only logical as the first step. I have posted my theorys, in written form and in the videos I post.

You OS defenders make me laugh , its so simple, apply Newton's Third Law to the towers and the OS goes out the door.


Ah, yes. The "unconventional methods" theory that is so unconventional as to be indescribable. How do you think Newton's Third Law does anything to the NIST report and who told you it did?



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 50  51  52    54  55  56 >>

log in

join