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.

 

9/11 Conspiracy Debunkers

page: 21
24
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

You would think profits would go to legal battles to seek justice and combat all the government lies?

I still cannot wrap my head around the fact Pilots for 9/11 Truth were not the ones pushing freedom of information requests and fighting court battles to get the flight 77 footage released. You would think they would of fought that fight for bragging rights alone?




posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Start by showing what you think is false in the NIST reports and conclusions...... actual rebuttals to the scientific account of the official evidence and fact based and peer reviewed conclusions.

Show if there is any falsehoods in the Aegis vs WTC 7 Owners lawsuit in that both sides gave testimony on the validity of the NIST conclusions.

Then start supporting or ruling out nukes, thermite ceiling tiles, fire extinguisher bombs, lasers, missiles, holograms, dustification, buildings built to self destruct, c-4 covered rebar, fizzle no flash bombs?

Correct those that claim WTC steel was sent to China with no inspection and those who ignore the hand searching of WTC debris for evidence, remains, and personal effects.

Root out those that come up with sensational 9-11 theories to exploit 9-11....


Hey NF. Will try to address your 4 last posts: in this one.

Personally do not interpret this thread as being about the details of some 9/11 CTs, nor even about the validity, or non-validity of the NIST report. So am not interested in discussing them here.
There are many other 9/11 threads, where they can be discussed.

It is good to see that you do go-on to mention your motivations. Thanks for that.

You said that you like to correct those making false claims, and to expose some that may try and exploit 9/11.
You were discouraged from the conspiracist's side, by seeing some make false claims, and changing their tune.
You feel like you get falsely accused of making personal attacks, and that you must deal with hypocrisy.
Then you go-on to say: that at least a part of your belief in the official story, is because of the claims from the CTers that it was false, and/or they were using the term "pseudoscience", against the NIST report, and the CTers continued to change their tune.
Then again: you state that you think there were lies made by CTers about a few different details, and that they use quotes out-of-context.

Is that about right?



"Why would I trust the truth movement more than first responders and civilian eyewitnesses that were part of the tragedy on 9/11? "
Why does it have to be one, or the other?

Do you think that everyone whom disagrees with the official story, is automatically aligned with some aspect of the "truth movement"?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Of course it is okay for people to question. But when those questions are based on bad data and they refuse to accept the facts......



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

You should be interested in the truth and exposing those who exploit tragedy, ufology, cryptozoology, flat earth, mandela effect, 9/11 for personal notoriety.

Not conspiracies.....


"Truth"? Maybe... Not sure if we could all agree what "truth" is. That is for another thread.

Those whom exploit others, for personal gain or notoriety: am indeed interested in seeing them exposed.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Do you have examples of NIST pseudoscience or not?

Do you have examples of falsehoods from the testimony and engineering documents submitted for the Aegis VS WTC 7 Owners lawsuit that support the NIST conclusions. Or not?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit outside vertical column inward bowing and collapse at the towers from contracting floor trusses.

Can you discredit the numerous papers by Scientists for 9/11 Truth that proves a large jet hit the pentagon, and debunks missiles and bombs at the pentagon.

Do you disagree with Scientists for 9/11 truth that pentagon large jet deniers are hurting the truth movement?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit NIST peer reviewed research and journal published findings?

Can you discredit why I should not listen to first responders and civilian eyewitnesses over individuals here at ATS?

Can you cite where any demolitions shrapnel was recovered from the injured, human remains, cars, nearby buildings, the street, ruble at the WTC?

Can you create a credible argument for....
Thermite ceiling tiles at the WTC
Spray on Thermite at the WTC
Nukes in WTC 7 diesel tanks
Self destructing buildings
C-4 coated rebar
Fire extinguisher bombs
Fizzle no flash bombs
Missiles and holograms
Lasers and holograms
Drones
Dustification

Can you prove there were pictures of cut columns at the WTC by thermite and they were not cut by thermal lance during WTC cleanup. Or just another example of an internet hoax?

Like to continue to ignore the lies perpetrated by the truth movement that the WTC steel was not inspected? The lie WTC welds were not inspected? The lie WTC floor connections were not inspected? The lie there was no effort to recover evidence at the WTC?

The misinterpretation of one camera angle trying to say it is proof of an antenna falling into a WTC tower when all other camera footage/angles proves it was just leaning?
edit on 30-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Added last paragraph



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Or would you rather talk about Steven Jones, WTC dust experiment results that could not be replicated, and Bentham Science Publishing?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Nothin

Of course it is okay for people to question. But when those questions are based on bad data and they refuse to accept the facts......


Can see how it is frustrating to try and discuss with people, whom are using incorrect information, and not accepting information that is deemed to be facts.

How do you think we can all do better, than to merely concentrate on the detail, or data, that is causing the divide?

It seems that the more we focus on the difference: the less chance we have of finding common ground to help advance the discussion. This may be a generic statement, that pertains to many different subjects.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Seems you have no interest in exposing the lies and falsehoods of the truth movement. Your concern for "truth" seems disingenuous?

On the flip side?

You don't care there might be falsehoods in the NIST reports? You never researched the truth movement claims? It's a coroner stone of their reason to reopen the WTC investigation? You don't think the WTC investigation should be reopened? If you think the WTC investigation should be reopened, why?



edit on 30-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and rhat



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Ok. State a fact that is credible by the truth movement?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Do you have examples of NIST pseudoscience or not?

Do you have examples of falsehoods from the testimony and engineering documents submitted for the Aegis VS WTC 7 Owners lawsuit that support the NIST conclusions. Or not?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit outside vertical column inward bowing and collapse at the towers from contracting floor trusses.

Can you discredit the numerous papers by Scientists for 9/11 Truth that proves a large jet hit the pentagon, and debunks missiles and bombs at the pentagon.

Do you disagree with Scientists for 9/11 truth that pentagon large jet deniers are hurting the truth movement?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit NIST peer reviewed research and journal published findings?

Can you discredit why I should not listen to first responders and civilian eyewitnesses over individuals here at ATS?

Can you cite where any demolitions shrapnel was recovered from the injured, human remains, cars, nearby buildings, the street, ruble at the WTC?

Can you create a credible argument for....
Thermite ceiling tiles at the WTC
Spray on Thermite at the WTC
Nukes in WTC 7 diesel tanks
Self destructing buildings
C-4 coated rebar
Fire extinguisher bombs
Fizzle no flash bombs
Missiles and holograms
Lasers and holograms
Drones
Dustification

Can you prove there were pictures of cut columns at the WTC by thermite and they were not cut by thermal lance during WTC cleanup. Or just another example of an internet hoax?

Like to continue to ignore the lies perpetrated by the truth movement that the WTC steel was not inspected? The lie WTC welds were not inspected? The lie WTC floor connections were not inspected? The lie there was no effort to recover evidence at the WTC?

The misinterpretation of one camera angle trying to say it is proof of an antenna falling into a WTC tower when all other camera footage/angles proves it was just leaning?


Personally do not interpret this thread as being about the details of some 9/11 CTs, nor even about the validity, or non-validity of the NIST report. So am not interested in discussing them here.
There are many other 9/11 threads, where they can be discussed.

Am more interested in the motivations of posters to either defend the official story, or attack the official story.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Point to what you think is unjustly debunked from 9/11?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Seems you have no interest in exposing the lies and falsehoods of the truth movement. Your concern for "truth" seems disingenuous?

On the flip side?

You don't care there might be falsehoods in the NIST reports? You never researched the truth movement claims? It's a coroner stone of their reason to reopen the WTC investigation? You don't think the WTC investigation should be reopened? If you think the WTC investigation should be reopened, why?




"Seems you have no interest in exposing the lies and falsehoods of the truth movement. Your concern for "truth" seems disingenuous?"
That is your opinion, your belief, or something you think is absolutely true?

Why have you gone back to making it personal?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Point to what you think is unjustly debunked from 9/11?


Trying not to point to anything at all.

Trying to take a step back, and contemplate the motivations of the debunkers, the attackers, the defenders,...



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Do you have examples of NIST pseudoscience or not?

Do you have examples of falsehoods from the testimony and engineering documents submitted for the Aegis VS WTC 7 Owners lawsuit that support the NIST conclusions. Or not?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit outside vertical column inward bowing and collapse at the towers from contracting floor trusses.

Can you discredit the numerous papers by Scientists for 9/11 Truth that proves a large jet hit the pentagon, and debunks missiles and bombs at the pentagon.

Do you disagree with Scientists for 9/11 truth that pentagon large jet deniers are hurting the truth movement?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit NIST peer reviewed research and journal published findings?

Can you discredit why I should not listen to first responders and civilian eyewitnesses over individuals here at ATS?

Can you cite where any demolitions shrapnel was recovered from the injured, human remains, cars, nearby buildings, the street, ruble at the WTC?

Can you create a credible argument for....
Thermite ceiling tiles at the WTC
Spray on Thermite at the WTC
Nukes in WTC 7 diesel tanks
Self destructing buildings
C-4 coated rebar
Fire extinguisher bombs
Fizzle no flash bombs
Missiles and holograms
Lasers and holograms
Drones
Dustification

Can you prove there were pictures of cut columns at the WTC by thermite and they were not cut by thermal lance during WTC cleanup. Or just another example of an internet hoax?

Like to continue to ignore the lies perpetrated by the truth movement that the WTC steel was not inspected? The lie WTC welds were not inspected? The lie WTC floor connections were not inspected? The lie there was no effort to recover evidence at the WTC?

The misinterpretation of one camera angle trying to say it is proof of an antenna falling into a WTC tower when all other camera footage/angles proves it was just leaning?


Personally do not interpret this thread as being about the details of some 9/11 CTs, nor even about the validity, or non-validity of the NIST report. So am not interested in discussing them here.
There are many other 9/11 threads, where they can be discussed.

Am more interested in the motivations of posters to either defend the official story, or attack the official story.


I think I was quite clear when I stated from my conspiracy research I was outraged, with examples, by a "truth movement" that hides facts, perpetuates misconceptions, uses photos/quotes out of context, falls prey to internet hoaxes, the inability to police itself, and is biased in its research.

The false authority that the "truth movement" is more trustworthy than individual's accounts on 9/11.



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Point to what you think is unjustly debunked from 9/11?


Trying not to point to anything at all.

Trying to take a step back, and contemplate the motivations of the debunkers, the attackers, the defenders,...


If you don't have an example of something unjustly debunked, then all debunking is valid?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

So yes. It does have lots to do with false claims of NIST pseudoscience.

Ignoring the peer reviewed research and published journal articles by NIST. With no valid arguments to discredit the findings.

Ignoring the technical testimony from the Aegis VS WTC 7 lawsuit.

Not understanding a nuclear bomb would have caused radiation sickness and left fission products.

The history of the truth movement trying to stay relevant with spray on thermite, thermite ceiling tiles, fizzle no flash bombs....

The truth movement completely ignoring legal action and not filling freedom of information requests.

Botched WTC dust experiments.
edit on 30-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that

edit on 30-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Added not to be clear



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Do you have examples of NIST pseudoscience or not?

Do you have examples of falsehoods from the testimony and engineering documents submitted for the Aegis VS WTC 7 Owners lawsuit that support the NIST conclusions. Or not?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit outside vertical column inward bowing and collapse at the towers from contracting floor trusses.

Can you discredit the numerous papers by Scientists for 9/11 Truth that proves a large jet hit the pentagon, and debunks missiles and bombs at the pentagon.

Do you disagree with Scientists for 9/11 truth that pentagon large jet deniers are hurting the truth movement?

Do you have a logical argument to discredit NIST peer reviewed research and journal published findings?

Can you discredit why I should not listen to first responders and civilian eyewitnesses over individuals here at ATS?

Can you cite where any demolitions shrapnel was recovered from the injured, human remains, cars, nearby buildings, the street, ruble at the WTC?

Can you create a credible argument for....
Thermite ceiling tiles at the WTC
Spray on Thermite at the WTC
Nukes in WTC 7 diesel tanks
Self destructing buildings
C-4 coated rebar
Fire extinguisher bombs
Fizzle no flash bombs
Missiles and holograms
Lasers and holograms
Drones
Dustification

Can you prove there were pictures of cut columns at the WTC by thermite and they were not cut by thermal lance during WTC cleanup. Or just another example of an internet hoax?

Like to continue to ignore the lies perpetrated by the truth movement that the WTC steel was not inspected? The lie WTC welds were not inspected? The lie WTC floor connections were not inspected? The lie there was no effort to recover evidence at the WTC?

The misinterpretation of one camera angle trying to say it is proof of an antenna falling into a WTC tower when all other camera footage/angles proves it was just leaning?


Personally do not interpret this thread as being about the details of some 9/11 CTs, nor even about the validity, or non-validity of the NIST report. So am not interested in discussing them here.
There are many other 9/11 threads, where they can be discussed.

Am more interested in the motivations of posters to either defend the official story, or attack the official story.


I think I was quite clear when I stated from my conspiracy research I was outraged, with examples, by a "truth movement" that hides facts, perpetuates misconceptions, uses photos/quotes out of context, falls prey to internet hoaxes, the inability to police itself, and is biased in its research.

The false authority that the "truth movement" is more trustworthy than individual's accounts on 9/11.



Would you agree: that at some point, each of us must get past our outrage, and take a step back?
Is our outrage genuine and justified, or is it merely attached to a belief we hold, that is in contradiction?
What if your outrage is the result of you being baited, and to keep you in an emotionally reactive state, instead of a rational, critically-thinking state?



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

Point to what you think is unjustly debunked from 9/11?


Trying not to point to anything at all.

Trying to take a step back, and contemplate the motivations of the debunkers, the attackers, the defenders,...


If you don't have an example of something unjustly debunked, then all debunking is valid?


Sorry: that doesn't appear to be a fair judgement. (This is my opinion, and not necessarily truth.)



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux



I think I was quite clear when I stated from my conspiracy research I was outraged, with examples, by a "truth movement" that hides facts, perpetuates misconceptions, uses photos/quotes out of context, falls prey to internet hoaxes, the inability to police itself, and is biased in its research.


Is it true everything about 911 can be found from 911Myths.com, Gov. com, NIST, FEMA, everything outside of that are lies, correct?

Is it true there is no conspiracy of 911 and our government never lies, never have committed any kinds of crimes, and have always had the american people's best interest before theirs, and would never abuse their power?



edit on 30-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Nothin

So yes. It does have lots to do with false claims of NIST pseudoscience.

Ignoring the peer reviewed research and published journal articles by NIST. With no valid arguments to discredit the findings.

Ignoring the technical testimony from the Aegis VS WTC 7 lawsuit.

Not understanding a nuclear bomb would have caused radiation sickness and left fission products.

The history of the truth movement trying to stay relevant with spray on thermite, thermite ceiling tiles, fizzle no flash bombs....

The truth movement completely ignoring legal action and not filling freedom of information requests.

Botched WTC dust experiments.


Does your stated motivation, include other aspects?
Do you hold other beliefs, that make you feel obliged to speak-out?
Do you feel like you have undeniable Truth, or some kind of Absolute Truth on your side?



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join