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: 23
24
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


You will seem more credible and genuine when you start calling out the lies of the truth movement. No being obviously desperate to embrace any "smoking gun" presented on YouTube.




This was offered as a starting point to facilitate a common idea for debate. And it was completely ignored.

You that pretend to be here for debate are here to push a narrative and practice intellectual dishonesty. While completely ignoring the lies and exploitation of 9/11 by the truth movement. Pitiful that you have no desire to police or hold your movement to credibility.
Your off topic.


Because of your hostility and condescending comments towards others and myself, no one wants to have a discussion with you.

Again the thread Topic is about 911 conspiracy debunkers.

Credibility? That my friend is not for you to decide, that is for the causal ATS lurkers and readers.

I am in no Movement, and please stop making false allegation about me personally. Clearly you have an agenda here.
edit on 31-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 31 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: neutronflux


You will seem more credible and genuine when you start calling out the lies of the truth movement. No being obviously desperate to embrace any "smoking gun" presented on YouTube.


Your off topic.

Again the thread Topic is about 911 conspiracy debunkers.

Credibility? That my friend is not for you to decide, that is for the causal ATS lurkers and readers.




And I asked you what was unjustly debunked?

Not a hard concept...

Fizzle and no flash bombs?
Thermite ceiling tiles.
Self destructing buildings?
Ect.....



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

I think the op was asking why you care so much about debunking 911. I still haven't heard your answer. I've seen you derail this thread like every other one before. What is your reason for wasting your life on here constantly. Why would you be interested in something you know everything about already. I figured you wouldn't come on here like I don't go on flat earth threads. I don't go on there because I think those people are nuts. I wouldn't waste an hour of my life to try to debunk what people think. So what is it ?

Thanks informer for arguing with this guy. I love reading your posts



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Thenail



I wouldn't waste an hour of my life to try to debunk what people think.
Aw come on, debunking flat earth is just as fun as debunking 911 truthers, and not any more difficult. Just another group of people that don't know how the scientific method works.

I have a question for you, the following is an image used to perpetuate the flat earth theory, can you tell me what is wrong with it? If you think the flat earth theory is so wrong, you should have no problem telling me whats wrong with this image.




posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


Aw come on, debunking flat earth is just as fun as debunking 911 truthers, and not any more difficult. Just another group of people that don't know how the scientific method works.



Beating your chest and stroking your ego

Because millions of americans that do not believe in the OS narratives, you lump all of them as stupid, making false claims that they all do not understand scientific method.

That also includes Architects, & Engineers, who have written many technical papers on the WTC, that doesnt support the OS narratives.

Since when did you become the spokesperson for the dead Truth movement?

And you want to address my credibility?


edit on 31-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Can you even debunk that flat earth image Informer?

In your own words, tell me whats wrong with that picture.

And I didn't call anyone stupid, I inferred that truthers do not subscribe to the scientific method, big difference.


edit on 31-5-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:16 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.



Quoted myself to prove I have addressed why staring out totally new to 9/11 conspiracies my studies quickly lead me away from the "truth movement" to debunking.....



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

And less than 20 percent of Americans think the government was behind 9/11.

And the majority of individuals know to stay away from the less than credible truth movement.



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

You cannot cite one of my examples as being unjustly debunked.

The truth movement will not police itself out of desperation of finding the "smoking gun".

Thanks for proving why debunking is valid and needed.



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


And less than 20 percent of Americans think the government was behind 9/11.


Why do you care what 20% of american think? I sure don't.


And the majority of individuals know to stay away from the less than credible truth movement.


What Truth movement?

Where do you get your statistics from?

edit on 31-5-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Guess you can't tell me whats wrong with that flat earth meme...



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   
For those truly interested in a case study for real debate....

Scientists for 9/11 Truth supports WTC CD, but acknowledges the overwhelming proof and evidence that a large jet hit the pentagon. They have debunked other pentagon theories. They have stated that large jet deniers are hurting the truth movement. I disagree with them on CD. But glad they acknowledge how the truth movement hursts itself. Do the have valid proof and justified views?

What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth
www.journalof911studies.com...


It is clear that the basis for the Pilots’ claim that the 757 could not have hit the Pentagon is without foundation as it depends on a flawed assumption about the path the plane would follow and an incorrect g-force calculation. As the Pilots assert that they do not have a position on whether a 757 hit the Pentagon, their simultaneous assertion that the plane could not have hit the Pentagon, as quoted above, is contradictory. To hold that the plane did not hit the Pentagon is to adopt the only remaining position, namely that it flew over the Pentagon. This would appear to be an uncomfortable position for a team which has done much good work to obtain and analyze the FDR data files.
Members of Pilots for 9/11 Truth have had over a year to address these concerns, but so far have not shown themselves to be willing to consider doing so. Whether this represents the position of the majority of members, or just the executive, is not clear.59 It appears likely that the majority of members have not carefully examined the claims in their own website


Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate
By John D. Wyndham | Oct 7, 2016
www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...


Despite the clear evidence and its analysis using the scientific method of large plane impact, a substantial portion of the 9/11 truth movement, including accepted leaders and those involved in major organizations, continues to publicly endorse, adhere to, or promulgate talks, writings and films on false Pentagon hypotheses. Some simply offer criticisms and reject or ignore evidence that would bring closure to the argument. There is clear evidence by way of disintegrating truth groups that these endorsements and communications are injurious to the movement. Public feedback shows that the false Pentagon hypotheses undermine public acceptance of other highly credible scientific findings, such as the demolitions of the Twin Towers and Building 7 (WTC7) in New York City.


Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon
www.journalof911studies.com...

The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...


So? Which truth group has the truth?


edit on 31-5-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed this and that



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

You use false authority to imply most Americans think the government was the mastermind of 9/11. They don't. They just want a better understanding of 9/11.

Thanks for manipulating an argument to create a false narrative.

Still waiting for you to provide a quote from the 9/11 forum of an individual exonerating the government or stating the US government is totally free of blame for 9/11. I thought the forum was loaded with those that make apologies for the government.

Can you quote were I stated the government was blameless concerning 9/11?



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Prove I never quoted the 20 percent statistic from PBS in any thread you were involved in?



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Never say orange jail suit......



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Why do you continue with personal attacks, and off-topic drifts?

For all intents and purposes: rational discussion has ceased here.

Did you notice the unfortunate side-effect, of you posting 4 replies to my one post?
Shame that it puts the logical, and on-topic posts on the back-page, and your off-topic talking-points on the last page.
Yup truly unfortunate, and: of course, we know you wouldn't do this on purpose.

9/11 conspiracy debunkers sure are persistent.



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin


9/11 conspiracy debunkers sure are persistent.


I know, right.


Since the topic is about 911 conspiracy debunkers, why do they feel they have to be in control all the time?

I wonder if anyone can answer that question?



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Still waiting for you to at least show us you can debunk a flat earth meme...



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: Nothin


9/11 conspiracy debunkers sure are persistent.


I know, right.


Since the topic is about 911 conspiracy debunkers, why do they feel they have to be in control all the time?

I wonder if anyone can answer that question?


Yes. Hopefully the thread will just gently die-out like this, with polite, rational, on-topic discussion.

We have learned a lot about 911 conspiracy debunkers.



posted on May, 31 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


Still waiting for you to at least show us you can debunk a flat earth meme...


The OP is not about flat earth.

What is your "opinion" about the OP?




top topics



 
24
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join