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: 31
24
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Was it something like you claiming "never"
making a statement on orange jail suits?

I state what I find evidence for.


Such a simple question. Name two WTC conspiracy collapse theories you think are total BS.

Quote one individual from the 9/11 forum that exonerates the government or wrote the US government is totally blameless concerning 9/11.




posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Wonder if an individual will piece part a quote out of context and try the dishonest act of using it for a quote of misinformation?
edit on 3-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
I state what I find evidence for.
Plenty of actual evidence to look at, great place to find it on these forums.

So called debunkers are posting it all the time.



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958

There is no debate here, never was. You can not prove the OS narrative true, and the other side cannot prove their side true.



So it's all misinformation?

You don't agree with me, so it's misinformation?

Because I agree with Scientists for 9/11 Truth on their view of the pentagon. That jet strike deniers are hurting the credibility of the truth movement. Do they support the official narrative?

How is saying a large jet hit the pentagon misinformation. Especially after Scientists for 9/11 Truth proved a large jet hit the pentagon, the only evidence that fits for the pentagon is a jet, and they debunked missile and bomb theories.

Sorry! Being rational to you is misinformation. Are you that far into conspiracy land?



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine

Interesting hypothesis, to bad it hasn't been proven yet. I wish it was true. Talk about how people "want" to believe in a conspiracy theory, you just demonstrated it yourself.


The only explanation most consistent with all the facts is the NIST report.


The fact is, the NIST Report is nothing more than a failed, political, fairy tale, to support a political agenda, and the fact, it's phony science cannot stand up to scrutiny. Peer Review some of you claim?

You cannot Peer Review science, when part of it is Top Secret from the public and other scientist. Not Peer Reviewed.

Your post is very hostile, and condescending towards members who do not support the 911 fairy tales, so do not be surprised, if others respond, in the same manners towards you.



My post is realistic. The NIST report is consistent with the facts. There is no evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories and I follow evidence. I offered to debate the Jones paper with you and you declined. I asked you for your theory of what happened in detail. As I remember, your position was that you didn't know what happened but that something seemed wrong. You could not provide any detailed theory to debate, which may be fortunate for you. My post states the truth; many 9/11 theorists have little or no scientific and engineering skills. They are ignorant of physics, chemistry, and material science. They have only the ability to repeat what they read without understanding. They cut and paste arguments but cannot defend them unless they have a script. This is a common situation and is obvious after a short exchange of posts.
Are you ready to post your detailed theory that is consistent with the events of 9/11? Are you ready to debate it?



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Was it something like you claiming "never"
making a statement on orange jail suits?


I find it very amusing that you believe my statements about orange jail suits will discredit me.

It is a sad shame thats is all you got and name calling everyone who will not agree with you.

Goes to show how dishonest you are, doesnt it?

I don't understand why all this, is so personal to you?



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

I but the individual will...

Rant that NIST is a lie

Will try to discredit you by implying something with you and the government.

Will imply you cannot handle the truth.

Will say that there is not enough evidence to support anything, yet knows every bit of the official account based on, individual accounts, recovered evidence, research, properly referred and peer reviewed material, wide spread engineering consensus, and testimony is all lies.

All because someone on YouTube told them so, all based on innuendo, half truths, and from quotes out of context?



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958
You owe me an apology for the baseless unfounded accusations from the other day.
Your own lack of understanding prompted you to launch an unjustified attack upon my character.
Are you going to man up and admit that you were wrong?




posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Got a quote of my misinformation?

Got a quote here who totally thinks the government is guiltless concerning 9/11?

Can you even cite which WTC conspiracy collapse theories are total BS to get closer to the truth.

Saying you never said something that you posted, then not having the grace to apologize and admit to it is very telling.

Here is an example...

If you can quote that you were sorry for claiming you never posted something that was proven otherwise, then I am sorry.

It seems you are the one with civility issues...



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Misinformation?

Didn't you use to make a big deal that Steven Jones had a properly peer reviewed thermite paper. You used to make a big deal about peer review.

And you made a big deal and the false claim NIST didn't use peer review.

Now that Jones's paper was proven improperly peer reviewed, and NIST used proper peer review, you now discredit peer review?

Do you have any shame?



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Well, you stolen enough of my time with your false accusations of misinformation....

Sorry, being rational is something you take as misinformation.

Got to run.




posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine


My post is realistic.


No, it is not, it's pure fictional.


The NIST report is consistent with the facts


The NIST Report is not consistent with facts, when part of it's science is hidden from the public and scientific Peer Review.


There is no evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories and I follow evidence.


There is no evidence to support the NIST hypothesis and assumption, all based on a political agenda to cover up a real crime.

The NIST report was deliberately written to fool the masses, the science cannot, and will not stand up to real science.

I speak the truth!


I offered to debate the Jones paper with you and you declined.


You are now being very dishonest. Nothin like having a discussion with someone who is always "intellectually dishonest".

Here my evidence that proves you just told a great big fat lie.


9/11: Science and Society. Dr. Steven Jones' presentation and challenge to all scientists.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Back in Feb 2011 when my user name was "impressme" You and I debated Jones paper.

On page two:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Everyone can start reading this so call debate. Posted posted on Feb, 23 2011.


My post states the truth;


Truth, you wouldn't know the truth if.....


many 9/11 theorists have little or no scientific and engineering skills


So true, however you're not talking to someone with an IQ of 70. Perhaps, that what you're used to?

You must be really drunk on your ego to believe that most educated people cannot read simple science or a scientific report and not understand it. I find it really amusing.


Are you ready to post your detailed theory that is consistent with the events of 9/11? Are you ready to debate it?


We have, and sadly, you lost.

edit on 3-6-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




The NIST Report is not consistent with facts, when part of it's science is hidden from the public and scientific Peer Review.
What part?


(post by Informer1958 removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)
(post by D8Tee removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Well, you stolen enough of my time with your false accusations of misinformation....


Yeah, everything I say, and anyone that disagrees with you is given you false accusations of misinformation according to you.

Funny, that everyone that believe in the OS of 911, is free to express themselves and their opinions without ridicule, condescending snide remarks.

How dare we none believer question you or your stories without insults from you?

I rarely see any conspiracy theorist attacking in the method that some of you clowns get away with. However, I will respond in the same respect that you give me.



edit on 3-6-2017 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 07:00 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 07:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 3 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join