Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: mrthumpy

It's the difference between science and religion

Yes it is. Its our world view. Everything we know all knitted together in a nice little package we call perception. The moment I realized we had been lied too about 9/11, a lot of those knitted concepts just fell apart at the seams. A bit like learning Santa Clause does not exist, I had my doubts for a while but eventually I got it.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: mrthumpy

It's the difference between science and religion

Yes it is. Its our world view. Everything we know all knitted together in a nice little package we call perception. The moment I realized we had been lied too about 9/11, a lot of those knitted concepts just fell apart at the seams. A bit like learning Santa Clause does not exist, I had my doubts for a while but eventually I got it.

Weird that you'll happily lie about 9/11 then

a reply to: neutronflux

I have already responded to your questions and one of your skeptic sources on this. You do work hard and bring up a lot of good questions, but in the weight of evidence for controlled demolition you are not adding much.

I did come across one photo where I guess the last past of the building to fall was. In my interpretation, it looks like one of the outer corners. Sure I could be wrong in trying to piece together things from what I have.



I have seen enough to be clearly and utterly convinced that some type of explosive charges where used. If you think it is tough trying to work out exactly what type of explosives where used, just wait until you see the money trail.

a reply to: kwakakev

What do you not get your points have been debunked for years, Gage is caught in lies. The thermite “research” is blatant pseudoscience.

Your faith of WTC CD are based on falsehoods and fraudulent studies.

a reply to: neutronflux

What do you not get your points have been debunked for years, Gage is caught in lies. The thermite “research” is blatant pseudoscience.

I do not get debunking. I know it has been going on for years. It is good to question, research and do your home work. But I do not get in how someone can ignore some things that are so blatant, like just watching WTC7 fall down. I did not need Richard Gage to explain anything to me. He does have a lot of pieces of the puzzle and does explain it well. He admits he does not have the whole 9/11 picture. I have gone through a lot sifting through truther sites, official and skeptic sources, and just people sharing there story about it. Richard Gage does have the strongest foundation for making sense of what just happened.

In seeing your reliance on debunking, it is like you are desperate to keep your world view of the official story being right and true for you. What I have found when looking into the skeptic and debunking links you offered is half truth and long explanations to ignore coming to terms with what a controlled demolition means.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: neutronflux

What do you not get your points have been debunked for years, Gage is caught in lies. The thermite “research” is blatant pseudoscience.

I do not get debunking. I know it has been going on for years. It is good to question, research and do your home work. But I do not get in how someone can ignore some things that are so blatant, like just watching WTC7 fall down. I did not need Richard Gage to explain anything to me. He does have a lot of pieces of the puzzle and does explain it well. He admits he does not have the whole 9/11 picture. I have gone through a lot sifting through truther sites, official and skeptic sources, and just people sharing there story about it. Richard Gage does have the strongest foundation for making sense of what just happened.

In seeing your reliance on debunking, it is like you are desperate to keep your world view of the official story being right and true for you. What I have found when looking into the skeptic and debunking links you offered is half truth and long explanations to ignore coming to terms with what a controlled demolition means.

Doesn't even understand what the word debunking means. It's a very strange universe you conspiracy theorists inhabit

a reply to: kwakakev

Your right. It’s not really debunking when People like Gage use falsehoods and pseudoscience.

a reply to: kwakakev

You

I did not need Richard Gage to explain anything to me.

Then what is YOUR no crap piece of evidence of supposed WTC CD?

a reply to: neutronflux



The events themselves. RIP.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: kwakakev

You

I did not need Richard Gage to explain anything to me.

Then what is YOUR no crap piece of evidence of supposed WTC CD?

Because he says so.

a reply to: kwakakev

but in the weight of evidence for controlled demolition you are not adding much.

They sure hit a home run when people repeat this after everything that is available.

But I do not get in how someone can ignore some things that are so blatant, like just watching WTC7 fall down.

So all one needs to do is be able to watch building 7 fall and that is enough to understand why it fell?

its not because they have been lead by a you-tube narrator to believe it couldn't be anything else?

He does have a lot of pieces of the puzzle and does explain it well.

But to the ignorant it may sound true, just like Tolkien's imagination and writings paint a very detailed middle earth fantasy world in ones mind, you then add Peter Jackson to the mix to make visuals and people will believe without a doubt.


Not saying people believe in middle earth but if such detail was applied to a real world event and then visualized for people like yourself to watch YouTube videos about it, many would and do exactly like what you do, parrot stuff they feel is right and cannot look at the event and parts of the event with a critical viewpoint simply because of the epitome moment they had watching one of these YouTube videos or reading a certain viewpoint that triggered it.

What I have found when looking into the skeptic and debunking links you offered is half truth and long explanations to ignore coming to terms with what a controlled demolition means.

So does controlled demolition mean an uncontrolled collapse that destroys surrounding buildings?

The events themselves. RIP.

You jut prove my point above when I mentioned having a epitome about how a videos are used manipulate the weak minded.

Add a title and other times narrate what you want the viewer to believe or create a collage of out of context clips to do the trick if all else fails.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

You are a wicked one with your forked tongue and cold blood. Thanks for joining the party.

We now have an example of what is called gas lighting. It is designed to make one doubt themselves so more lies and mis directions can be placed.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: kwakakev



So all one needs to do is be able to watch building 7 fall and that is enough to understand why it fell?

Next it'll be the claim that nothing hit buiding 7

a reply to: neutronflux

Funny, I was mostly talking about twin towers. Now you want to talk about WTC 7.

Well. If it was a CD, how did the penthouse fall into WTC 7 before the facade of WTC 7 ever moved?

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: InhaleExhale

You are a wicked one with your forked tongue and cold blood. Thanks for joining the party.

We now have an example of what is called gas lighting. It is designed to make one doubt themselves so more lies and mis directions can be placed.

And when you ask for evidence, you get an emotional rant void of fact. Classy and scientific.

a reply to: kwakakev

Thanks for joining the party.

Ive been here the whole time.

There is conspiracy involving US Government officials,

Yes Cheney and others would have had prior knowledge to some extent even though many debunkers say there was a miscommunication and no real alliances between intelligence agencies prior to the event.

I like to entertain my ideas that a planned terrorist attack on US soil was being planned wa sdiscussed at an event liek lets say a Bilderberg Meeting,

It would have been at least a year or so prior so things were put in place to make sure the attack wasn't hindered by too much cooperation of Us Intelligence agencies that got many warnings in the years prior from many nations and from their own surveillance methods.

The controlled demolition, Pentagon missile and many other conspiracy theories are either created by your average conspiracy theorists or in my opinion false information was leaked to conspiracy theorists to make them believe and spread the word to create this whole mess of a truth movement to steer minds away from what right infront of their faces.

The prior knowledge, the actions taken after the event, the things said by many in Bush admin about how planes being used weapons was never even thought off and other nonsense that is not true and can found to be not true if one as many like to say does their own homework they ceratinly can can a bettre picture to understand the how and why of 9/11

the conspiracy ideas of demolition and other idiotic things like nukes only requires exactly as you display, one just requires the knowledge to add 1+1 and see what they are being manipulated to see.

Bravo, the think they have worked out or are on the right track because 1+1 = the 2 or the answer they have heard others speak of.

To actually gain knowledge one must know how do equations much more complex than a simple 1+1 to get an answer.

In all the years since and if one really wanted to know they could have acquired educational degrees in numerous feild to gain a better understanding of all the claims made about the eventful day.

99% of people just add 1+1 and that is enough for them because when they get the answer of 2 its an epitome they have, its mind blowing that others also get 2 as the answer.

I really hope you get my analogy.

It takes way more knowledge of numerous fields of study to get the conspiracies put forth and after one acquires even an elementary level of knowledge they can see how much BS there is in the search for truth while there is much steering away from real conspiracies of what was known, by whom and how was it used to create the world we live in today.

ON the day like BBC reporting building 7 being reported on 20 mins before it collapsed is just for idiots to look in the way they have been looking at and not look in their peripheral view to see why or how such a thing could happen in a catastrophic event.

Many other tid bits about what conspiracy ideas push are exactly that.

ways to blind searchers of truth to questions that require being ignored from the masses.

the loudest and most highlighted things like demolition only enlightens those who have as i said elementary knowledge just how easily mass mind control can be implemented and used to create a hive mind steered away from whats real and lead to the BS and made believe its fine chocolate.

We now have an example of what is called gas lighting. It is designed to make one doubt themselves so more lies and mis directions can be placed.

If one just blindly believe that is better way, right?

One should not have doubts unless its what certain sides of a story say.

How does one decide what to doubt and what to believe

YOUTUBE? Ignorance?

Or

knowledge to allow critical thought?

You are a wicked one with your forked tongue and cold blood.

F yeah,

the amount of people dead and still dying due to actions and plans after the event and those gaining more power and wealth since that used the event to gain is enough for me to get banned if I was to really say what i wanted to say to these ideas that I actually once believed in myself back in 2006-2007 until I started doing my own homework and that is not YouTube videos but real homework that allows one to gain more intelligence about a whole sleuth of subjects.

A lot of technical knowledge is good to have to understand the physics and architecture and engineering of buildings and planes but if one gets a good enlightening view about how psychology plays a big part especially in creating counter intelligence and in that I mean how an abundance of information and claims pointing to many things it becomes easy to see how large groups get brainwashed.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Yeah, heaps better. Something like that. Cheers.

originally posted by: kwakakev
a reply to: InhaleExhale

Yeah, heaps better. Something like that. Cheers.

care to elaborate what in the hell you mean?



Its 2019, over a decade should be enough time to really gain knowledge about many things claimed and said

Its been 18 years almost.

99% that still debate 9/11 and push many ideas I mentioned have failed to even try and still just parrot things heard on YouTube videos or videos made like "in plane sight" and other so called documentaries alike that have made money of the dead and dying to push ideas away from real questions and focus on fake planes, demolitions, Missiles.

Conspiracies are a business, Ufology is hot again due to the recent nonsense that has many screaming disclosure.

depending on what arises something else will takes its place eventually and the merry go round will continue.

Its a shame many can't actually see the game they are playing and believe they are searching for truth.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

care to elaborate what in the hell you mean?

You are being straight out and direct with how you see you. At least you are aware there is a bigger picture to it all. It is clear we will get no where taking this issue to city hall. I did not start this thread for that.

I started this thread as an individual to help with how I handle it. I has been interesting to see how others handle it. One thing I have recently found, I do not support state sponsored terrorism.

a reply to: kwakakev

But you are starting with a false argument. The WTC was not leveled by planted pyrotechnics. There is no evidence. None.,,