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.

 

Any 9\11 conspiracy debunk topics should be closed and the author banned

page: 10
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

A new survey is open to ATS members and guests to help get a "pulse" of what our members and visitors think of conspiracies associated with the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001.


Good call, SO. I for one already took it. Always good to get a by-the-numbers feel for member's thoughts now and then, lol. plus, I like surveys!




posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I'm offended by the fact that there's no option on the survey about the Reptillians. As I'm sure you all know, 9/11 infact was caused by the Reptillians. The Reptillian Pope (Not the one in the vatican, the space pope) had ordered the greys in dulce to make the holographic 757s to mask the ufos they used to crash into the trade centers.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   

A new survey is open to ATS members and guests to help get a "pulse" of what our members and visitors think of conspiracies associated with the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001.


I'm glad this is FINALLY getting done, but something tells me this has a lot more to do with the profitability of this site than anything else. The apathy of ATS on this matter and its acceptance and pampering of the various wrong opinions (because they all can't be right) is finally scaring away enough members to maybe put a dent in the owner's wallet. That's a plus.


On the down side, it's still all about the Benjamins.
This reminds me of that Chapelle Show skit where the guy called the cops on his crack-dealing neighbors not because it was the right thing to do, but because he was jealous of all the money they were making. Right action, wrong reasons.

[edit on 4-7-2006 by iamjman]



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Deny Falsehood


Originally posted by iamjman
I'm glad this is FINALLY getting done, but something tells me this has a lot more to do with the profitability of this site than anything else.

Then whatever it is that's telling you this is lying to you.

If you're interested, here's the truth about what inspired this survey:

To the ADMIN

Deny Ignorance


Originally posted by iamjman
The apathy of ATS on this matter and its acceptance and pampering of the various wrong opinions (because they all can't be right) is finally scaring away enough members to maybe put a dent in the owner's wallet. That's a plus.

The assumption that ATS exists to line the pockets of its owners is false.

As for why ATS doesn't rally behind causes, here's a thread that covers the issue:

I have a good feeling about ATS

Speaking as a member and as a moderator, if what you are implying about ATS were true, I wouldn't be here.

Since it's not, I am.

You are posting statements which expose your ignorance of what ATS is about. I recommend studying the matter in greater detail, because denying ignorance must start with each of us.

Please, Deny Ignorance.





P.S. In the grandest of ironies, if ATS were to adopt your suggestions about closing threads and banning members, this thread would be closed and you would be banned for posting false information. I hope you can agree that a more tolerant approach benefits everyone, including yourself.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   
What better thread to address said issues? Comments about staff & other members are off topic for this thread? The thread was started to ask staff to ban certain members...

I am not ignoring staff or insulting members when saying The Doctor has hit the nail on the head. This again shows the obvious bias on these boards and contributes to an environment where a person can even request such a thing as banning members for having different opinions.

As someone who was cut slack when I was new, I can see why some people do not post much or are willing to add anything to a discussion when it will just likely fall upon deaf ears…



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   
The Topic


Originally posted by Jake the Dog Man
What better thread to address said issues? Comments about staff & other members are off topic for this thread? The thread was started to ask staff to ban certain members...

The original post does not name individual members, and proposes bans based on member opinions, not that members should make personal comments about one another.

Regardless, personal commentary about any member, staff or otherwise, is outside the purview of the 9/11 conspiracies forum, and insults directed at any member, staff or otherwise, are contrary to the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use.

In fact, there is no forum in any ATS domain in which personal insults are tolerable.

Doctor With A Hammer


Originally posted by Jake the Dog Man
I am not ignoring staff or insulting members when saying The Doctor has hit the nail on the head. This again shows the obvious bias on these boards and contributes to an environment where a person can even request such a thing as banning members for having different opinions.

I'm not sure what your point is. Of course you are quite free to agree with The_Doctor if you want to.

I don't see any credible challenges to your intellectual freedom here.

The suggestion that the ATS policy of allowing all opinions (subject to the T&C, of course) can be thought to contribute to an environment of "bias" seems inherently contradictory.

Perhaps you can explain how your assertion makes sense.


Sign Language


Originally posted by Jake the Dog Man
As someone who was cut slack when I was new, I can see why some people do not post much or are willing to add anything to a discussion when it will just likely fall upon deaf ears…

Many other members will read and consider your opinions. That seems contrary to the idea of "deaf ears".

Just because you aren't greeted with a chorus of cheers and backslapping when you post doesn't mean you aren't being heard.

That other members may disagree with you is a chance we all take, and a necessary risk on ATS.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Riiiight, ok Magic. Why not just change the motto to "Tolerate Ignorance" then? This is exactly the reason why we need to have intelligent, motivated representatives instead of always leaving it up to the masses to figure things out on their own. The only time anything ever gets done around here is when the people get up off their lazy ass and demand action. Think that'll ever get done in our country, with our kind of people?
LOL This country sucks.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   
"I think anyone against my opinion should be banned."
Thats what the author is sayin. Even tho his opinion is wrong. This is what truely happened.



Just kidding, cool pic. tho.
Anyway, those of us who know the terrorists are truely responsible have proof and also have done research. We too have searched for the truth. The truth of a government conspirocy led me to a website with photoshopped videos, and fake witnesses. I haven't found any actual proof to what the 9/11 conspiracy sayers have been saying. Most of the proof you have can be diproved, no wait, all of your proof can be disproved. Everything you conspiraters have put on the web, I've found ways to disprove.



posted on Jul, 4 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Deny Elitism


Originally posted by iamjman
Riiiight, ok Magic. Why not just change the motto to "Tolerate Ignorance" then? This is exactly the reason why we need to have intelligent, motivated representatives instead of always leaving it up to the masses to figure things out on their own.

If I understand your point of view correctly, it is your belief that a relatively small number of people should dictate opinions to everyone else.


From Dictionary.com

e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism
n.
    1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
    2.
      1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
      2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

You are, of course, free to hold this point of view, but you should be aware that it is in direct opposition to the principles of intellectual freedom which have been repeatedly affirmed and supported by the owners, staff and majority of members of AboveTopSecret.com for years.

Thus you may not find a great deal of enthusiasm here for adopting policies which would undermine the rights of members to decide for themselves what to think.

However, to the extent you are willing to abide by the T&C, your opinions are still welcome.

Hopefully that has become clear by now.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Intellectual freedom ASSumes that the person is an intellectual, or at least somewhat capable of pointing themselves in the right direction. On this 9/11 issue there's just too many damn chefs in the kitchen. Sometimes a person needs to be told what to believe, otherwise they might go and think some dumb stuff and hurt themselves or others. It happens all the time. The only things that scare people off of the idea are the things we learn in history, and that we might never have been as "successful" as we are now had we never had a democracy. Unfortunately we just turned a couple hundred million monkeys loose upon the world, with all the technology necessary to tear the place apart.

You think Elitism is bad, but what do you think the kingdom of Heaven is? You just got to have some good people running the show.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Why not create TWO NEW sub-forums on 9/11...

One to present evidence and debate the governments theory.

One to present evidence and debate alternative theories.


Leave the current one intact for the everday posts that we have all seen an answered to a million times. Like whne a new user appears and just posts "PROOF: W is a Gorilla" or "How could you idiots believe...".



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by iamjman
Intellectual freedom ASSumes that the person is an intellectual, or at least somewhat capable of pointing themselves in the right direction.


And this statement makes it all too obvious that you consider yourself to be more of an intellectual than any person that believes that buildings can collapse without involving the use of explosives.

For the record, the concept of "intellectual freedom" does not "assume" anything. The term intellectual used in the phrase refers to the mind itself and not to it's efficient, or even proper, usage.


Originally posted by iamjmanSometimes a person needs to be told what to believe, otherwise they might go and think some dumb stuff and hurt themselves or others. It happens all the time.


Tell you what. Let me be the one that tells you what to believe. It's necessary, after all, because I've decided that you are one of these people that need to be told what to believe lest you hurt yourself or others. Before you post again, please U2U me your proposed post. I'll look over it and let you know in a day or two whether I think it passes "intellectual" muster.


Originally posted by iamjmanYou think Elitism is bad, but what do you think the kingdom of Heaven is? You just got to have some good people running the show.


There is no such thing as the "Kingdom of Heaven." Might as well ask "What do you think Narnia is?" Of course, Narnia is as good an example of Elitism (Monarchy) as the KOH. Why not ask "What do you think Monaco is?" At least there you have a real-world example.

Also, I wonder, will you be on the committee that decides which people are "good" enough to run the show? That's funny, I don't remember you running that thought past me, as you are now required to do!


Harte



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 10:52 PM
link   

And this statement makes it all too obvious that you consider yourself to be more of an intellectual than any person that believes that buildings can collapse without involving the use of explosives.


Buildings can collapse without the use of explosives. Those particular buildings, however, couldn't have collapsed without the use of explosives. If someone believes otherwise, then I guess I am more of an intellectual than they are. I'm sorry everybody can't be right, and I'm sorry that some of these people are going to have to be disgraced if the truth comes out. It's not their fault though; they lack the mental dexterity required to envision the entire 9/11 conspiracy.


There is no such thing as the "Kingdom of Heaven." Might as well ask "What do you think Narnia is?"


That is your opinion, of course. I too didn't believe that "rubbish" for the longest time, because I thought I was smarter than that. After some loooong hard thinking about everything (science, religion, past, present and near-future) I came to the conclusion that it does exist. Too much crazy stuff going down in the world, but I know you'll be figuring that out soon enough.


Also, I wonder, will you be on the committee that decides which people are "good" enough to run the show?


Nope, there are many others out there that are much more qualified than me. I'm just saying that I know the way things are working right now is not the way it was meant to be. Everybody is too much like you, though, and they value their own freedoms more than the greater good.



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 11:57 PM
link   
"Buildings can collapse without the use of explosives. Those particular buildings, however, couldn't have collapsed without the use of explosives. If someone believes otherwise, then I guess I am more of an intellectual than they are. I'm sorry everybody can't be right, and I'm sorry that some of these people are going to have to be disgraced if the truth comes out. It's not their fault though; they lack the mental dexterity required to envision the entire 9/11 conspiracy. "


sorry ATS mods, ban me, warn me or whatever, IDC, someone has to say it

dude im sure you have all the mental and intellectual greatness that you talk about, but im having trouble envisioning you getting your head around your huge ego.


night


[edit on 6-7-2006 by blatantblue]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Damn. Well said Blatantblue.

Anyway, any building can collapse. With the trade towers, the structure was ruined. The floors began to collapse as suport beams couldn't hold the weight of the destroyed support beams. If you watch the video, its a domino effect. The floors begin to fall where the plane hit. A floor collapses, that causes the floor below it to collapse, which causes another floor below it to collapse. It continues as the upper floors fall on the lower floors.
Why the hell would the government have to use bombs when the plane does all the work.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hound
Anyway, any building can collapse. With the trade towers, the structure was ruined. The floors began to collapse as suport beams couldn't hold the weight of the destroyed support beams.


Well, that's the idea anyway. No one's really produced any kind of functioning model on that yet. I don't even think NIST successfully got the first floor to collapse from the fires, even though they had the fires reach over 1000 C in their modelling.


If you watch the video, its a domino effect.


Really? When I watch the videos, I just see the top floors plow through the floors below like they were made out of nothing, and then the rest of the collapses are totally obscured by debris flying out everywhere.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   
That's right, if my head got any bigger I'm sure it'd start collapsing in on its own gravity. Man you hate me for it, so much you just have to prove I'm wrong about the world trade center. I love knowing that's why you can't accept the truth, because it'd hurt your pride and boost mine at the same time. MmMMMMmMM it'd feel so good too, I'd get on ATS every day just to bump the thread I'll open titled "Remember that time we were right and they were really, really, really wrong?"

Damn, that's what it's always about with you guys right? You just can't let us get away with it.

I love these old clips, by the way:
www.metacafe.com...




posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
Warthog,

You have to be like a kung fu or shaolin master.

When you see a newbie's post, read it, just sit back and relax and say:

FOOL.


Hmm, well I would say Warthog's thread is totally newbie & ignorant.


Originally posted by warthog911
Threads like"screw loose change",9\11 consipracy is nonsense" makes me puke.Son we did months and months of research and most if not all of the senior members like me know what really happened on 9\11.


Your thread is the same quality, the only difference is that you have opposite view. Also tell me what really happened there, or should I check Loose Change first?



Watch alex jones martial law 911:road to police state.Even after watching it they dont agree.It foolishes to even make these zombies wake up.


Give us a break, I've seen almost all of his docus and what now? With your banning & stuff man get a grip and create your own forum where you can ban everyone with other opinion.

BTW it's 9/11 not 9\11 and spellcheck before you post would be cool too.


[edit on 2006-7-6 by zer69]



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by iamjman
I'm glad this is FINALLY getting done, but something tells me this has a lot more to do with the profitability of this site than anything else.

I think we've mentioned enough times that if we (3 Amigos) were to create a joint business partnership with the goal of financial gain, it would not be a time-consuming, low-income, high-expense and high-maintenance item such as a wildly popular conspiracy theory discussion board.



Originally posted by iamjman
is finally scaring away enough members to maybe put a dent in the owner's wallet. That's a plus.

Really? Is that how you feel? You theorize there may be a negative influence on the income generated by this site and celebrate that? Why? I'm curious to know your point of view that would cheer potential financial hardship for ATS.

In any event, your comments couldn't be further from reality. In fact, there have been several recent posts indicating that traffic is high and attention is being bestowed on ATS (high-profile guests, sourcing on CNN, live radio events, television production, etc.).

In addition, June is a typically slow month (July is the slowest), but June of 2006 was our most active month ever. We had slightly over 2.2 million visitors access more than 13 million pages with a record 11,053 different web site URL's referring visitors to us.


Back to the topic...

In any event, many of our members who are more virulent supporters of a wide variety of 9/11 conspiracies have become interested in "conspiracy theory" topics after 9/11. Their initial exposure to "conspiracy theories" have often been through websites and "experts" of dubious repute, and as a result regularly form incorrect assumptions about conspiracies and shun "old school" conspiracy research.

Prior to the online madness inspired by 9/11 conspiracies, "conspiracy theorists" were typically skeptical of everything and regularly sought out and encouraged lively debunking of their theories. The best conspiracy theory is one that stands up to scrutiny and survives. Toward that end, skeptical (but collaborative and supportive) debunking is both healthy and highly desirable.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   
To comment on the structure thing, the reason why the WTC towers 1 and 2 collapsed the way did was not because of a domino effect that had occurec, what had happened was that the heat from the fires in the building that was a direct result of the planes colliding into the buildings had heated the steel frame to structural failing point. The steel beams did not have sufficient heat-resistent foam coverings and alot of what was there broke off so the steel eventually began to warp and did break under the stress of holding up the top of the building.

That's what architectures and engineers have come to accept as the cause for the collapse of the WTC, wasn't a bomb or anything, it was heat and fire, and a poor initial construction of the structures.

Shattered OUT...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join