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.

 

To all Believers of the Official Story:

page: 10
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I'm currently watching "The 9/11 Conspiracies Fact or Fiction" on cable and am even more convinced that the "official story" as it's called is pretty close to what happened.

The documentary is pretty straight forward and addresses most conspiracy points including the Loose Change guys.



It is devastating to CT'ers, isn't it? One thing that struck me is in order for most of the various CTs to work, you must discount the massive amount of eyewitnesses to the various events at the same time they are trying desperately to find one person who was an eyewitness who says something that supports their assertions without ignoring any relevant facts or any semblance of context.




posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


It is devastating to CT'ers, isn't it? One thing that struck me is in order for most of the various CTs to work, you must discount the massive amount of eyewitnesses to the various events at the same time they are trying desperately to find one person who was an eyewitness who says something that supports their assertions without ignoring any relevant facts or any semblance of context.


I call it the "Pentacon Fallacy".

If it supports my theory then it is valid.

If it does not support my theory then it is invalid.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


The producer was Bradley Davis backed by Hearst Publishing Empire. The people bringing to the world - "Popular Mechanics".

au.messages.yahoo.com...

Interesting - new editor-in-chief. What happened to the Chertoff cousin put in place just for 9/11 at PM?

Enter Brad Davis of "Entertainment Weekly":

www.prisonplanet.com...

How anyone can say that outline in the photo at the above website "perfectly fits a Boeing 767 is beyond me.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 

That one particular fallacy seems to be a favorite.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Since you are so certain of the speed, why don't you prove any alleged 767s were going 500 mph when allegedly impacting two twin towers?

Flying horizontally perpendicular to gravity and all that closer to sea level air pressure as well along with any wind resistance. In addtition, to making wide turns, with all that bulk of mass, at close to sea level.

It is simulation similar to being on a stock car racing track, and having to slow down going into the curve, and gradually speeding up until hitting the straight part of the track. Only to do it again and again on each curve until that race is over.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


How is that a fallacy? Because the fact is that it was definitely biased to support the disinformation "official" reports. Since Hearst Publishing, owner of PM magazine, was responsbile for the disinformation hitting the general public from the onset. It was no accident the ex-editor, of PM, was pushed out, and replaced by the Chertoff cousin, on behalf of the PNAC members. Hearst became highly well-known for what is called yellow journalism (corrupt dishonest journalism).

www.zpub.com...



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Ultima brought up three valid reasons why everything you list would not hold up in a court of law. Not least of all, too many conflicting statements from too many different poeple and sources.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Yahoo news is a mainstream media source, therefore, it is invalid.

Prison Planet? Can you validate that Prison Planet is a valid source? No hearsay or conjecture please.

This is your standard OrionStars, please stick to it.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 



Your reference is invalid. Could you please post something that is not conjecture or hearsay?



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Are you saying 767s are flown by remote control?

Other than that, why are pilots paid the big bucks if 767s are so "fully automated"? The airlines could save a great deal of money allowing the planes to fly themselves.

Regardless, of what others have stated, flight simulators in no way replace the actual conditions of flying or driving. That is why they are called virtual reality simulators.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 

Ultima brought up three valid reasons why everything you list would not hold up in a court of law. Not least of all, too many conflicting statements from too many different poeple and sources.


ULTIMA1, self admittedly, works for or has worked for the government and he uses government sources in his quest to find the truth. Therefore, his statements are invalid because they do not confer my beliefs.

That's the Pentacon Fallacy. See how easy that works? If it doesn't fit my beliefs, it is invalid!



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


They have photos. Unfortunately, for them, there is a quite visible white smoke traveling around and trailing what is supposed to be a jet fuel burning engine having just left a carbon based fire putting out dense black carbon smoke.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 

They have photos. Unfortunately, for them, there is a quite visible white smoke traveling around and trailing what is supposed to be a jet fuel burning engine having just left a carbon based fire putting out dense black carbon smoke.


Can you prove that those photos were not faked? Can you prove that the smoke is white? It looks black to me. No conjecture or hearsay please. If you provide links, they must be valid.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Pilgrum
 


So overwhelm me. Let us sort through at that data the taxpayers have a right to have - since we paid for it and the law says we are entitled to it.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


You missed what I posted at least twice from the Pilots for 9/11 truth? They are very easy to find with Google.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


There is always Standard and Poor's aka the bible of Wall Street.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


What does that have to do with anything? It is your side using those photos. The onus is on you to prove them valid or fake.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


It's a fallacy because jsut because you refuse to recognise something doesn't make it go away.
I could say my cat doesn't exist and be quite vehement about it. Doesn't mean she will suddenly disapear even if I acted as if she did.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


I do not allow anyone to tell me how to think or what to see that is not there to see.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


I assure you sir my cat does in fact exist. Otherwise I really gotta wonder what is leaving the claw like wounds on my hands that I thought was from the fact she likes to play rough.


In all seriousness though. You are allowing others to tell you what to think. Do you know the physics of building collapse?
Do you know how WTC was designed?
Have you had any part to play in the whole 9/11 series of events?
Do you have ANY degrees or experience that leads you to the conclusions you so vehemently defend?
Or are you accepting the opinions of others?
Opinion others that are also weary of the mainstream reject, I might add but yet you continue to attack them as if they wholeheartedly accept everything the mainstream offers (which is of course a false assumption).

[edit on 6-1-2008 by WraothAscendant]

[edit on 6-1-2008 by WraothAscendant]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join