Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

9/11 What evidence would make you believe in a conspiracy?

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed For grins, I asked my friend in the legal dept at my firm. He asked me if you were on crack or something. Lack of evidence is just that: lack of evidence.


You might want to look it up. The judge will accept lack of evidence as evidence.


Care to post an example of this? The evidence I have posted proves you wrong.




posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Thank you for showing that you do not know what you are talking about.

www.fallacyfiles.org...

Sometimes it is reasonable to argue from a lack of evidence for a proposition to the falsity of that proposition, when there is a presumption that the proposition is false. For instance, in American criminal law there is a presumption of innocence, which means that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and if the prosecution fails to provide evidence of guilt then the jury must conclude that the defendant is innocent.



Care to finish that paragraph you quoted? Allow me:


Similarly, the burden of proof is usually on a person making a new or improbable claim, and the presumption may be that such a claim is false. For instance, suppose that I claim that I was taken by flying saucer to another planet, but when challenged I can supply no evidence of this unusual trip. It would not be an Appeal to Ignorance for you to reason that, since there is no evidence that I visited another planet, therefore I probably didn't do so.


Also this:


Exposition:
An appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence.




[edit on 18-3-2008 by Disclosed]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed For grins, I asked my friend in the legal dept at my firm. He asked me if you were on crack or something. Lack of evidence is just that: lack of evidence.


You might want to look it up. The judge will accept lack of evidence as evidence.

No he/she won't. If you think we're wrong. PROVE IT.


Originally posted by jfj123
You're not correct. The end. Thank you for your response though.


Thank you for showing that you do not know what you are talking about.


www.fallacyfiles.org...

Sometimes it is reasonable to argue from a lack of evidence for a proposition to the falsity of that proposition, when there is a presumption that the proposition is false. For instance, in American criminal law there is a presumption of innocence, which means that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and if the prosecution fails to provide evidence of guilt then the jury must conclude that the defendant is innocent.


[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]

You have no idea what this means, do you?



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
reply to post by plasmacutter
 


You do realize that on the link you posted...the second picture down is NOT fireman looking into a molten hot area...as they lead you to believe. They are illuminated by a high intensity light while searching for victims. If you watch the actual video of that scene you would see. That is just a still from it.

here: www.youtube.com...

Start around 2:00 or so...you will see your footage.

Now granted, there were areas there that were super heated...but that photo was just put thee for dramatic effect. It had nothing to do with molten anything....just looking for victims.


[edit on 18-3-2008 by Disclosed]




I see the beam and it is at a 45 degree it htink you have mistook the wrong pic...

And i was a Fabricator for a few years and the intensity on metal does not challange our technoloy and are easily 10 ways to cut a beam of that size.But and I say But not in the time they has.....

and no Unmanned cutter could do this if that was cut it was either by man leading to the collapes or done while trampling over body parts(doutful) or explosives...



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Disclosed
 


Well I think that at this point, since Ultima has helped us prove our case, there's no need to dwell on this aspect any further. You can't do any better then be proven right by opposing side


We should take this opportunity to refocus back to our original discussion.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
You have no idea what this means, do you?


Yes it means that lack of evidence can be used as evidence. Lack of evidence to prove someone is guilty is evidence to prove them not guilty.


Originally posted by jfj123
Well I think that at this point, since Ultima has helped us prove our case, there's no need to dwell on this aspect any further.


I HAVE PROVEN YOU WRONG ON THE DNA AND THE COURT MATERIAL WHAT ELSE YOU WANT?

I am still waiting for 1 of you to post some kind of evidnece to suport your theory or the official story.

[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
I'm still waiting for an example of a court case using "no evidence" as evidence. How could anything go to trial without evidence?



You could have all the evidence in the world but you still need a quallified person in the right position who is also willing to risk everything to go against some of the most powerful and dangerous men alive ...to bring it to a court...then you have to find a judge who is willing to allow it in their court and since judge's are put into position by the same men he would be bringing down I see an endless process...


Unless the rules are different in the U.s



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


jfj123,

No need to try to explain this further. He is just trolling now. The very link he provided stated that lack of evidence is not evidence. We'll save our discussions for other forum users that understand what they are posting.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
The very link he provided stated that lack of evidence is not evidence. .


I have proven that lack of evidence is evidence why can't you admit it ?



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   
in response to the guy that said th cutt was made with a welder in order for it to be cutt by a welder would have to be done fromm the inside of the beam a troch blows the slag away from the top of the plate u r cuttin so acording to u some one was standing inside the beam dout it,the slag (if someone was cutting from the outside of the beam the slag would be along the inside sorry thats gravity a cutting torch heats metal then u (the cutter operating the torch blows air to the molten metal and the blows the molten metal away, so no i wasnt sutt from the outside with a torch sorry or a plasmacutter would leave a much much cleaner cutt and if it was cutt with an torch then the guy needs to go back to welding school that cut sucks if a torch was used and i never said i did dmeo i just know what it takes to cutt 4 inch thick plact,have u ever seen a filet eld on 4 inch plate cutt at a 45 bevele then filled in with (on a 4 foot wide 45 deg bevele with 1/2 inch root gap 6010 rod as filler and 7018 as cover weld )have u ever worked or seen anyone working with plate thincker than 1/2 inch if u have u wouldnt have made ur coment go get a torch and just a small square of plate 1/2 inch thick from ur local salvage yard and mess around with it fo awhile then come back and talk to me about 4 inch thick plate most people have no clue to the size of a 100 foot long 4 inch thick box beak made from 90,000 psi steel 4 foot wide by 2 foot wide just to join 2 lengths together we arnt talking 1/4 inch plate, we are talking 4 inch plate, the size alone and thickness would have disipated the heat to fast from an open flame and the pic was taken right after the first tower fell ,(but i have seen the pic of cutters after the clean up started )so they didnt break out cleaning crew till days after second fell ,anyway the beams where usualy prheated by a torch man when they where erected to get the metall up to around 800 degress to make welding easyer , do u even understand that , the steel was so thick it had to be pre heated it would absorb heat so fast it wouldnt stay moletn long enough to fuse , what ever im just saying what i know from welding and fabracating lifts for people who drive from wheel chairs i convert vans so people can drive from a wheel chair and use hand controls for brake and gas most plate i use is 3/8 thick but in school i had to get certified on thickness of 1/4 inch to 6 inch plate from 1g to 6g welds i may not be a master but i can surly hold my own im just saying look up for ur self but i know this for 100% fact that that cutt was not made with a torch right after the first tower fell or after with cleaning crew inorder to get a cutting rigg near that beam with all that rubble would have needed a tractor or loader to clean a path for the torch rack and it looks pretty fresh where the hoses from the torch but anyways ill find some good photos of the cutters at the time of clean up so u can realy see what it takes to realy cutt up steel that big with cutters brb in a few

[edit on 18-3-2008 by plasmacutter]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
The very link he provided stated that lack of evidence is not evidence. .

I have proven that lack of evidence is evidence why can't you admit it ?


If thats true, then why did the link you provided state this?

www.fallacyfiles.org...

If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence.


Your own link proved you wrong...



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
for disclosed i never mentiond the men looking in the hole i said look at the firman with the radio and the beam behind ,i have a buch of pics i saved from the web that i can post but i am new to posting how do i attach a pic id love to post a buch of pics for all u to decide debunk or what ever i just want more intelect and this site seems to alot the info u guys find is just superb


[edit on 18-3-2008 by plasmacutter]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by gmac1000
I see the beam and it is at a 45 degree it htink you have mistook the wrong pic...

And i was a Fabricator for a few years and the intensity on metal does not challange our technoloy and are easily 10 ways to cut a beam of that size.But and I say But not in the time they has.....

and no Unmanned cutter could do this if that was cut it was either by man leading to the collapes or done while trampling over body parts(doutful) or explosives...


So then you can see that since all the scenarios discussed about the beams being cut by plasma cutter or torch in 15 seconds or less are impossible, therefore that's not the way they were cut. This is simple reasoning, so we can rule this out.

They were cut during the cleanup. If they were cut during the collapse by shape charges, the cut edges wouldn't look so fresh. Rather, the 1/4 mile of debris raining down on it would have banged the edges and smoothed them to roundness. We don't see this, so we can rule this out too.

So the only scenario possible is that they were cut, most likely by torch since there's many photos of workers with gas hoses snaking around, during the cleanup.



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed Your own link proved you wrong...


No, becasue i provided this quote.


www.fallacyfiles.org...

Sometimes it is reasonable to argue from a lack of evidence for a proposition to the falsity of that proposition, when there is a presumption that the proposition is false. For instance, in American criminal law there is a presumption of innocence, which means that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and if the prosecution fails to provide evidence of guilt then the jury must conclude that the defendant is innocent.


Which means that lack of evidence to porve someone gulity is evidence to prove them not guilty.

Also:

www.crime-scene-investigator.net...

Blood evidence or the lack of blood evidence can also be used to bolster or contradict a witness statement or any statements that the suspect may make.




[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
The very link he provided stated that lack of evidence is not evidence. .


I have proven that lack of evidence is evidence why can't you admit it ?




where did you prove this?? I disagree

Lack of eveidence could be the cause of lack of investigation....Lack Of Interest by Parties..Lack of sources to get proper evidence..lots of different variables to contibute to not having sufficient evidence..



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by gmac1000

where did you prove this?? I disagree


I have proven it twice in last post. I will be posting more to suport what i post.



[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


So...when that site said "a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence", they were what....lying?

You are making no sense at all...



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


So Op have you done your research on Building 7 ? Cause everyone who argues the point that the offical report is correct won't touch this question.

Please anyone answer this question! Cause just one fallacy in the report should trigger a new investigation by a third party...say like Japan.

People from alot of nations died in those attacks and each country should have been allowed to do there own investigation. The only reason they weren't allowed is cause there's something to hide, what i don't know.

youtube.com...

The Youtube Video button wouldn't work so i just copied and pasted it on here. Please watch and explain why there not allowed to investigate there own civilian deaths



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by plasmacutter
in response to the guy that said th cutt was made with a welder in order for it to be cutt by a welder would have to be done fromm the inside of the beam a troch blows the slag away from the top of the plate u r cuttin so acording to u some one was standing inside the beam dout it,the slag (if someone was cutting from the outside of the beam the slag would be along the inside sorry thats gravity a cutting torch heats metal then u (the cutter operating the torch blows air to the molten metal and the blows the molten metal away, so no i wasnt sutt from the outside with a torch sorry or a plasmacutter would leave a much much cleaner cutt and if it was cutt with an torch then the guy needs to go back to welding school that cut sucks if a torch was used and i never said i did dmeo i just know what it takes to cutt 4 inch thick plact,have u ever seen a filet eld on 4 inch plate cutt at a 45 bevele then filled in with (on a 4 foot wide 45 deg bevele with 1/2 inch root gap 6010 rod as filler and 7018 as cover weld )have u ever worked or seen anyone working with plate thincker than 1/2 inch if u have u wouldnt have made ur coment go get a torch and just a small square of plate 1/2 inch thick from ur local salvage yard and mess around with it fo awhile then come back and talk to me about 4 inch thick plate most people have no clue to the size of a 100 foot long 4 inch thick box beak made from 90,000 psi steel 4 foot wide by 2 foot wide just to join 2 lengths together we arnt talking 1/4 inch plate we are talking 4 inch plate the size alone and thickness would have disipated the heat to fast from an open flame and the pick was taken right after the first tower so they didnt break out cleaning crew till second fell ,anyway the beams where usualy prheated by a torch man when they where erected to get the metall up to around 800 degress to make welding easyer , do u even understand that , the steel was so thick it had to be pre heated it would absorb heat so fast it wouldnt stay moletn long enough to fuse , what ever im just saying what i know from welding and fabracating lifts for people who drive from wheel chairs i convert vans so people can drive from a wheel chair and use hand controls for brake and gas most plate i use is 3/8 thick but in school i had to get certified on thickness of 1/4 inch to 6 inch plate from 1g to 6g welds i may not be a master but i can surly hold my own im just saying look up for ur self but i know this for 100% fact that that cutt was not made with a torch right after the first tower fell or after with cleaning crew inorder to get a cutting rigg near that be with all that rubble would have needed a tractor or loader to clean a path for the torch rack and it looks pretty fresh where the hoses from the torch but anyways ill find some good photos of the cutters at the time of clean up so u can realy see what it takes to realy cutt up steel that big with cutters brb in a few



So that leaves expolsives that must of been pre arranged..Maybe during the first ever WTC power down 3 weeks prior to the collapes?:?



posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
So...when that site said "a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence", they were what....lying?


No, as stated lack of evidence that proves someone is guilty is evidnece to prove them not guilty. It also depends on the evidence, like the second example i showed about blood evidence.

I will be posting more evidence to support my post.



[edit on 18-3-2008 by ULTIMA1]





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join