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.

 

How Skeptics Confronted 9/11 Denialism

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
To date, no one has yet come up with any evidence that would refute any of the evidence, the NIST investigation, or the ASCE investigation, the claims-without-evidence from 9/11 truthers, notwithstanding.


To date, the NIST report hasn't been peer reviewed. They hold all the evidence when it comes to the structural documentation. So, to date there is no evidence to refute what NIST has told us because we don't get to see the evidence. How hard is this to understand?

If you're fully satisfied with the NIST report even though you get to see no evidence to back it up, so be it. I don't live in that kind of denial.

It would be like me writing a paper explaining in detail all my evidence that concludes there is a government conspiracy but when asked for my evidence I claim national security and you can't view. Would you just trust me? No.

So, why the trust in NIST?


So, if you want to waste MY taxpayer money by claiming you have "unanswered questions", I will suggest you pay for it yourself.


I AM paying for it myself. I am in the middle of learning SAP200. My going rate is 125$ per hour. It's going to take me a very long time to put this together because NIST isn't forthcomming. That's a lot of money right there. Plus, if the student version of SAP2000 isn't enough to analyse, I am willing to buy the full version. Again, my own money because NIST isn't forthcomming.

And furthermore, I keep saying I'll pay for the structural documentation.




posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
If you're fully satisfied with the NIST report even though you get to see no evidence to back it up, so be it.


It all goes back to jthomas's not even wanting to know. He only needs the shadow of evidence, and with this he is content thinking that everyone else is wrong.

I can say it all day: if you have no questions, then you don't care or you don't know what the reports say. One or the other. No other option.

No one has objected except for "truthers"? You mean, the ~30% of the population that still has the same unanswered questions? Ah, those few million people don't know anything! It's jthomas who knows, because he refuses to see otherwise.

Jthomas, it's a simple equation: there are no issues, because you refuse to see them.

At the end of the day you still can't answer our questions because, outside of your own little head, you don't really know. That's also a very simple fact, or else wouldn't you be explaining more to us? Griff is a civil engineer. Call him a "truther" and he magically goes away. Can you not see how dense your whole way of looking at this is? Do you think only inferior people post on the Internet? Who are you?



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   
I have only one question for Jthomas.
Why were none of the hijacked aircraft on 911 intercepted?



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by NIcon
 


Just curious if you realize the 9-11 Commission conducted no investigations? You are aware they only reported the most likely scenarios based on the evidence?

You also realize the truth club's entire set of theories require one thing: hidden/suppressed evidence? And for that to work the conspiracy would involve multiples of thousands of people?

How? Because the one fact that some seem to miss is the commission only studied all the available evidence.....from many, many disparate agencies and groups. They were not an investigative body.

Do you realize the commission simply evaluated these multitudes of reports and then drew conclusions? So what this means is not only would the commission be 'in on it', but so would the thousands of engineers, scientists and scholars who signed their names to the various reports they drew their information from?

There is no “official story”. That is something the truth club continuously tries to sell in an effort to equalize positions. This is but one, of many, frauds the truth club regularly engages in.

The bottom line: there is no “official story”. There is a massive, overwhelming body of evidence that leads us to one conclusion. For example: the WTC collapses are the most studied building collapse in history. Multiple agencies, universities, scholars institutions and thousands of experts have looked over every square nano-inch of material and have found no “high strangeness”. Are there so-called experts who will publicly announce that they believe 9-11 was an inside job? Yes and they number less than 10. I’m not talking about some anonymous internet petition that is utterly unvetted; I am talking about real engineers, real experts.

An important distinction: I am talking about the leaders of the cult. Not the people who throw around ideas on forums but the actual propagators of this nonsense. They no better. When some of these…..people…….claim what they claim, they either know they are lying or lack fundamental knowledge about which they speak. Usually it’s the latter, IMO.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by jonyo1
I have only one question for Jthomas.
Why were none of the hijacked aircraft on 911 intercepted?



Instead of demanding others do your homework for you (although par for the course for the truth club), why don't you tell us why they weren't intercepted?

You guys need to realize this information has been discussed, and debunked, for years! The internet makes these kinds of questions, and the answers available for all to see. Shoot, just search this site; you wont even have to leave.

This is not an origonal question. It's not new. There is no new information from truthers, just the same questions repeated for almost seven years.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
For example: the WTC collapses are the most studied building collapse in history.


How do you study a building's collapse without the structural documentation to do your analysis?


Multiple agencies, universities, scholars institutions and thousands of experts have looked over every square nano-inch of material and have found no “high strangeness”.


Again. Prove that these multiple agencies, universities, sholars and thousands of experts can analysis anything without the needed documentation.

Go ask a structural engineer to analyse any building without the structural documentation. See if they laugh in your face.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
There is no new information from truthers, just the same questions repeated for almost seven years.


Release the structural documentation and maybe we can stop asking.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Do you realize the commission simply evaluated these multitudes of reports and then drew conclusions? So what this means is not only would the commission be 'in on it', but so would the thousands of engineers, scientists and scholars who signed their names to the various reports they drew their information from?


This is a major misconception. The investigative thought that went behind 9/11 was not an effort of thousands of people. It was the effort of a handful. When you talk about "thousands" of engineers, you really mean maybe a number in the 100s if you count all the trivial software jobs and etc. that had to be performed for the simulations and etc., not the actual critical thought that went behind what these theories mean. You probably are not aware of the fact that the same core of individuals were behind the ASCE, FEMA, and NIST reports, which is why both FEMA and NIST borrow ideas from the ASCE report. You are probably also unaware that an engineer with the FEMA investigation (Astaneh-Asl) has publicly declared the original ASCE report to be intentionally misleading. That is an AP article I bet you would love to read.

NIST gathered evidence that contradicted their final hypothesis. When it came time for the final hypothesis, you are down to a handful of people at best. Same for the Kean Commission. They got to pick and choose what they reported. WTC7 was not mentioned at all. Hardly a thorough job with the contribution of "thousands."


There is no “official story”.


There are official reports that were commissioned by the government. This includes the Kean Commission, FEMA, and NIST, all commissioned by congressional committees.

In this sense, there is an official "story."

reply to post by jonyo1
 


Don't ask him that, because he probably thinks he has an answer for it. That's the whole problem. It's too easy for jthomas to assume he's been told the truth already.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I was 95% sure 9/11 was an inside job, after reading the O.P.'s link,... I am 99% sure...


[edit on 7-6-2008 by coastlinekid]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Griff
If you're fully satisfied with the NIST report even though you get to see no evidence to back it up, so be it.

No one has objected except for "truthers"? You mean, the ~30% of the population that still has the same unanswered questions? Ah, those few million people don't know anything! It's jthomas who knows, because he refuses to see otherwise.


Really? 30%? Says who? And I would suggest you know what you talking about before quote the poll you're about to. Do you know what it really says? In it's entirety?

Tell me the percentage of people in that poll who answered they think the government was involved in 9-11? Do you even care? Can you tell me how many people answered they didn't know or care? Hint: it was more than those that think the government was involved.

I'll bet dollars to doughnuts your truth club web site didn't bother to tell you the whole story, did they? I am also willing to bet that if you take the time to actually look at the entire set of data, you'll come back and say it doesn't matter or attempt to change the guardrails.

Something you guys never seem to understand: we aren't invested in outcomes. We skeptics are outraged at the willful manipulation and outright lying that occurs to propagate myths. If the evidence suggested that 9-11 was an inside job I would be al lover it. But, it doesn't. Pseudo science claims it does. However, the actual body of evidence does not. Truthers are so involved in the argumentative techniques they loose sight of the actual facts.

The truth club is neither a movement nor interested in truth.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
We skeptics are outraged at the willful manipulation and outright lying that occurs to propagate myths.


So, you're outraged about the war in Iraq then? WMDs anyone?


If the evidence suggested that 9-11 was an inside job I would be al lover it.


Yeah, I know. Fully denying it.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Really? 30%? Says who?


Oh, here we are! The core of the issue: you are trying to fit in somewhere, because you don't really know how to think for yourself.

I've seen two Zogby polls of New Yorkers and at least one poll of university students. They provide similar figures, and I'm sure you are smart enough to use Google.


And I would suggest you know what you talking about before quote the poll you're about to. Do you know what it really says? In it's entirety?


This is just your pathetic way of dismissing what the polls really indicate. What the exact percentage is doesn't matter to me, and it doesn't really matter to you, and what the exact wording is doesn't really matter to me, and it doesn't really matter to you. What matters is that you hurt inside and you don't want the polls to show what they show, because you are losing ground in all these years. If you could tell me that the polls don't even exist, you would in a heartbeat. If you could tell me the polls weren't really about 9/11 at all, you would. If you could tell me all those people are not like me, you would. But they are like me. And Griff. There are millions of us. You just don't want to have to think for yourself, because you don't want the responsibility.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by bsbray11]

[edit on 7-6-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


Stop asking us to do your work for you. Go forth and find out for yourself.

Secondly, lets be honest here. Your questions aren't questions, they are positions. If these questions were answered you would simpily create new ones.

If after six, almost seven years, you honestly think the body of evidence doesn't lead you to the obvious conclusion(s) you need to perform your own investigation (or find someone who will).



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Stop asking us to do your work for you.


We have done our work, now it's your turn. You believe FEMA and NIST don't you? Why? Can you justify your own position, or not?

When we ask questions that NIST hasn't answered, for example, it also means that YOU can't answer them. It relates to you. You have been lied to and you bought it. Why should you continue to be so stupid? If you disagree with me then make me understand why! I know math and engineering principles, I can follow, TRY ME! The work we push on you is to try to actually justify all this garbage that you have grasped onto.

If you can do it, then you are justified. If you can't, you can't tell us that we aren't justified for being unsatisfied for such a piss-poor investigation of such an atrocity.

And when I say we are unsatisfied with the investigation, I am really being facetious. I know what was "pulled" that day, and it wasn't just three buildings.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Oh, here we are! The core of the issue: you are trying to fit in somewhere, because you don't really know how to think for yourself.


Ad hom attack. Which, is par for the course. You can't debate me, so I now become the issue. Nice try. Next?


I've seen two Zogby polls of New Yorkers and at least one poll of university students. They provide similar figures, and I'm sure you are smart enough to use Google.

No thanks. Do your own homework and report back. You're the one who made the assertion, now prove it. If this your opinion, that's fine. If you're representing this as fact.......


This is just your pathetic way of dismissing what the polls really indicate. What the exact percentage is doesn't matter to me, and it doesn't really matter to you, and what the exact wording is doesn't really matter to me, and it doesn't really matter to you.


And that is why your club fails and will continue to slip into obscurity. I do care. Anyone after real truth cares about the details. That is a perfect example of why the truth club is the gang who can not only shoot straight, but shoots themselves in the process.

Truly, priceless. Thank you for this gem!


EDIT: in reference to your last post.......burden of proof reversal. It's not my burden to prove the reports I believe are correct. It's up to you to prove they aren't. Basic logic: you can't prove a negative, which is exactly what your asking me to so. So, how many more years will it take to move the club from here to the 'mainstream'. Or will you still be asking 'questions' in another seven years?


[edit on 7-6-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


You're telling me that semantics matter more to you than the message.

The Devil is in the details; are you the Devil?



Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals


www.zogby.com...

Read it and writhe; you "debunkers" are still losing ground, simply because you are ignorant (and yes I know that poll is from 4 years ago; let me guess, you probably think there were more "conspiracy theorists" right after 9/11?
).

We simply ask you to use your own heads to think, not the heads of others that you don't even know. That is called faith.



PS -- How do you like the fact that the percentages given are actually higher than I mentioned? Like I said, it's the message. I know you respond to mass appeal whether you have the guts to admit it to yourself or not. The whole movement of ignorant, sarcastic debunkers is a symptom of this.

Not wanting to think for yourself, wanting to just "go with the flow" of the reports, yet here are all these regular people that also disagree with you. Hurts, doesn't it? Because you "think" with your gut. Fortunately this is changing for a lot of people as they realize how hateful this system really is. There aren't that many genuinely crazy people out there, you know, lol.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Something you guys never seem to understand: we aren't invested in outcomes. We skeptics are outraged at the willful manipulation and outright lying that occurs to propagate myths.


Ahhhhhh, Griff beat me to it!

The irony of your statement is astounding. I bet you wish you could back track huh, edit that out. The government lied about WMD's, that's been proven. They even said it was the UK's fault for providing misleading info. The US government went to war and believed something because they were given a document by someone saying so? We don't even do our own research before we decide whether to go to war or not?

So, are you outraged about the myth of the WMDs?

EDIT: It get's better: You now state: "It's not my burden to prove the reports I believe are correct. It's up to you to prove they aren't." So in that same mindset, it wasn't the governments burden to prove that British intelligence accusing Iraq of having WMDs was correct?

SlightlyAbovePar, we all have things we can bring to this debate, but based on your past 2 statements, from now on the thing you should bring is silence.


[edit on 7-6-2008 by Alethia]

[edit on 7-6-2008 by Alethia]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
If after six, almost seven years, you honestly think the body of evidence doesn't lead you to the obvious conclusion(s) you need to perform your own investigation (or find someone who will).


I'm starting to find myself repeating and repeating around here. It doesn't matter how many years goes by as long as the structural documentation isn't available...i.e. suppressed. If conclusive proof came out tomorrow that LBJ gave the order to kill Kennedy, would you disregard it just because this evidence was suppressed for 45 years?

And yes, the body of evidence does lead me to believe most of what I am told happened. There are just a few things that don't.

Like I said though, I'm working on an analysis. If I'm wrong, I'd actually be far happier than I would if I'm correct. I could sleep easier at night.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Alethia
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


"...so you have no idea what's happening behind because you can't see it, and a sound recording which in no way can determine the exact time the tower stopped falling and sound generated by debris flying around and settling."


So you don't know? You claim you knew it fell faster than free fall, right? Now you say no one can tell the exact time when it stopped falling.

Nothing like contradicting yourself.

In fact, with the video stopped at 11.5 seconds showing conclusively that WTC 2 had not finished collapsing, it was already 2 seconds past the free-fall speed, thus showing you that you are wrong.

Will you have the honesty to admit you're wrong, Alethia?


Errrr, I don't know what's going on, I guess you can't read or are just willfully lying, but I never claimed it fell faster than free fall speed, where did i claim that? And I also never claimed no one can tell the exact time, I claimed no one can tell the exact time based on that one, very poor video, you claim as evidence.

And you and Butz and others claim all "truthers" are wrong, and they have to prove their right. Then to prove your position, you post a video on YouTube??? If I posted a video on YouTube that showed the towers fall at free fall speed (of which there are many), you'd claim it was a ridiculous source, but now there's a video you like it's OK? Your video is conclusive and every other video isn't? All the others are faked and yours isn't? Your video which, by the way, has a camera totally panning away from the collapse on 2 separate occasions, is irrefutable proof?

Face it guys, everything you say can be picked apart, every piece of evidence you have can be countered. And that's the big point you willfully miss. You guys are stating, as a matter of fact, conclusively, without question, what happened on 9/11. You have evidence that proves it happened that way and that evidence can not be refuted. Do you understand what refuted means? Refuted - to prove to be false or erroneous, as an opinion or charge. To claim a video, which doesn't show the collapse of a building in it's entirety as evidence of how quickly that building collapsed is erroneous. It's refuted. And the video itself has 3 nice big question marks next to the time it claims. Your irrefutable evidence refuted itself!

Your so blindly absolute in your conviction you can't even see your own hypocrisy.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by jthomas
I don't have any "unanswered" questions.


Again, because you are either apathetic or don't fully understand the problems with the given explanations thus far.


I don't see any problems with the evidence.


I wouldn't have any questions either, if I didn't give half a #, and just believed whatever I wanted. And you obviously don't have all the answers because you can't give them!


That's silly. You know full well that just because you have "unanswered" questions that does NOT mean they are either valid or relevant to the totality of ALL of the evidence or to the conclusions. YOU cannot continue to try evading YOUR responsibility to DEMONSTRATE YOUR claims and YOUR belieffs.


You are content with not knowing.


LOL! I've been waiting for 6 1/2 years for the 9/11 Truth Movement to provide anything worth knowing by any objective standards whatsoever. As these past 6 1/2 years demonstrate, you have gone nowhere.




top topics



 
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join