Challenge to debunkers

I say we had the MO...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I say we failed to back the official story with science and used pseudoscience instead...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I say we don't have all the evidence as it is being with held...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I say that precedent was set several times over that day and challenge anyone to prove or disprove it...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This was later proven to be true...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And finally I state that CT's being false does not prove the OS...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

All of these threads point at problem with the OS and are all debunker free as of yet. I challenge you to debunk them.

I dont think You are going to have any Debunkers in here to refute these threads.

I have to say this is a good post, and you have found enough proof that the Government has been lieing.

But your post also will let us know who are real debunkers are.

This one is worth a star.

[edit on 8/2/2008 by cashlink]

It's amazing that there are any 9/11 threads that haven't had their throats yogurted with BS and disinfo.

When you examine the totality of evidence against the government, whether it be an initial failure to act, a mountain of unexplained anomalies, previous false flags such as Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, Oklahoma City, etc., highly implausible explanations (sometimes none at all), or a failure to disclose relevant information, the implications are disturbing but crystal clear.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
It's amazing that there are any 9/11 threads that haven't had their throats yogurted with BS and disinfo.

Golden,

You have FAILED to show ONE post of mine that is dis-info.

Please show me one post where I have made lies.

Thank you

When are you going to contact a lawyer or approach a court to finally bring these bastards to justice?

reply to post by jprophet420


It is your prerogative to remain in ignorance on 9/11 and believe all the false statements you make about 9/11 threads in the opening post. For most it is common knowledge and clearly the fantasies ideas of a few who lack knowledge on 9/11 have failed to pass the test of truth. The entire truth movement is based on fantasy ideas and as such need zero debunking. The lack of evidence clearly makes the truth movement failed. Since your evidence is equal to the truth movements evidence I see you lack knowledge to post evidence in support of truth movement ideas, and conclusions.

The truth movement ideas are like believing in Santa Claus, you guys do no real harm until you post stupid posters in aircraft bathrooms, exactly where you ideas need to be flushed.

I think belief in 9/11 truth ideas is good, it gives someone a choice when you expose your fantasy, do I hire the fantasy minded guy who adopts ideas not based on facts or evidence or do I hire the reality based guy, who used facts and evidence to develop logical conclusions as most people who think for themselves do? It could depend on the job.

It is your prerogative to remain in ignorance on 9/11 and believe all the false statements you make about 9/11 threads in the opening post.

Yet you fail to cite one.

I never said a word about any truth movement nor did I cite one conspiracy theory.

You come with ad homenim logical fallacy galore and not one fact. If you would like to debunk anything I posted be my guest. You haven't yet and I doubt you will.

reply to post by jprophet420


Nice post. And somehow I missed most of those threads. Kind of gives me a reality check on what the mods must go through around here.

Anyway, star and flag. I have some reading to do.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
You have FAILED to show ONE post of mine that is dis-info.
Please show me one post where I have made lies.

How about showing us one post, where you can prove the identity of the planes that allegedly crashed, matched by serial numbers to maintenance records?

If you can't do that, then you're going to have real big trouble proving that the official story is true. You can't even identify the alleged planes that were allegedly used!

reply to post by tezzajw


tezzajw,


You are like Ultima. You think by echoing the same statement over and over it will make your fantasy come true?

I will not get pulled into your world of fantasy. You fail to see the evidence. You do the typical hand waving that is so prevalent in these threads.

Only if it fit's your fantasy is it viable.

reply to post by jprophet420


JP-

I would like to clear up the label "debunker." IMO a debunker is one the removes "bunk." = humbug; nonsense.

So, your first thread Modus Operandi is clearly an opinion of yours. You showed a few reasons why the United States would use a false flag event to justify going to war in Iraq.

Can it be debunked? Well, it's really difficult to debunk an opinion. If you would like my opinion:

I don't think it would have taken an event like 911 to get the American public to go with a war in Iraq. Planting a WMD in the country would be easy enough... blowing up one federal building and putting Saddam's name on it... whatever. I think you get my point.

Aversion of the Scientific Method and its effect on the 911 OS

One again your thread although very passionate, is an opinion.

I don't want to derail getting into a debate about NIST. Even Griff who is searching for the truth realizes that the WTC Towers could have come down in the manner as NIST has shown.

Not only NIST has done scientific papers on the WTC collapse. On another thread i listed over 90 experts that have done peer reviewed papers on the collapses, fires, etc.

This is for the WTC alone. I'm not sure what else in the way of science do you think is missing from 911 investigations.

Here are only some of the papers / conferences etc..

"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation" Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C., JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

"Dissecting the Collapses" Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

A suggested cause of the fire-induced collapse of the World Trade Towers. By: Quintiere, J.G.; di Marzo, M.; Becker, R.. Fire Safety Journal, Oct2002, Vol. 37 Issue 7, p707, 10p.

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center. By: Karim, Mohammed R.; Fatt, Michelle S. Hoo. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Oct2005, Vol. 131 Issue 10, p1066-1072.

Could the world trade center have been modified to prevent its collapse?; Newland, D. E.; Cebon, D. Journal of Engineering Mechanics; 2002 Vol. 128 Issue 7, p795-800, 6p.

"Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers" Clifton, Charles G., HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center; Wierzbicki, T.; Teng, X. International Journal of Impact Engineering; 2003 Vol. 28, p601-625, 25p

Stability of the World Trade Center Twin Towers Structural Frame in Multiple Floor Fires. By: Usmani, A. S.. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Jun2005, Vol. 131 Issue 6, p654-657.

Structural Responses of World Trade Center under Aircraft Attacks. Omika, Yukihiro.; Fukuzawa, Eiji.; Koshika, Norihide. Journal of Structural Engineering v. 131 no1 (January 2005) p. 6-15

The Structural Steel of the World Trade Center Towers. Gayle, Frank W.; Banovic, Stephen W.; Foecke, Tim. Advanced Materials & Processes v. 162 no10 (October 2004) p. 37-9

WTC Findings Uphold Structural Design. Post, Nadine M. ENR v. 253 no17 (November 1 2004) p. 10-11

"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations" Monahan, B., Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.

Ming Wang, Peter Chang, James Quintiere, and Andre Marshall "Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1" Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities Volume 21, Issue 6, pp. 414-421

Engineering Conference Papers:

"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering" Marechaux, T.G. JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.

Abboud, N., M. Levy, D. Tennant, J. Mould, H. Levine, S. King, C. Ekwueme, A. Jain, G. Hart. (2003) Anatomy of a Disaster: A Structural Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapses. In: Proceedings of the Third Congress on Forensic Engineering. San Diego: American Society of Civil Engineers. pp 360-370

Beyler, C., D. White, M. Peatross, J. Trellis, S. Li, A. Luers, D. Hopkins. (2003) Analysis of the Thermal Exposure in the Impact Areas of the World Trade Center Terrorist Attacks. In: Proceedings of the Third Congress on Forensic Engineering. San Diego: American Society of Civil Engineers. pp 371-382

Thater, G. G.; Panariello, G. F.; Cuoco, D. A. (2003) World Trade Center Disaster: Damage/Debris Assessment In: Proceedings of the Third Congress on Forensic Engineering. San Diego: American Society of Civil Engineers. pp 383-392

Fire Protection and Fire Modeling Papers?

How did the WTC towers collapse? A new theory; Usmani, A. S.; Chung, Y. C.; Torero, J. L. Fire Safety Journal; 2003 Vol. 38, p501-533, 33p.

Effect of insulation on the fire behaviour of steel floor trusses. Fire and Materials, 29:4, July/August 2005. pp. 181 - 194. Chang, Jeremy; Buchanan, Andrew H.; Moss, Peter J.

"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings" Brannigan, F.L. Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

"Construction and Collapse Factors" Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.

Corbett, G.P. "Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster" Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Collapse Lessons" Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103

Burgess, I.W., 'Fire Resistance of Framed Buildings', Physics Education, 37 (5), (2002) pp390-399.

G. Flint, A.S. Usmani, S. Lamont, J. Torero and B. Lane, Effect of fire on composite long span truss floor systems, Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (4) (2006), pp. 303–315.

Fire Protection Conference Papers

"Coupled fire dynamics and thermal response of complex building structures" Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, Volume 30, Issue 2, January 2005, Pages 2255-2262 Kuldeep Prasad and Howard R. Baum

Choi, S.K., Burgess, I.W. and Plank, R.J., 'The Behaviour of Lightweight Composite Floor Trusses in Fire', ASCE Specialty Conference: Designing Structures for Fire, Baltimore, (Oct 2003) pp 24-32.

Jowsey et all, Determination of Fire Induced Collapse Mechanisms in Steel Framed Structures, 4th European Conference on Steel and Composite Structures, 10 June 05, 69-76

Usmani et all, Collapse scenarios of WTC 1 & 2 with extension to generic tall buildings, Oct-2006 Proceedings of the International Congress on Fire Safety in Tall Buildings

some related papers:

Interactive Failure of Two Impacting Beams Xiaoqing. Teng and Tomasz Wierzbicki. J. Engrg. Mech., Volume 129, Issue 8, pp. 918-926 (August 2003)

Use of High-Efficiency Energy Absorbing Device to Arrest Progressive Collapse of Tall Building Qing Zhou and T. X. Yu Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130, 1177 (2004)

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30:2, January, 2005. pp. 2247-2254. Baum, Howard R.; Rehm, Ronald G.

Reconnaissance and preliminary assessment of a damaged high-rise building near Ground Zero. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings. 12 :5, 15 December 2003. pp. 371 - 391. Warn, Gordon; Berman, Jeffrey; Whittaker, Andrew; Bruneau, Michel

"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center" Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A., The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48

John K. McGee et al, “Chemical Analysis of World Trade Center Fine Particulate Matter for Use in
Toxicologic Assessment”, Environmental Health Perspective (June 2003)

UC Davis Aerosol Study: Cahill et al., “Analysis of Aerosols from the World Trade Center
Collapse Site, New York, October 2 to October 30, 2001”, Aerosol Science and Technology,

Lioy et al, “Characterization of the Dust/Smoke Aerosol that Settled East of the World Trade Center
(WTC) in Lower Manhattan after the Collapse of the WTC 11 September 2001”, Environmental Health
Perspectives, Volume 110 #7

I will post more later..

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Even Griff who is searching for the truth realizes that the WTC Towers could have come down in the manner as NIST has shown.

But didn't the NIST original computer model state that neither the plane impacts or fires caused the collapse?

So what NIST reports should we go by, don't the NIST reports contridict each other and NIST also did not recover any steel from building 7 for testing? So how can we trust any report from NIST?

[edit on 3-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Your next Thread: Confiscated Videos

You linked pictures to a list of camera confiscated. I went to the site where they were from.

www.flight77.info...

This is what is posted there:

85 videos

The videos taken from the Pentagon area after the 9/11 attacks were mentioned in the Maguire declaration, where FBI Special Agent, Jacqueline Maguire responded (see below) to a request from Scott Bingham.
In Summary:

* She determined that the FBI had 85 videotapes that might be relevant. Of those, 56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."
* Of the 29 remaining videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."
* Of the 13 remaining tapes which showed the Pentagon crash site, 12 "only showed after the impact of Flight 77."
* The videotape taken from the Citgo gas station did not show the impact.
* No videotapes were located from the Sheraton Hotel, though she located a videotape from the Doubletree Hotel.

So, the question is... "Is Ms. McGuire lying?" I am hoping that a FOIA request will someday be accepted. Will it show an impact? Nope. But I am hoping it will squash the CIT flyover fantasy.

Not sure what you are looking to debunk here.

Lack of evidence and setting precedent.

You are correct that as far as we know VIA recent FOIA documentation. That the NTSB does not have recorded SN's.

I do not know the typical protocol of aircraft disaster investigations. Though this does not scream "inside job". Look at the evidence:

Flight 93 for instance:

DNA for all passengers was discovered at crash site.

Personal Belongings were discovered for many if not all passengers.

FDR and CVR were discovered. Data was consistent with radar data.

There have been crashes that show similarities in debris and damage. All things have to be taken into consideration when making these comparisons.

Keeping on the subject of flight 93. Have there been any crash investigators that have questioned the damage and debris in Shanksville?

What would you expect to see and why?

NTSB: No Records Pertaining To Process Of Positive Identification Of 9/11 Aircraft Wreckage

My above post explains this.

There were no records kept with SN's. Lets look at flight 77 for a second. I believe the FDR records for (X) amount of hours. The FDR from flight 77 showed the flight on 911 and the previous flight of the same aircraft.

We can once again look at physical evidence. DNA, personal belongings, radar, etc. This is all real.

Many for and against CT threads, no pro official story threads...

Or: If you cant prove your CT, the OS has to be true.

What I am guessing you are saying here is that if your CT gets debunked, it does not meant the OS has to be true.

Well, I think you have to look at it this way:

What conspiracy theory has evidence to directly refute the OS? It is up to the theorist to prove the lies, cover-ups, etc. Not just with opinion, hearsay, and speculation. Facts.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by jprophet420

 

JP-

I would like to clear up the label "debunker." IMO a debunker is one the removes "bunk." = humbug; nonsense.

So, your first thread Modus Operandi is clearly an opinion of yours. You showed a few reasons why the United States would use a false flag event to justify going to war in Iraq.
Modus Operandi is clearly definable and I have proven we had it. It is indeed my opinion we used it again.

Can it be debunked? Well, it's really difficult to debunk an opinion. If you would like my opinion:

I don't think it would have taken an event like 911 to get the American public to go with a war in Iraq. Planting a WMD in the country would be easy enough... blowing up one federal building and putting Saddam's name on it... whatever. I think you get my point.
Thats fine but it doesent change Pearl Harbor or Operation Northwoods or Golf of Tonkin.

Aversion of the Scientific Method and its effect on the 911 OS

One again your thread although very passionate, is an opinion.
No, it is not opinion. It is fact. NIST admits that it is fact. Fema admits that it is fact. Its in the reports.

I don't want to derail getting into a debate about NIST. Even Griff who is searching for the truth realizes that the WTC Towers could have come down in the manner as NIST has shown.

Not only NIST has done scientific papers on the WTC collapse. On another thread i listed over 90 experts that have done peer reviewed papers on the collapses, fires, etc.
They use pseudoscience. This has been proven, doccumented, and peer reviewed.

This is for the WTC alone. I'm not sure what else in the way of science do you think is missing from 911 investigations.

Here are only some of the papers / conferences etc..

"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation" Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C., JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12...


I will post more later..

I posted over 50 on my link. Do any of yours prove the OS as a whole?

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
FDR and CVR were discovered. Data was consistent with radar data.

911research.wtc7.net...

A source close to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) who asked to remain anonymous when asked about the " ongoing [black box] investigation, " told us that "the NTSB never closely examined the cockpit voice recorders (CVRs) and flight data recorders (FDRs) recovered from American Flight 77 which hit the Pentagon, and United flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania. "

There have been crashes that show similarities in debris and damage.

Maybe you can explain why Payne Stewarts small Learjet made a bigger crator then the crator at Shanksville that was supposed to have been caused by a much larger 757?

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Your next Thread: Confiscated Videos

You linked pictures to a list of camera confiscated. I went to the site where they were from.

www.flight77.info...

This is what is posted there:

85 videos

The videos taken from the Pentagon area after the 9/11 attacks were mentioned in the Maguire declaration, where FBI Special Agent, Jacqueline Maguire responded (see below) to a request from Scott Bingham.
In Summary:

* She determined that the FBI had 85 videotapes that might be relevant. Of those, 56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."
* Of the 29 remaining videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."
* Of the 13 remaining tapes which showed the Pentagon crash site, 12 "only showed after the impact of Flight 77."
* The videotape taken from the Citgo gas station did not show the impact.
* No videotapes were located from the Sheraton Hotel, though she located a videotape from the Doubletree Hotel.

So, the question is... "Is Ms. McGuire lying?" I am hoping that a FOIA request will someday be accepted. Will it show an impact? Nope. But I am hoping it will squash the CIT flyover fantasy.

Not sure what you are looking to debunk here.

Well, I dont think anyone really can. They are with holding information from the public is the point of the post. That is in fact the textbook defenition of cover up.

cover: hide from view or knowledge; "The President covered the fact that he bugged the offices in the White House"

reply to post by ThroatYogurt


Becasue every time a plane crashes this is standard procedure. To allow it to 'slip through the cracks' 4 times in one day when it has never happened before is a mathmatical anomaly of biblical proportions. It doesent prove anything other than blatant mismanagement.

I am a taxpayer however, so it is blatant mismanagement of my money, and so I must point it out.