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.

 

911 Truth: Condition-Terminal

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I pity the people who think popular opinion or interest in anything is an accurate reflection of any facts. You might as well put mediocrity on a golden pedestal and worship the status quo, which is only becoming stupider and stupider in this country. But don't take my word for it, live it for yourselves and face the consequences.

I told jthomas a few months ago to remember all this stupid bickering with us when he could no longer put food on this table, because while he argues about it, I prepare for it. For years this information has been available to people, and financial experts have even been saying it for years, but unless it is dumbed down and commercialized as a mass information product, too many dumbed-down people find the information too opaque, or even depressing, and can't properly "digest" it.

If it didn't happen this way, I guess it wouldn't be what it is.




posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:50 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by jthomas
(I'm sure you are loathe to admit that NIST was made up of a majority of non-government forensic scientists, structural engineers, physicists, chemists, and architects who signed their names to the reports, reports whose methodology, data, evidence, and conclusions are fully open to their peers around the world for analysis, confirmation, or rebuttal.)

I'm sure you're aware that NIST was appointed by the government.


Of a majority of non-government investigators.


I'm sure you're aware that NIST admitted that WTC 7 fell with freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds in the early collapse sequence and that NIST never tried to explain why. This information was only included after initially being omitted in the draft report.


I'm sure you understand that the evidence and methodology of the investigation demonstrated why and how the collapse took place and that it took around 14+ seconds from start to finish. You are welcome to refute it but I note that no one has.


You're certainly aware that the government appointed body, NIST, has lots of peer arguments to rebutt it's methodology, data, evidence and conclusions.


I am sure you are aware that your "peer arguments" are not "peer reviewed" confirmation or rebuttal and that no refutation of the conclusions of the mostly non-government-manned NIST has yet successfully been mounted.


You're no doubt aware that the government appointed body, NIST, has closed the case on WTC 7 and neatly avoided answering any further rebuttals.


I am sure you are aware that claims don't constitute rebuttal


The NIST WTC investigation was not independent from the government. Thanks for desperately trying to make it seem that it was!


I am sure you are aware that the vast majority evidence did not come from the government nor from NIST whose majority of non-government forensic scientists, structural engineers, physicists, chemists, and architects who signed their names to the reports, reports whose methodology, data, evidence, and conclusions are fully open to their peers around the world for analysis, confirmation, or rebuttal.

Those are the facts.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
I am sure you are aware that the vast majority evidence did not come from the government nor from NIST whose majority of non-government forensic scientists, structural engineers, physicists, chemists, and architects who signed their names to the reports, reports whose methodology, data, evidence, and conclusions are fully open to their peers around the world for analysis, confirmation, or rebuttal.


What are you talking about? Can you name the reports you are talking about?

If he still has me on ignore, can someone ask him what he thinks he's talking about?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by jthomas
I am sure you are aware that the vast majority evidence did not come from the government nor from NIST whose majority of non-government forensic scientists, structural engineers, physicists, chemists, and architects who signed their names to the reports, reports whose methodology, data, evidence, and conclusions are fully open to their peers around the world for analysis, confirmation, or rebuttal.


What are you talking about? Can you name the reports you are talking about?

If he still has me on ignore, can someone ask him what he thinks he's talking about?


Can you answer the question jthomas?



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I'm not too sure about the way this thread is going,
but for the NIST's report on WTC7 they did have a conference
on the final draft which was open to questions
from the floor of invited guests,
one of which was from David Chandler,
a high school physics teacher.
As a result of his question,
the final report was changed to include
gravity free-fall in their own terms,(no credit was given).
You will have to dig for David Chandler's own
youtube video of his own findings,
and also for a video of the NIST's research on WTC7,(play close attention to their computer modelling of the collapse,
it is totally different from what archive video shows)
this link is to the draft of the "final report"
conference and you can take it from there.

www.youtube.com...://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=17671&p=119659



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
Why does this thread have disinfo written all over it?


I was about to say the same 2 pages into the thread..

The OP is atypical of the general mainstream garbage fed to the mass media on a daily basis ie: "This happened so it means this" with NO quantification or facts or anything to support the claim.

CameronFox should get a job at NIST. He'd fit in well there. They make similarly ridiculous claims ie "jet fuel entered the towers, the steel weakened causing the top floors to buckle and collapse ensued.." I mean like WTF? Wheres the FACTS? Wheres the bits inbetween? Wheres the PROOF the fires were hot enough for example, etc etc. Hell I can say im Crusty the Clown but it doesnt mean jack unless I produce evidence to support my claim.

So visits are down to some of the more well known 9/11 truth sites eh? What about the visits to newer or less well known sites? Did you factor that in when making your tabloid quality thread? No - I guessed not.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   

posted on 2-24-09 by jthomas
I am sure you are aware that the vast majority evidence did not come from the government nor from NIST whose majority of non-government forensic scientists, structural engineers, physicists, chemists, and architects who signed their names to the reports, reports whose methodology, data, evidence, and conclusions are fully open to their peers around the world for analysis, confirmation, or rebuttal.


posted on 2-26-09 by bsbray11
What are you talking about? Can you name the reports you are talking about?

If he still has me on ignore, can someone ask him what he thinks he's talking about?


posted on 2-26-09 by Griff
Can you answer the question jthomas?


jthomas has fled the forum

Ordinarily, jthomas has no idea what he is talking about. Disinfo and confusion are his intended goals; not deciphering the 9-11 evidence to obtain justice for innocent victims. And jthomas has demonstrated a real knack for photoshopping 9-11 evidence, hasn't he? Perhaps he is working on some emergency measures for NIST; propping up their stupidity and lack of professionalism. After all, his intention is to preserve the self-destructing 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY isn't it?




posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
I like this quote from a video on youtube exposing the lies on 9/11 -

"Seven years after the attacks of September the Eleventh, a global awakening has taken place, the likes of which the world has never seen. As the corporate-controlled media dwindles into extinction, a new breed of journalists and activists has emerged".




Youtube link www.youtube.com...



[edit on 23-3-2009 by Nonchalant]



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Bringing The Truth Home part 3



Nonchalant use this portion of the embed inside yvid. Works the same for google videos. (gvid)

com/v/sfVfyoOtRPE&hl=en&fs=1"><



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

jthomas has fled the forum


No, not really. I check in occasionally to see if you Truthies have come up with any evidence to support your claims.

I see you haven't. What else is new?

I did get a kick out of CIT and Rob Balsamo trying to claim there are loads of eyewitnesses who "actually saw a jet fly over the Pentagon." After doing his famous Mussolini pose, Balsamo failed to actually name any eyewitnesses and Ranke mumbled something unintelligible.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

I'll check in again in a month or so to see if you have yet found any evidence that 9/11 was an inside jobby job. Maybe you need seven more years, eh, SPreston?

Cheers.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 



Ordinarily, jthomas has no idea what he is talking about. Disinfo and confusion are his intended goals; not deciphering the 9-11 evidence to obtain justice for innocent victims. And jthomas has demonstrated a real knack for photoshopping 9-11 evidence, hasn't he? Perhaps he is working on some emergency measures for NIST; propping up their stupidity and lack of professionalism. After all, his intention is to preserve the self-destructing 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY isn't it?


Didn't you overlook the remainder of the post jthomas? Haven't you figured out how to bail out NIST from their 2.25 second freefall blunder yet? A high school physics teacher has to expose their lies? Have you run out of disinfo and confusion and strawman arguments? Or did your masters tell you to STFU? After all you are the agent who brought so much attention to the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY aren't you?

Doesn't jthomas display excellent photoshopping skills? This is his creation.
Perhaps jthomas also worked on the original faked parking lot security videos.

No doubt it was jthomas who couldn't figure out the difference between September 11th and September 12th and the difference between 9:37:19 and 17:37:19. Atta boy jthomas.





[edit on 3/30/09 by SPreston]



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
so.. what are you suggesting? that we just give up and bask in disappointment? i believe there are matters at hand which, don't necessarily trump the 9/11 truth movement in importance, but are better for the TRUTH movement in general. not everyone is ready for this information, and from my point of view more people are waking up today than I have ever thought possible. nice attempt at dampening this major issue, but i don't really know where you stand. all i know is that i'm not falling into it




top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join