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.

 

National Geographic - 9/11 Science and Conspiracy Special 8/31/09

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
A crushed airplane and dead bodies were found.


No, it was not and no, there was were not. I believe this has already been swatted down at least once in every thread and yet it keeps coming back like some sick whack-a-mole game. If a crushed and airplane and the bodies of passengers were found, where are they? They are not in any pictures. There has never been once piece of evidence shown that equals a crushed airplane passenger bodies. Please save your photos of the men in orange jumpsuits. Yes people inside the pentagon were injured. Of course they were, something blew a giant hole through it. Unless American Airlines had issued orange jumpsuits for that one flight.




posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by mmiichael
A crushed airplane and dead bodies were found.


No, it was not and no, there was were not. I believe this has already been swatted down at least once in every thread and yet it keeps coming back like some sick whack-a-mole game. If a crushed and airplane and the bodies of passengers were found, where are they? They are not in any pictures. There has never been once piece of evidence shown that equals a crushed airplane passenger bodies. Please save your photos of the men in orange jumpsuits. Yes people inside the pentagon were injured. Of course they were, something blew a giant hole through it. Unless American Airlines had issued orange jumpsuits for that one flight.



This is only the case in Truther Fantasy Land. Your website source is lying.

Photographs of the wreckage exist and are online. Not hard to find,

The names of the some of hundreds of Washington area staffers, private citizens, medical support people, who dealt with all this are available.

I'm in perpetual amazement there are adults out there so gullible they fall for these Truther fairy tales.


M



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Geez must be blind

Try these videos

www.911myths.com...

Taken from various angles

Can see smoke pushing out of numerous floors on south face

Also can see fires breaking out on North face of WTC 7 (Black exterior)



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
This is only the case in Truther Fantasy Land. Your website source is lying.

Photographs of the wreckage exist and are online. Not hard to find,

The names of the some of hundreds of Washington area staffers, private citizens, medical support people, who dealt with all this are available.

I'm in perpetual amazement there are adults out there so gullible they fall for these Truther fairy tales.


M



Mmmmk. Where? Show me.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Can see smoke pushing out of numerous floors on south face


Smoke is NOT fire. Lots of smoke does not = HUGE FIRES. Lots of smoke only indicates a lack of oxygen getting to a burning source. Thank you for backing me up. The huge amounts of smoke only back up the fact that the fires were not getting hot enough inside. They were starved for oxygen.


Also can see fires breaking out on North face of WTC 7 (Black exterior)


Is this a 'debunker' trick? Do you think that you magically gain some sort of truth for your silly narrative simply by ignoring what you are actually attempting to rebut?

Did I say there were no fires or that there were not "HUGE" fires?



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 





Oh yeah, you mean the fires that fire fighter accounts said could be taken out with a couple lines? Too bad the 9-11 commission wouldn't allow them to testify. They would have heard accounts of explosions and how the fires had mostly been supressed.


You mean this ?




"Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."

Ladder 15: "What stair are you in, Orio?"

Battalion Seven Aide: "Seven Alpha to lobby command post."

Ladder Fifteen: "Fifteen to Battalion Seven."

Battalion Seven Chief: "... Ladder 15."

Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"

Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower


For one Battalion Chief Seven (Orio J Palmer) was talking about the SOUTH TOWER (WTC 2) not WTC 7



South tower is WTC 2.

The glaringly obvious logical problems with using Orio Palmers quote are:

Orio Palmer was in the South Staircase (Adam) on the South Tower which was not damaged because of large, heavily constructed elevator equipment which protected it.

It’s not unreasonable to expect two small fires on a floor where only a wing tip entered. What was above those floors is the question not answered by the fireman’s quote.

The 78th floor was a sky lobby which didn’t have much office furniture to catch fire. If there were two small fires on the 78th floor where just a wing tip entered, what must the 81st floor be like where the nose of the aircraft hit?

If there were small fires on the 78th floor just before collapse, does that mean the 78th floor never had larger fires?

If he was in the staircase which is in the core, how would he know the perimeter columns were about to get pulled in?

If he did see the building was about to collapse, why would they predict he would get on the radio instead of take immediate action to save his life?

Why do they think the visibility from the smoke of two small fires were such that he could see to the four corners of the building?

Why are they using this quote as a ruler by which to measure the whole building


You said they were not allowed to testify

The reason they did not testify was because they were DEAD ! Killed when
WTC 2 collapsed right after these transmissions were recorded


Try doing some research instead of parroting stupid remarks...



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Is this a 'debunker' trick? Do you think that you magically gain some sort of truth for your silly narrative simply by ignoring what you are actually attempting to rebut?



I'm wondering if you're too far gone to deal with the real world events of 9/11. Not the online cartoon video version. The one with actual people, plane crashes and deaths.

But let's try anyway. This is a good starting point. Check the links.


www.debunking911.com...


Don't go berserk when you see the word Debunking. It's not Satanic Rituals, it just means getting rid of Bunk. Bunk is a polite word for Bulls**t.

Check the links. Lotsa pictures of plane wreckage.



[edit on 29-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


...and yet another "debunker" trick. Please take note of the quotation marks. They are a polite way of saying that you are full of bullsh*t. Do you know how to navigate the internet? I am just wondering why I am given yet another link to a page full of other links that I have to sift through when you could very easily link me right to the info in question or even post it here yourself with credit to the website. I took a quick look up and down and I am not going on a fishing expedition just because you are too lazy to try to prove anything you are saying.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
For the same reason Rummy said a missile hit the pentagon. Freudian slip. The mind while stressed is likely to say the truth of the matter than what you deceitfully wanted to say.
Kinda like puttin your foot in your mouth. Something you should have noticed by now.


Except it doesn't really matter what word Rummy might have used once. Because a large airplane hit the Pentagon. Not a missile. 3-5 people say they saw a missile, 200+ saw a plane. A crushed airplane and dead bodies were found. Hundreds worked on the clean up. You can phone them and tell them they're all lying. Phone the dead passengers families and inform them while you're at.


They'll be impressed by your great investigating skills.

Prime pushers of this absurd theory, Craig Ranke and his Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) acting as if they're independent Truther investigators have been outed as a corporation making a buck off this. Manipulatiing evidence and witnesses is the game. A lot of suckers out there in Truther land.

Check out the sordid details here


911review.com...


Mike


So I should believe you over the countries principle defense minister at the time?
Get a life my boy. There was only one hit on the building. If there were two hits he most probably would have said THE MISSILES. (plural). You can place wings on a missile and make it look like a plane.
Victoria's article is about fly over . That is not anything to do with a missile but it is disinfo here in regards to my post. No commercial airplane hit the pentagon on September 11 2001 IMO.
Please give me any of the phone numbers of the family members you speak of.
It would be best if you give me the numbers of the ones you have spoken to.
golly gee thanks



[edit on 29-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Reply to post by GenRadek
 


And that is with him intentionally forgetting the facts that 1) they usually say it sounded like not that it was a bomb, some even going farther and stating THEY KNOW IT WASN'T it just sounded like a bomb. 2) Eyewitness testimony is inherently unreliable.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Yes because the media commonly releases pictures of American victim's mangled bodies. WRONG! They tend not to.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Yes because the media commonly releases pictures of American victim's mangled bodies. WRONG! They tend not to.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



So you are confirming that the people posting here that these photographs exist are lying correct?



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


You weren't sound a sleep with swampy were you?
No one has mentioned building 2 for pages.
Sorry to hear those guys are no longer with us.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

So I should believe you over the countries principle defense minister at the time?

Get a life my boy. There was only one hit on the building. If there were two hits he most probably would have said THE MISSILES. (plural). You can place wings on a missile and make it look like a plane.

Victoria's article is about fly over . That is not anything to do with a missile but it is disinfo here in regards to my post. No commercial airplane hit the pentagon on September 11 2001 IMO.

Please give me any of the phone numbers of the family members you speak of.

It would be best if you give me the numbers of the ones you have spoken to.



As Rumsfeld made spoken about the plane attacks a thousand times in public, I'm sure, I'll go by the other 999 references. People make typos, flubs in speaking. They're not uncommon. Obama once referred to the 57 states of America. Doesn't mean they're hiding 7.

I linked you to that Ranke site to show you how Truther deception works. You obviously didn't get it.

Not even a possibility an airliner did not go into the Pentagon.

Do some basic research. Which does not mean Truther sites and video.
The information is all there, as a matter of public record.

Start with basic Wikipedia entries and use their links.

Frankly, at this point in your life you really can't differentiate between web and video fantasies and hard facts there's really not much else to say.

Mike

[edit on 30-8-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Not even a possibility an airliner did not go into the Pentagon.

Do some basic research. Which does not mean Truther sites and video.
The information is all there, as a matter of public record.

If at this point in your life you cannot differentiate between web and video fantasies and documented facts there's not much else to say.

Mike


So this is the newest tactic being practiced quite exhaustively of late. Debunkers toss out this "the information is there if you just do research." Just in this thread alone, look how many times one of these OS supporters has said something something something "instead of getting your info from truther websites and youtube." It must have been the talking point that was in bold and underlined when they got their script. Either the same person is pretending to be every debunker on this thread or they are all sheep of collective mind and once one person said it, the rest just repeat it over and over and that somehow makes it true.

Stop telling us where not to get this info. Stop telling us that there are places to get good info. Just give us this info.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


Lovely copout.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Lovely copout.


Copout? You basically gave me a link to google and said "here is all the info, just look." Yep that is helpful. So if my refusal to search through pages of links to try and find what you claim is there is a copout, then what is it when you simply refuse to link directly to it or post some of it here? It seems to me that if you know right where it is and you really wanted to convince me, you would just include the link. It is simple. This is not a game to be won or lost. You do not want to do the work for me? Good, I do not want anything from you then. I must say that I am truly sorry that asking you to take 4 seconds to back up what you are saying is so troubling for you.

The truth is easy.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Let me know when you find where I referenced any specific firefighters in this thread, when you do we'll go into the facts of the 9-11 commission not letting the firefighters testify to the commisson, alrighty?


It's getting pretty nasty around here. Transparently so.



Edit:
It says mmiichael posted the last post on this thread, but it isn't showing up. How does that happen? I've seen it a couple times today in the 9-11 forum.

[edit on 30-8-2009 by twitchy]



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
So this is the newest tactic being practiced quite exhaustively of late. Debunkers toss out this "the information is there if you just do research." Just in this thread alone, look how many times one of these OS supporters has said something something something "instead of getting your info from truther websites and youtube." It must have been the talking point that was in bold and underlined when they got their script. Either the same person is pretending to be every debunker on this thread or they are all sheep of collective mind and once one person said it, the rest just repeat it over and over and that somehow makes it true.

Stop telling us where not to get this info. Stop telling us that there are places to get good info. Just give us this info.



Guess I'm a sheep.

Don't read my messages. Put me on Ignore.

Go watch a few Youtube videos of the collapses with arrows pointing to where the explosions are.

Say to yourself you're doing reseach. Over and over again.


Mike



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael
Guess I'm a sheep.

Don't read my messages. Put me on Ignore.

Go watch a few Youtube videos of the collapses with arrows pointing to where the explosions are.

Say to yourself you're doing reseach. Over and over again.


Mike



Well, do you have anything to add? Do you have anything on topic to say? Do you have any credentials to make anything you say worth listening to? I would be thrilled to read all your wonderful little comments if you can tell me that you are going to add something on topic. All I see is deflection and insults. You dodge questions and attack people. I neve ronce said I rely on youtube for one single thing. I never once told you what kind of research I may or may not have done. I never told you any of that crap yet you take these "twoofer" generalizations and toss them at me as if it means something. What are you hoping to accomplish? Attacking me with some general junk that does not actually apply in anyway shape or form to me is doing what exactly? How about you just ignore all of my legitimate questions and simply attack me again. I think you make my case against you better than I could.

I just wanted to add that it has been 19 posts since I asked for evidence of passenger bodies and a crushed plane. Still waiting.....

[edit on 30-8-2009 by K J Gunderson]




top topics



 
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join