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.

 

What do we have to do to gain credibility? I am about to quit.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   

What do we have to do to gain credibility?


Talk to open minded people.

Never quit. Just ignore those that clearly want to reject proof via hard evidence.

Use your time to spread the word instead of wasting energy on those that
spin and deny your research. There are many here doing just that - trying
to make us quit.

We're beyond debate; it's time to get action from our "leaders". E-mail your
local media and copy the latest from the scientists and architects. It takes a
few minutes. More good will come of that than fighting with anonymous kids
on the internet.




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:13 AM
link   
You are part of a movement who's sole purpose is to attempt to take to task some of the most powerful government officials and power players in the world for crimes against humanity.


Did you ever think it would be easy?


They own the news media, the police, the television networks, and virtually everything else. And they have been spreading propaganda and planting seeds of ignorance and fear for decades.


We are the ant attempting to take down the elephant. But there is more to a fight than wheather or not you win. Sometimes you have to take up a cause simply because it is right and it must be done.

You are on the side of righteousness, do not ever forget that. Do not give up.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman

Originally posted by truthquest
reply to post by talisman
 


We don't have to gain credibility. If people don't want the truth that is their problem not ours.

Alex Jones destroyed his credibility but if people will use that to say all other things he said must therefore be false then they are using logical fallacies and have no logical right for example to say that 9/11 is not an inside job because Alex Jones said it is an inside job.

I have a tough time believing other people won't be filling the void left by Alex Jones.




People don't see things like this. The tendency of people (public) is to "lump" things together. Whether it is wrong or right is not the issue, its just the way it is.



And my point was that if they are going to lump things together then they can just suffer the consequences of their purposeful ignorance.

If someone is going to do that... call them out and point out their willful ignorance. Any time someone discredits an idea due to its prominent speakers is 1) wrongful discrimination and 2) willful ignorance. So call them out on those two things hard and they will change their tone in most cases in the future.

"Intellectuals solve problems. Geniuses prevent them."
- allegedly Albert Einstein

Instead of solving a credibility problem simply avoid it by mounting a sharp verbal attack whenever someone uses the word "crazy", "nut", "off-kilter", etc. with words like "wrongful discrimination", "guilt by association", "willful ignorance", etc. Force people to attack the idea by attack their idea of wrongful discrimination, guilt by association, and willful ignorance. Because that is what they will be doing if they use the Alex Jones hoax to say 9/11 happened just like president Bush said.

Example conversation snippet:
Jerk: "Oh you think 9/11 was an inside job just because Alex Jones the hoaxer said it was?"

You: "Alex Jones may be off the wall nuts. But you can't shoot the messenger or you are unfairly discriminating. Why are you attacking the messenger instead of the idea that has all of this powerful evidence behind it?"

[edit on 10-9-2009 by truthquest]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by king9072
 



The United States Government has the power, to absolutely obliterate every single Pentagon related conspiracy by doing one simple thing. Releasing 1 video, of a Boeing slamming into the building at 550 MPH.

This one video, which no doubt exists, as evidenced by the ten's of cameras which would have captured the event, has the power to eliminate any need for a conspiracy theory.


There's a video of the explosion, but it's a slow frame-rate camera that didn't catch the plane coming in.

Can you specify which possible cameras near the pentagon could have definitely caught the plane coming in?

Otherwise it's perfectly reasonable to assume there's no footage that exists. There's also many witnesses who claim to have seen the plane.



What a shocker, you joined within the last 3 months. And my jaw is on the floor that you are a 911 debunker, absolute shock. Couldn't have guessed in a million years.

Anyways, does "most heavily defended building on earth" ring any bells? That would be the Pentagon. The face of each side of the building stretched 921 feet.

You mean to tell me, you believe that there would have been no cameras across 921 feet of wall? The 6 frames they released from the guard shack, doesn't even show a 757. You cannot show me a 757 in the images.

I don't even need to go into the fact that the hotel and citgo station both had cameras that would have captured the attack. Unfortunately the FBI took this film, and for some reason do not want to release it.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:24 AM
link   
In my quest for truth, I have learned one inexorable fact.
Truth, is subject to interpretation.
What I believe to be true, someone else may or may not.

I don't like to try and convince people of anything.
I'll talk about something that we can mutually relate to.
That is the doorway to a greater understanding.
Trust is also a key element in conversations.
If you come across as trying to ram the truth down someones throat, they will act accordingly, and promptly tell you to go @#$% yourself
You have to realize, that people are comfortable in their own little micro-realities.
When you disturb that, they are going to make you pay for it.
If you pique someones interest, they will look for more information.
That is what I do to gain credibility. I touch on a subject, pique interest, and encourage further exploration.
Everyone must be given the opportunity to find their own truth, and like it or not, we must accept what others find.

Think of it from a network marketing viewpoint.

When a person takes the time to research something, then the truth will reveal itself.



What do we have to do to gain credibility?

All we have to do is show people the door. It's their choice to walk through it, and we need to make that choice as easy and painless as possible.

People will put up with a lot of crap, just to keep the peace, in their own lives.
When doors are getting kicked in, is when people will have revelations.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 

Video footage was seized by the FBI from a few other locations in the vicinity of the Pentagon, including a nearby Citgo gas station, as well as a Doubletree Hotel. The Citgo footage was released in September 2006, following a FOIA request.



Footage from a security camera at the Doubletree Hotel was released in December 2006




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   
just know and be conifident in what you believe. dont get into serious arguements about it if you cant stand your ground. just be patient. we will never be satisfied, but it doesnt mean you have to quit. its hard being right.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
i like to start by dropping a 9/11 line to people, and then not necessarily say i believe in conspiracy, but say to them that there are some strange things about that day. mention how you saw videos and informations, maybe tell them how 80% of americans reached their opinion within the first 4 days of 9/11 and how you decided to look further. eventually they will be interested. then tell them to watch videos. doesnt matter which 1, they will all point out atleast one discrepency that will make that person think. convincing people is not as hard as you think.

though when i tried to speak withg my dad he said, "well what does it matter who or what was behind it?" i dont know how he can have that approach, but maybe hes right.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
And yet another reason why ATS is killing ATS.

What do you have to do to gain credibility???????

What a freak'n joke....

You "truethers" will never be credible. Not with stupid things like "super thermite", holographic planes, fake planes, pay offs, inside job, controlled demolition, all the jews stayed home that day, the president was in on "it",
the media was in on it, all the senators, congressmen were in on it.

the list goes on and on and on......

You guys have a ridiculous-off the wall-way out in left field answer to every minute of what happened that day.

Anything that is presented to you is wrong, mis-info or dis-info.

The nat - geo special that was on last week - of course could not be in any way shape or form the least bit accepted by you guys. You guys say it was a scam from the begining. Your guys couldn't even ask the guy who conducted the experiments a reasonable question.

So, you "truethers" can argue and present your version of what you call "facts" to anyone and you will always be laughed at, mocked, made fun of and be called all kinds of vile names.

Again, this is why ATS is killing ATS....



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
Well none of us know the damage and the outcome of the Alex Jones fiasco, but that aside, what does the Truth Movement have to do to gain credibility? I am honestly thinking of "throwing in the towel" and calling it a day and just read about UFO's and what not.

It is frustrating on so many levels and for me at least has been building for a long time.

From the beginning the movement has been hounded by people who have put out the most ridiculous of theories or on purpose put out stuff that can easily be debunked (Just think of In Plain Sight).

Now we have some scientific tests that have been done, but the debate is not on the findings but is centered on whether or not the Open Journal is really a Peer Review Journal or has any credibility.

It seems nothing is straightforward anymore.


I have some thoughts on how we might gain credibility but I would like to hear others voice there.

Here are just a few of my thoughts.


#1. Engage and learn from Skeptics ( I am not talking about die hard debunkers who's sole purpose is to argue against the obvious)

I am talking about Skeptics who hold a different viewpoint and who actually might have something valid to say, or might correct an error in the facts we report.

This is about the Truth after all, and we should try as hard as we can to put aside "winning the argument" for "searching for Truth."

If we don't respect others who hold a different viewpoint, that makes us intolerant. Tolerance is tolerating people who are different or hold different viewpoints. Tolerance goes a long way in gaining one respect and it makes others take you seriously.

#2. Doing more then arguing back and forth and in circles on the internet. The net has become a place that catches people like flies and keeps them there.

Now don't get me wrong, there are certain facts and arguments that are valid and need our full attention, but we have to *balance* ourselves lest we waiste our energy on such so that more important things are not addressed or looked into.

#3. Demand of OUR OWN (People who believe the OFFICIAL STORY IS FALSE).

Don't just glorify David Griffin or Steven Jones, respectfully challenge them and have your own ideas challenged. Of course we can applaud those and the hard work they are doing but in order for the movement to remain strong, we should be more demanding.


Those are just a few of the ideas floating around my head right now. The way I see the Truth movement currently, it is stuck in the mud and all of these issues will be a future talking point, much like JFK. If that is the future of this, I don't want to continue.

If the future of 9/11 Truth is Alex Jones and his Charlie Sheen fantasies, then count me out.


Admit you're wrong. Not about everything, but at least somethings. Nobody who is supposedly dealing only in factual evidence can ever be 100% correct. The fact that no truther will or has ever said, "ok, you're right - I'm way off base here" detracts significantly from your movements desire to be seen as a legitimate avenue for investigation and just adds to the perception that your movement is a cult. Cults are never wrong.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


What I've done is to become a sustaining contributing member to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and while I may distribute some of the new Loose Change 9/11 An American Coup DVD's around, and perhaps arrange a screening with the help of Vancouver 9/11 Truth, that's about it for me.

But the arrow of progress and the credibility of the evidence being put forward and fhe work of many truth groups, is definitely marching forward, and it will continue, until one day there will either be another investigation, or a more accurate historical rendering of what took place.

No worries, it's all good.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
There is no room for conspiracies when we know the truth. They are an unnecessary byproduct of lies that cannot be substantiated.

That is a major problem with the truth movement. They cannot agree on what is true, nor can they prove that their theories are based upon facts. Once some of the hypothesizes are proven wrong, truthers adjust their pieces to fit a new narrative. Its an endless cycle of debunk - tweak - debunk - tweak - etc...

According to their philosophy behind the meaning of truth, subjective-personal interpretation overrides any type of tangible reality. Even though a car is clearly painted in red, the argument they are making is that the car is not red. After truthers create that thesis, they will say subjective interpretation is fact. Its not. Its an opinion.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Pathos]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
The "truth" is that the official story, including the story about how those buildings were destroyed, is a lie, and is patently absurd. That's the starting point. We don't claim to have the full understanding of just what took place, for example how the many war games may have played a role to impede any attempt at defence, things like that. All we know is that the official story as sold by the 9/11 Commission and NIST is wrong, false, a lie.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by tomfrusso
 


---You "truethers" will never be credible. Not with stupid things like "super thermite", holographic planes, fake planes, pay offs, inside job, controlled demolition, all the jews stayed home that day, the president was in on "it",
the media was in on it, all the senators, congressmen were in on it.---

the term truther is really stupid for anyone involved. but i guess people that don't believe the official story can call themselves that if they want.

most all those things are retarded. anyone who believes holographic planes or all the senators knew or the media knew or any stupid thing is just..well stuipd.

fact is, they didnt shoot down those planes. they should've, but they stood down. the rest doesnt really matter, thats just details to be worked out.

there was a hundred coincidences and things wrong with that day, and the official story, and anyone who believes it is just as retarded as someone who believes in holographic planes.



[edit on 10-9-2009 by whateverponcho]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
We as people who demand a new investigation into 911 must not give up EVER! It is up to us to try and get people to see the truth. If we give up, then we are giving up on our country and the American people.


Playing the DA here but what is to be gained from another investigation? Who will carry it out? Who will compile the report? Will it need to be official to change people's minds and if it's an official investigation (backed by whom?) does that make it automatically redundant? Then, if the evidence of the Truth is there...what happens next?




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I'm a proponent of letters to editors. As long as it's presented in a way of asking, "what really happened?" and supported with links to credible evidence.

the Journalof911studies.com is a good place to start to get lists of facts that you can be armed with in composing letters to editors and just simply having on hand if you are given a chance at discussing the subject with someone open minded enough.

There certainly are a lot of grey areas still, so stick to the things that have been PROVEN...pictures of molten steel pouring from the buildings and firefighters reporting that they SAW molten steel, BBC's "live" broadcast that 7 had come down 25 minutes before it really happened, evidence of nano thermite, etc.

I, too found myself really upset the other day over this whole Charlile Sheen "interview" and didn't think it helped "the cause" at all.

It may take years, if ever, for the whole story to finally be revealed. But if you have any belief in karma or reaping what you sow, take solice in KNOWING that the evil bastards that perpetrated this, whomever they may be, WILL suffer getting bitten on the ass by their lies and deceit one day.

Stay calm, stick to the facts, get the word out, let the experts continue their research (help support the experts if you can) and be patient.

That's MY advice!
)

[edit on 10-9-2009 by ladyjo]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
The "truth" is that the official story, including the story about how those buildings were destroyed, is a lie, and is patently absurd. That's the starting point. We don't claim to have the full understanding of just what took place, for example how the many war games may have played a role to impede any attempt at defence, things like that. All we know is that the official story as sold by the 9/11 Commission and NIST is wrong, false, a lie.

Its a thesis that hasn't been proven to be true. Its a subjective and personal interpretation of events, which is based upon pure speculation.


Originally posted by OmegaPoint
All we know is that the official story as sold by the 9/11 Commission and NIST is wrong, false, a lie.

No we do not. If we did know for a fact that the original story was false, we wouldn't be having this debate about 9/11.

If you view the official report as being wrong, you are stating that your subjective opinion is fact. Its not.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pathos
[quoteIf you view the official report as being wrong, you are stating that your subjective opinion is fact. Its not.


That's not necessarily a true statement.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
This one video, which no doubt exists....


And you know this.....how?

I know! You MUST have seen it!!! Wow! Why haven't we heard about your viewing of this video before - since it "no doubt exists".



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyjo

Originally posted by Pathos
[quoteIf you view the official report as being wrong, you are stating that your subjective opinion is fact. Its not.


That's not necessarily a true statement.

Within the context of what he is stating, my analysis is true according to his philosophy.

It should read to everyone else:
If you view the official report as being wrong, you opinion is a subjective (but not factual) interpretation of evidence. Opinions are not factual.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Pathos]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join