Don't be fooled by ATS' professional debunkers

You know it's funny.

This debate has ranged since the early days of 9/11. Either side could be considered official bunkers or debunkers for their actions.

The argument is like beating a dead horse. The truth will NEVER come out...EVER.

It's an important issue, and should be discussed and all new information should be presented, but just giong about blatantly disregarding information from both sides in an effort to "destroy" a thread for or against the OS is nonsense.

It serves nothing but to divide this community further, which is why I don't read the 9/11 boards anymore, too much hate, too much paranoia and trolling.

Some members are here specifically for that section of the website, and they take an arrogant, defiant stance while using the "deny Ignorance" moto as their argument.

What everybody does in these boards, as far as 9/11 discussion goes, taking what has said above in mind, is IGNORANCE at it's finest, you people simply haven't realized that yet.

~Keeper

Originally posted by ZombieOctopus
Let me guess; you lost an argument recently and you're trying to make yourself feel better about it by convincing yourself it was a paid government operative.

Calling someone a paid agent of the government, is like comparing something to Nazism or someone to Hitler; it concedes that you have nothing of substance to say.

Exactly right.

He lost to me.

And now this.

If all else fails, run away and call the other person names.

And you know the saddest part? I happen to agree that the official story is bogus. I just disagree on certain unsubstantiated particulars.

It's fundamentalism, in its purest form.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by TrueTruth]

reply to post by tothetenthpower

This debate has ranged since the early days of 9/11. Either side could be considered official bunkers or debunkers for their actions.

This isn't about debunking. Heck, I hate negativity for its own sake as much as anyone here and have seen enough that I have my own reasons to believe.

What I dislike is the purposeful paranoia and fear mongering. It turns member against member and without knowing the slightest thing about those they attack.

If this is the future of ATS... then they can have it.


[edit on 29-11-2009 by redoubt]

reply to post by redoubt


Reading the rest of my post you will see that I do agree with you, it's the hate and trolling which is the problem, not the discussion itself.

However the topic has become diluted in it's own hate, and it's no longer about whose right and whose wrong, it's about who can garner the biggest knee jerk reaction from the community and then find some way to justify their actions to those who they've wronged.

This whole board has become a Straw Man.

~Keeper

Originally posted by RipCurl
of course, all these "sleepless nights" are resesarching only on websites that cater to your beliefs. AE911 isn't a reliable source

I hardly consider controlled demolition sites, science/physics sites, or fire engineering sites catering to anyone's beliefs. As I've already stated, sites like AE911T were not around yet.

But you go ahead and keep making things up like most debunkers do. Those of us in the truth movement will stick with facts, evidence and truth. Don't forget the keyword in the truth movement: truth. Not made-up, make-believe, illogical, or fairy-tale improbabilities like the official account suggests.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Good thinking this thread will keep most of the FEDS tied up for a while keep it going. That is the feds on ats.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by blc4r4]

reply to post by jthomas

What's funny about you 9/11 "Truthers" is you actually fall for the above nonsense that you were told and now believe it comes from your "gut instinct."

What is funny about OS believers is you actually fall for the OS nonsense that you were told and now believe it comes from your "gut instinct."

Debunkers don't have to do a thing except chuckle and shake their heads in amazement that 9/11 "Truthers" will believe anything other "Truthers" tell them like you did above.

OS don't have to do a thing except chuckle and shake their heads in amazement that OS believers will believe anything their government, Fox News, Bill O’Reily, Glen Beck, tells them as Religious truth.

Funny enough, some people are ignorant enough to think "9/11 was an inside job."

Funny enough, you are ignorant enough to think, “911 OS is all true”.
You have spent years making fun of the Truth, insulting everyone who scoffs at the OS proven lies. What are you hoping to accomplish here?






[edit on 29-11-2009 by impressme]

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I tried to talk to the guy calmly. In fact, I entered the discussion not even talking to him - just offering a website that had good information countering a particular point.

And all of a sudden, he comes charging in like a bull, and starts belittling my position, with that famous truther belligerence, as if anyone who doesn't share their pet theory is an idiot, needs to do their homework, or must be a Jew covering for Israel. Classy, huh?

If they ever hope to make any progress on the issue, as opposed to just impress themselves with the volume of their argument, or hear amens from the choir, they'd do well to entertain alternate interpretations, as even among the 9/11 skeptics - meaning, those who doubt the official story, me being one of them - there is a wide range of views.


It's really sad, actually. Some people just get off on feeling like only they have the inside perspective, and everyone else is a sheep - only they have seen the light, and everyone else walks in darkness. It's a common hook of many cults to convince members that they have special knowledge.

Oh well. Is what it is I suppose.

reply to post by TrueTruth


The funny part is that the problem exists on BOTH SIDES of the aisle.

The 9/11 movement, whether for or against the OS is akin to the Democrats VS Republican argument.

"Let's just keep em busy arguing among themselves while we laugh in the back rooms".

No side is better than other, you all have blood on your hands and it won't ever change until they realize that.

~Keeper

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I have no such blood on my hands.

Not knowing me, you're in no position to judge.

I don't have a side. That's my entire point. Anyone who values the scientific method, does not pick a side - they go where the data leads them. It is my core philosophy to reject duality - including the political partisanship you mentioned. Partisanship is a social disease.

I am the antithesis of how you just tried to characterize me.

I'm just trying to interject a proper examination of facts from both sides.

Thanks for the insult, but no thanks.

[edit on 29-11-2009 by TrueTruth]

Originally posted by TrueTruth
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I have no such blood on my hands.

Not knowing me, you're in no position to judge.

I'm just trying to interject a proper examination of facts from both sides.

Thanks for the insult, but no thanks.

That wasn't directed at you, I was agreeing your position, I was simply stating that both sides of the argument have the same problems.

My apologies if that sounded like an attack, it wasn't..

~Keeper

Originally posted by TrueTruth
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

I tried to talk to the guy calmly. In fact, I entered the discussion not even talking to him - just offering a website that had good information countering a particular point.

And all of a sudden, he comes charging in like a bull, and starts belittling my position, with that famous truther belligerence, as if anyone who doesn't share their pet theory is an idiot, needs to do their homework, or must be a Jew covering for Israel. Classy, huh?

If they ever hope to make any progress on the issue, as opposed to just impress themselves with the volume of their argument, or hear amens from the choir, they'd do well to entertain alternate interpretations, as even among the 9/11 skeptics - meaning, those who doubt the official story, me being one of them - there is a wide range of views.


It's really sad, actually. Some people just get off on feeling like only they have the inside perspective, and everyone else is a sheep - only they have seen the light, and everyone else walks in darkness. It's a common hook of many cults to convince members that they have special knowledge.

Oh well. Is what it is I suppose.

hey mate, if that was the case it is very poor form.

It doesn't matter if it's 911, JFK, UFOs or Peeing on Athletes foot, that's no way to argue a point.

I wish I knew before I jumped up to fight this position. But I have to stand by what I said in earlier posts.

I think the problem with 911 is that we all forgot how to be nice, a bit of manners would go a long way, or just the realisation that people can have opposing theories but that doesn't mean we have to tear strips outa each other!

Anyway, peace mate!

Originally posted by impressme



What is funny about OS believers is you actually fall for the OS nonsense that you were told and now believe it comes from your "gut instinct."

No. I believe the EVIDENCE and FACT based conclusions in the various reports based on the fact they were WRITTEN by respectable people in their fields of expertise, SPENT years researching and testing, and had their WORK peer reviewed.

YOU do understand how and why this is the case?

What does the truth movement have? Reports written in SHAM journals and one that will publish if you pay them too. And most of the reports are written by those who haVE No expertise in the fields they are writing about!

Funny enough, you are ignorant enough to think, “911 OS is all true”.
You have spent years making fun of the Truth, insulting everyone who scoffs at the OS proven lies. What are you hoping to accomplish here?

Then you wouldn't mind providing a fact fill, evidence based report that fits all the evidence, witness testimonies and events, of 9/11/2001. Care to back it up of course, with any published papers you have in RESPECTABLE engineering journals.



the truther movement has had 8 years to do and till this DAY Refuses to do so.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Ok. Thanks for that.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by TrueTruth

 

The funny part is that the problem exists on BOTH SIDES of the aisle.

The 9/11 movement, whether for or against the OS is akin to the Democrats VS Republican argument.

"Let's just keep em busy arguing among themselves while we laugh in the back rooms".

No side is better than other, you all have blood on your hands and it won't ever change until they realize that.

~Keeper

I agree, we'll keep arguing and arguing until there's about a dozen left, then the next generation will take over, the passion a little diluted, and so on, generation upon generation, until all that remains are a few old website, until that is all gone when the web goes telepathic!

But in all seriousness, well said!

9-11 Happened, the exact truth of who, what, where, and why hopefully will come out someday.
I can see suppressing and attacking conversations on it by devote individuals, I wont say its impossible, highly improbable, but its a strange world so..you never know.
The official story doesnt sit right with me, I've worked with steel and structure for alot of my life. What concerns me more, is how any satisfaction is gained by basically as stated earlier, most engagements on the topic do in fact go strawman. Frustration will erode mostly to that.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
. . . .
Secondly, what are you on about "proffessional debunkers"? Even if there were disinfo agents on here, at the end of the day they are still members participating in discussion. Instead of aiming for them personally, why not address their arguments? If an NWO agent were to post a comment against an NWO thread with their views and points, what good would it do to your cause to automatically dismiss them as agents as opposed to actually addressing their points? I mean at the end of the day, regardless of whether their NWO agents, conspiracy theorists or Tom Hanks, isnt this forum really about addressing points and arguments? What good does it do to automatically dismiss somebody for who they supposedly are, not what their argument is? This isnt what ATS is about in my opinion.

There are people being paid to make posts pushing certain points. I don't know where they post, but I do know a regular advertising company which has recently included this in what it sells, and pays per post.

You are right that it is important to argue with the post, not attack the poster. Now, I wouldn't know or care if anyone pays you to post because you are always informative and polite, and you answer points that other people bring up. The people I suspect of being paid agents are not like that.

These people are posting a regular number of posts each day, always pushing a small range of points. They do not present actual arguments or facts, and do not debate any that are presented. They merely repeat themselves over and over, and use guilt trips, threats, ridicule and strawmen to silence the other points of view. By doing this they seriously stifle discussion.

It's been pointed out in this thread that people posting theories not in agreement with official ones tend to be new posters. There's a grain of truth in that, and I believe it's because some new posters are surprised and hurt by the ridicule and harsh treatment they receive, and don't stay around. This is bad for the whole forum.

However there is another aspect. Having people devoted to cutting one off at the knees for disagreeing with the view they are pushing really sharpens up one's concentration, logic and use of source material. If people hang in there, putting together logical arguments and not running away, these paid agents can do more good than harm by keeping a thread alive and forcing clear thinking.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jthomas
What's funny about you 9/11 "Truthers" is you actually fall for the above nonsense that you were told and now believe it comes from your "gut instinct."

What's funny about you "Debunkers" is that you actually think most of us truthers believe things we are told without a shred of research or verification.

What we know is that you do not know how to logically evaluate information, facts, and claims.

When in actuality, many of us have spent countless hours, days, months and years with many sleepless nights researching and verifying facts.

A meaningless statement. One suffering from confirmation bias trying to "prove" one's beliefs will do that routinely. One can approach 9/11 "Truther" claims logically and quickly understand the contradictions, misstated "facts", and illogical mental processes that characterize those who become 9/11 "Truthers." We don't have to spend "countless hours" looking for what we want to find; we only have to point out your failures to make any case of support for your claims.

You forget that we have decades of history studying the nature of "denial", the motivations, the methodologies, the tactics, and the outright, repeated denial of verifiable facts inconveneint to a deniers beliefs and motives. This is nothing new, _BoneZ_.

I was an official fairy-tale believer until I spent many months researching what truthers were saying back then and none of it came from truther websites as there weren't very many around in those days. So let's stop pushing misinformation that truthers just "believe what they're told" and that's what the truth movement is based off of because that's furthest from the real truth.

You just illustrated that you "believe what you are told." There is not a single rational person who falls for the "Truther" canard of a so-called "official story" or "official fairy tale." None of us have any reason to deny evidence wherever it leads. We don't have any ax to grind as much as you NEED to have imaginary opponents. If you "Truthers" were the slightest bit capable and rational and could actually bring evidence to the table overwhelmingly supporting your claims, not one of us would object. And you would have done it at least seven full years ago. But you can't and you know you can't. You have never given us one reason to believe or accept your claims, much less call for yet another investigation.

You stepped right into the doo-doo with that faux pas of the "official story" and don't even know you did it. You gave us a good chuckle.

You don't know what you don't know and you don't want to. You all are happy to buy into the utter nonsense of "9/11 Truth" . And you have not an ounce of embarrassment to be associated with the idiotic and irrational Richard Gage.

Get real, _BoneZ_ and give up the nonsense of "9/11 Truth."

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Those of us in the truth movement will stick with facts, evidence and truth. Don't forget the keyword in the truth movement: truth. Not made-up, make-believe, illogical, or fairy-tale improbabilities like the official account suggests.

As I wrote, you don't know what you don't know and you don't want to. The truth is irrelevant to you.

_BoneZ_ One of Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth Sustaining Members

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Don't forget the keyword in the truth movement: truth.

Yes, quite an oxymoron huh?

Not made-up,

Let us start with some of Gage's other "engineers" and their thoughts:

–Engineer Edward Knesl says, “We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.”

–Structural engineer Dennis Kollar says, “For me the most convincing aspect that the 911 collapse was a controlled demolition is the recorded explosions on the 9/11 Eyewitness DVD.” (talking about the wind on the microphone in Hoboken)

–Robert T. Mote: "I could never understand the 'convenient' vertical collapse at the BASE due to an extreme event at height."

make-believe,

Richard Gage in May 2008: ”Ninety thousand tons of structural steel has been pulverized to a fine talcum powder through these intense explosions”

illogical

Watch the crowning moment of Richard "the Box" Gage
video.google.ca...

(keep in mind, Gage NEVER promoted this debate on his website!)

fairy-tale improbabilities

Richard Gage: "McPadden heard a countdown on a Red Cross radio prior to the WTC7 Collapse."