911 OS Debate Facts, Bring sources, not Opinions, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 29 times


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 06:36 AM by Gorman91
reply to post by impressme



Here's a fact. Computer simulation is not that hard to do. I'll stop believing the os (assuming it means original story), when a computer simulation proves it wrong.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 06:43 AM by conar
Amalgam Virgo has not been discussed much
en.wikipedia.org...

is it a coincidence that they had Bin Laden on the front page on this exercise?


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 07:36 AM by captiva
Good sane advice from the OP, but yet again 9/11 threads turn into side against side with the usual assertions from both sides.

Do I belive the OS? absolutly not. Why? because I got off my bum and researched the lies and propoganda. This leads me to my point..........

The energy expanded by both camps in debating the same old videos, documents and witnesses is pointless. IMO those that agree with the scenario and outcome pushed by TPTB have an agenda based on being told to believe and told to derail, cloud or generally muddy the waters of truth.

Am I saying they are organised disinfo agents?... Before I answer I will give you my reason for the answer.

They are not dumb or stupid people. Read some of their posts and you will agree with me. They are not sheeple because everyone eventually sees the logical cracks in the OS. They are intillectually aware so are being deliberatly used, IMO, to derail and cloud.

So I believe that most if not all of those who close their eyes to the evidence that has been and continues to be found and raised are denying it because its part of their job or role.

With the above point in mind. I suggest that our time be better spent researching and looking for evidence to end the quest that will see those responsible hang for what they did to thousands of Americans that day.

Ignore the debaters who show no evidence to support the OS. Ignore the debaters who hunt in packs to debunk the real evidence and get on with convincing joe public as to what realy happened that day.

The truth will out, Im sure of it and so are the government mouths who hassle and derail. That is the only reason they are here, and they know it.

Respects



reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 08:34 AM by seethelight
reply to post by impressme



I believe this should be moved to RANT.

The last time I told people to stop claiming things were fact without proof it was moved to RANT so... expect that treatment as well.

ATS is not a place to investigate or solve, it's mostly a place where people can swap lies and hoaxes and a place where people with mental illness can post crazy # without fear of being called crazy.

So don't expect the Truthers to start being honest... instead expect this to be dumped in an unread forum by mods.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 08:36 AM by seethelight
reply to post by Dean Goldberry



FACT: You don't know what you're talking about.

FACT: Repeating lies from other people, no matter how "authoritative" you may think they make you sound, doesn't make you an expert.

FACT: Using the word "fact," when you can't back up your arguments with proof makes you look foolish.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 08:57 AM by Dean Goldberry
reply to post by seethelight



I'm talking about physics; you're stating your purely emotional opinion or rhetoric, as believers in fairy tales are exclusively capable of. I'm just asking for scientific corroberation of physical reality. Fine by me if ONLY science - not emotion or opinion - can point the way and prove me wrong. Where's the PRECEDENCE?


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 09:05 AM by hooper
reply to post by conar



OS believers think that fire can cause a demolition


And "truthers" believe that fire has no effect on structures.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 09:12 AM by Alfie1
reply to post by impressme



impressme

You obviously really don't see the irony of you of all people intiating this thread.

For example, only 2 or 3 days ago, on your other thread " Phone calls from the 9/11 Airliners, Faked " I gave you a link to Dr George Papcun.
Dr Papcun's views, which briefly are that voice morphing was impossible in the conditions of 9/11, are obviously extremely relevant to a consideration of alleged "faked phone calls". Why are his views important ? because he actually devised the technology of voice morphing.

What was your reaction ? to dismiss Dr Papcun's statements as " someones opinion " while preferring to believe D R Griffin. So, a straight choice between someone who is an expert in the field and a retired theology professor and who do you go for ? The conspiracy theorist of course; as you will every time. So please don't give me bull about "facts" and "credible sources" you will only ever go for the conspiracy angle as is so obvious from your posts.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 09:40 AM by The Baby Seal Club
reply to post by Gorman91


You're right Gorman 91, computer simulation isn't that hard. As a matter of fact I bet that if I put certain parameters and information into my simulation, I can get a 757 to fly backwards while doing loops.
GIGO.

But do us all a favor with your correct computer simulation. Take all the stock market data from the last year and punch it in, and tell us EXACTLY where to put our money into 2 companies in which we ALL can make a killing over the next week. Thanks.


reply posted on 24-1-2010 @ 09:45 AM by theonlyrusty
Is it only me or do others see something a little off with news reports like this?

www.cnn.com...

Who mails these tapes and where are they mailed to?

What is still amazing to me is.....The official story of the hijackings is all based on presumptions.
There are no "first hand accounts" of what really went on on the planes. Unless, of course, you believe that cell phone calls were made from the planes.

I don't recall that anyone actually called someone and said, "There is a guy from seat 36b named Mohhamed Atta, that is holding a boxcutter to the flight attendants throat. He is threatening to take over the controls and fly the plane into the WTC". And, if that did in fact happen, you mean to tell me that NO ONE on the plane would have tried to stop it?!!!!

The entire story/scenario of 911 is contrived from the finding of a passport and government intervention of assumed conditions. No one really knows what went on on the planes from the moment they left the gate.

Anyone care to give me a detailed scenario of the flight supported by "FACTS"?

peas
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Flight 93 was headed for Building 7
  Posted 11 days ago with 48 member flags
9/11 INTERCEPTED
  Posted 3 days ago with 45 member flags
9/11: The WTC Elevator Key
  Posted 14 days ago with 43 member flags
What are your favorite 9/11 debunking tactics?
  Posted 7 days ago with 17 member flags
Who is the Joker on ATS radio now running their mouth?
  Posted 15 days ago with 13 member flags
Was the government a co-conspirator?
  Posted 17 days ago with 9 member flags
British Police Want Us To Present False Flag Terror Evidence.
  Posted 7 days ago with 8 member flags