Originally posted by weedwhacker
Unfortunately, there is a large contigent of individuals who prefer to start with a premise, then only selectively choose anything that can be found, in "research", to support that supposition. Whilst ignoring, or discounting, any other evidence that refutes the contention.

Ironically it seems that you have started with the premise that the official story is true and view everything from that conclusion.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What is necessary here is to point out obvious flaws. NOT that the person who posts them is responsible for the flaws in the first place; rather, that person has likely been duped, led down a wrong path, by poor information.

Sometimes it is hard to believe that person could have some much information available but still come to a conclusion that contradicts the evidence.

I got on a plane this morning and there were not two but three boardings.

Now I'm worried. Am I going to Cleveland instead of London?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
This is not an argument. I offer additional research venues for you to consider. IF a person is truly interested in proper research.

Please show these research venues that show proper evidence to support the official story, becasue i have not found them in over 5 years of real research.

Would you care to show your research websites, your FOIA requests and e-mails for this research?

Unfortunately, there is a large contigent of individuals who prefer to start with a premise, then only selectively choose anything that can be found, in "research", to support that supposition. Whilst ignoring, or discounting, any other evidence that refutes the contention.

But unfortunatley there is as bigger contigent who just goes along with what they are being told instead of doing real research.

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
I suggest we put these people on ignore, and collaborate to make a bunch of new posts, putting them on the defensive. These guys aren't worth a single breath of air or time. Seriously. Why are you wasting your time responding to them and letting them make you dance to their tune?

Well its kind of like comic relief. Specially when you catch not being able to support the official story, or show them how even the media they use or some statement from a site they use proves them wrong.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Unfortunately, there is a large contigent of individuals who prefer to start with a premise, then only selectively choose anything that can be found, in "research", to support that supposition. Whilst ignoring, or discounting, any other evidence that refutes the contention.

Ironically it seems that you have started with the premise that the official story is true and view everything from that conclusion.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What is necessary here is to point out obvious flaws. NOT that the person who posts them is responsible for the flaws in the first place; rather, that person has likely been duped, led down a wrong path, by poor information.

Sometimes it is hard to believe that person could have some much information available but still come to a conclusion that contradicts the evidence.

Please prove the official story to be true. Or stop with your know it all arrogance. What part of the official story is true? Enquiring minds wanna know...

cheers-
phil





[edit on 5-4-2010 by Phil Jayhan]

I have recently asked some profs at the local university and asked them what could of caused the tiny crater. They offered some theories like explosives or bomb but when told it was caused by a Boeing 757 they said "NO WAY!"

Truth movement is growing.