9/11 Truth Movement Gaining Scientific Credibility

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
As a 9-11 truther I feel insulted by your last paragraph. If we are not willing examine various theories, some more credible than others, than how can we ever determine what likely happened?

These various theories such as hologram planes, no planes at the WTC, and "pods", have been examined years ago, found to be false, and as such, anyone still peddling false information would be peddling disinformation. And 9/11 truthers don't peddle disinformation. Therefore if you believe in or peddle these crackpot theories that have been debunked years ago, then you're not considered a 9/11 truther. So you may continue to feel insulted. I have no sympathy for those that choose to remain unresearched.

There isn't a single 9/11 research organization that endorses or accepts these crackpot theories, so let it go.

I stand by what I originally said, regardless if it does not please you DBonez! You don't offer any theories at all other than just deny the OS, which even a fifteen year old can do by now.

I already know explosives went off and those explosives ultimately brought the building down. Every unbiased person knows that, so please bring something new to the table. You say those theories were debunked yet I have seen many threads of the "crazy" type and most have NOT been debunked at all.

To be frank with you, you don't come across as a 9-11 truther, rather as CONTROLLED OPPOSITION to the OS believers. The government has hijacked/infiltrated every conceivable truth movement and posts/threads such as yours do nothing towards advancing the 9-11 movement. Its called stalling!

PS: As of now, I am putting you on my # list!

reply to post by seethelight/dereks/etc
You posted the same thing in another thread, so I'm going to post the same reply to you. WTC 1 and 2 were both hit by planes being used as missiles. This caused raging fires in both buildings. Obviously you're not going to use the same amount of explosives in those buildings as you would in a building that size not being hit by planes.

Originally posted by downisreallyup
And why exactly are people saying that RT is not a credible news source?

Because RT doesn't believe what they believe.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

Have to disagree with thy final statement about Cheney/bush co. never telling the truth.Didn't he once say that he,"TOOK" the office of prez?Oh wait,Cheney was prez,sorry my bad.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
You say those theories were debunked yet I have seen many threads of the "crazy" type and most have NOT been debunked at all.

Oh the threads show up from time to time. But they get debunked every time. Where are those threads at right now? I don't see them anywhere unless I dig back pages and pages. Why? Because they get debunked and buried.

Please stop trolling and contribute something to the thread. Or not...

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
You say those theories were debunked yet I have seen many threads of the "crazy" type and most have NOT been debunked at all.

Oh the threads show up from time to time. But they get debunked every time. Where are those threads at right now? I don't see them anywhere unless I dig back pages and pages. Why? Because they get debunked and buried.

Please stop trolling and contribute something to the thread. Or not...

Of course they get buried. The noise to signal ratio is too high!

The best way to hide the truth is by bringing it out in the open and have people mock it to submission. Mocking the truth does not equate to debunked!

I can agree the hologram theory is a bit far fetched, but the pod theory is not. It makes perfect sense to mount a remote control pod beneath a plane's belly and then have someone steer the planes into the buildings. I am talking about the NYC attacks.

If the planes that struck the WTC were bonafide united/american scheduled flights then how come the media made no mention of the dead victims onboard and no public outcry from their families? Are they afraid to speak or what? Further, how is it possible for Bin Laden to still be alive and talking from caves in afghanistan if he actually carried out the attacks? Don't you think with all the advanced tech america has to offer, such as remote uavs, he would have been killed within a year of the conflict?

Basic common sense mate! Just like NO PLANE struck the pentagon because the hole was TOO SMALL and because it is almost impossible for any pilot to make such a precision hit on such a short target. No plane can possibly bust the pentagon's steel-reinforced concrete walls. Not unless it had a decent warhead attached to it! Secretary of Defense, Mr Rumsfeld himself mistakengly admitted that a missle struck the pentagon, before correcting himself by saying "a plane was used as a missle".

So lets put the picture together and see what happens. Two planes hit the twin towers on 9-11, caused minor LOCAL damage, 45 minutes passed then we heard loud booms and viola the towers came crashing down VERTICALLY on to their bases. What the hell were the planes actually? Why all the INTENTIONAL confusion?

And the plane that went down in Shanksville, PA barely has any importance.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I can agree the hologram theory is a bit far fetched, but the pod theory is not. It makes perfect sense to mount a remote control pod beneath a plane's belly

Yeah, it doesn't matter what "makes perfect sense". What matters is what actually happened.

Fake disinfo "pods" debunked:

www.questionsquestions.net...

Originally posted by brianmg5

Originally posted by seethelight
Russia Today is NOT a credible source.

So 1/10th of 1% of the worlds engineers think 9/11 was a demo, that isn't actually very impressive.

Statistically, that means NO engineers do, because most surveys/studies have a margin of error of AT LEAST 1%.

So less than a 10th of that is meaningless.

Russia Today = Fail
Statistically insignificant number of engineers = fail

And on and on...

This is a very interesting statistic and I'm sure it can all be backed up. Could you please cite a source for the 100,000 engineers who have proven 911 wasn't a hoax?

I'm really excited to see this! We'll finally be able to put this one behind us!!

.........

LOL. I was pointing out that Einstein was not statistically significant, and that sciences like Engineering require proofs and models that can be proven and disproven.

It's much more to the point sometimes, to make a joke -- as it's obvious there is not a bevy of engineers supporting the Government Theory on 9/11. There are a few well-placed cronies and the three and four letter agencies, act as if their entire cadre of professionals, signed off on it. Nope. You work for one of these agencies and you keep your papers and your points within the walls, and concentrate on your own task. If the big wigs say something -- you leave it alone.

They did a dang good job at consensus building, and most people follow the reality that "everyone knows"and don't really fight too hard to understand much beyond what takes care of their own business. We want to be liked and popular -- so we talk about Bard and Anjolie and don't stray form the path.

I remember talking to a pilot -- back when the GOVERNMENT THEORY that everybody KNEW, was that you couldn't find a plane with it's transponder off. I was aware of the "RADAR THING" that Air Traffic Control uses. I asked him; does the official news bother you sometimes -- it seems to me, that a pilot would know that some things they claim are kind of "not believable" (and I mentioned tracking planes and the transponder, of course, is to ID the plane -- and it would set off a bunch of alarms when a plane flies in any airspace without it turned on). But he just figured, they got a few things wrong, but all the areas that he wasn't an expert in -- they got it right.


Amazing that we can't have scientists say; "The earth is warming" and we can't get people to say; "Single Payer healthcare will lower costs." Well, actually we do -- but if you watch the TV -- those concepts seem "controversial" and kind of "too liberal" even though they are the majority opinion in the country. The "Truther" theories are portrayed as "far out" but about half the people in New York City think the government had something to do with it.


It's this daily illusion that is created, that people were FOR the bank bailout.

All the "mavericks" seem to sound like Company PR -- the "self made" cowboys, who stroll in like the Marlboro Man -- sound like they work for Madison Avenue. It's amazing how the "cultural image" of the solid, thoughtful and hard working American, ended up parroting, the exact same concepts of the "Media" that it is so suspicious of. I can't even watch the news anymore without getting extremely annoyed at the lack of Reporters calling out absolute lies in interviews, of not covering the huge stories and following the nonsense.We get distracted by the food fights while our country is falling further and further behind.


>> And yeah, and as a previous Truther just mentioned the NSA admitted that the Vietnam war was based on a bogus and staged attack -- it's like in 50 years if someone said; "Oh sure, we rigged the towers to blow, and we even tricked an Al Qaeda cell into hijacking airlines -- with a LOT of help." And nobody cared. We are TOLD by people that it's completely ridiculous to think the US would attack it's own buildings to instigate a power grab and war --- but we JUST HAD NORAD ADMIT THAT. How many soldiers died in the Vietnam war? About 50,000. Was that not just as bad as 9/11? It was met with a yawn.

There are ONLY two wars in American history that I think are likely NOT based on a false flag; The War for Independence, and WW II. And WW II only had the US fighting the Nazis because FDR had half the robber barons on Wall Street by the short hairs for trying to arrange an army to take over Washington. SMEDLEY BUTLER

BushCo lied about EVERYTHING, yet we are nuts for suspecting that the most bogus botched investigation in history of the USA wasn't a coverup.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I can agree the hologram theory is a bit far fetched, but the pod theory is not. It makes perfect sense to mount a remote control pod beneath a plane's belly

Yeah, it doesn't matter what "makes perfect sense". What matters is what actually happened.

Fake disinfo "pods" debunked:

www.questionsquestions.net...

I never said it was a missle pod! I said it was a remote control pod. Do you know the difference between the two?

And as for the author's conclusion of the bulge attached to the plane's belly being "a trick of light" is pathetic. It really is! Just look CLOSELY at the picture comparisons and then with your hand on your heart tell me its just an "illusion".

Your not fooling anyone! And how come you didn't bother answer ANY of my sincere questions in the previous post?

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Just look CLOSELY at the picture comparisons and then with your hand on your heart tell me its just an "illusion".

Many of us looked closely at it so many years ago, debunked it and moved on. You're way behind the times. But you are entitled to believe in what ever you like, no matter how wrong or right. Why do you think it was taken out of the 2nd Loose Change?

Why do you think that 9/11 research organizations like AE911T, Scholars, 9/11 Blogger, etc. don't endorse the "pod"? Because there was none on the bottom of Fl.175, period.

But you go ahead and keep believing in fantasies. You will be part of a very small minority in the back corner while the rest of us get on with real 9/11 truth.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Just look CLOSELY at the picture comparisons and then with your hand on your heart tell me its just an "illusion".

Many of us looked closely at it so many years ago, debunked it and moved on. You're way behind the times. But you are entitled to believe in what ever you like, no matter how wrong or right. Why do you think it was taken out of the 2nd Loose Change?

Why do you think that 9/11 research organizations like AE911T, Scholars, 9/11 Blogger, etc. don't endorse the "pod"? Because there was none on the bottom of Fl.175, period.

But you go ahead and keep believing in fantasies. You will be part of a very small minority in the back corner while the rest of us get on with real 9/11 truth.

Well what is the truth then? If your going to insult and ridicule someone with a differing opinion, the only honorable thing left to do is state YOUR theory and why you think its better than ours.

Here is what a spanish university professor had to say about the bulge:

CONCLUSIONS

The same analysis has been performed on various images. The selected images are fragments of photographs of the attack on 11 September and a Boeing 767-300.

The studied images are taken from different angles of observation.

The detected cylindrical objects cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun on the plane, because they always appear to be the same shape and size, though with varying luminosity.

The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation).

The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear.


AMPARO SACRISTÁN CARRASCO
PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL

Mataró (Barcelona, Spain), 26 March 2003

[edit on 28-2-2010 by EarthCitizen07]

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
26 March 2003

We've come a long way since 2003, including the debunk I posted above. You believe what you want to believe. But you don't need to plead your case to me because I helped debunk the "pod" disinfo way back then and you'll never convince me there's a pod.

You should be pleading your case to Scholars or Pilots or some other organization, but good luck getting them to care!

Anyway, this is off topic. Let's get back on topic. Thanks.




[edit on 28-2-2010 by _BoneZ_]

reply to post by technical difficulties


snort.

That's completely ridiculous and not based on anything but some wishful thinking.

So, how'd they figure out how much explosives to use?

what would they have done if a plane missed?

Why did no one report the timed explosions necessary for a demo to work?

Why would you just make stuff up you have no proof of?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Please keep this up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're my new favorite poster!

reply to post by _BoneZ_


You did not debunk anything! I just debunked you, but your a poor sport and will never admit it. That is fine. Keep up "the good work" and hopefully by 2150 we might get close to the truth, that is if NWO doesn't blow us all to hell by then.

I called you *controlled opposition* and you proved me 100% correct by large. Thanks!!

reply to post by seethelight


That picture came from an article he wrote which you can read here:

www.wtc7.net...

In regards to these pictures Steven Jones makes these statements:

"I am further checking whether these photos show the glow of molten metal, or of a bright light inserted into the hole."

People ran with these as proof of molten metal. It was discovered later that it was a light. However, there is plenty of proof for molten metal. It'll take you two minutes to find it, as long as you're searching objectively and not trying to prove a preconceived conclusion.

Good luck.

Yours,

THE AQUARIAN 1

Originally posted by THE AQUARIAN 1
However, there is plenty of proof for molten metal. It'll take you two minutes to find it

Proof is right here in my other thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by _BoneZ_


And yet the 911 death toll mounts, see: www.legitgov.org...

reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1


He used it in his paper and in lectures saying it was molten steel.


As far as I can tell HE generated it.

If that's the kind of investigative mind (one that runs with evidence without knowing if it's real... or one that invents evidence, and then lies when he's busted))... then your faith has a long way to go...

reply to post by seethelight


I used to be riled by ignorant 9/11 debelievers and I used to bite and vent my anger in many posts. Now though, I realise that people like yourself are scared, scared of the truth scared of realising just how messed up this world is, the world where people think they are safe in their own houses. A world where people believe that their governments would save them in the time of need.

I understand how scared you must be, I understand how helpless you must feel, but what about the innocent people that have died in the hands of the corrupt system?

You are alive today and arguing in defense of the perpertrators, but all that can change on sixpence once something happens that will involve you personally.

All it takes is one experience and your life as you know it will never be the same again.

God luck

reply to post by seethelight


Post a picture of molten aluminum in open atmospheric conditions.

It turns silvery upon exposure to cool (atmospheric) air.

It does not glow like molten steel. It does not glow like the metal seen running from WTC2.