ATTN: Everyone

page: 3
56
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
The water is constantly being tested tp see how effective lies and misdirection are. No people do not have to spend their day re-documenting details to entertain you or any other thread bearer. Besides that, everyone has an opinion and for the most part they just way to find information that supports their view. People can argue about anything and find fault with any point of view. People with a certain education are still people. They are weak, vulnerable, naive, brainwashed, manipulated, dependent, prejudiced, needy, etc..

All of science, all of philosophy, all of reason, all of faith, have one goal and only one goal and that is to feel good. That's it, that's the whole ball game. People want to feel good about something. Their belief, they have the right understanding, they're safe, they "know" something, they're smart, they're righteous, they're just, it's ok to ignore their conscience or they are aligned with it. Sometimes their beliefs are suspicions that their belief may be wrong and they need confidence to change or to keep. But everything resolves to nothing more than feeling good about where they are at. And guess what? People find ways, based on their condition to feel good about their knowledge which is likely to be the direct opposite of someone else.

Truth is out there but truth is somewhat relative to the viewer. Very few people care about truth, most want to feel good as quickly and cheaply as possible.

There are way too many repetitive subject threads and way too many small minds to go into the details with an intention of educating a stranger. Hints are sufficient to alert someone to the concept that it may not be what they think it is. Bottle feeding every threat is not realistic or necessary.




posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by KKinsane2009
"DESIGNED" TO WITHSTAND MULTIPLE PLANES


pity nowhere did one of the tower designers state what you claimed.... but that is so typical for "truthers" - they just make garbage up to try and bolster their conspiracy theory!




Furthermore, al-Qaeda conspiracy theorists frequently point to the fact that the towers were designed to withstand a 707 impact, not the 767's which actually struck them. In fact, the two planes are very similar in terms of size, speed and fuel capacity.


SOURCE: FEMA's WTC Report -- www.fema.gov...



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
It's called petulance.......I'm gonna take my ball and go home!!



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crito

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by KKinsane2009
"DESIGNED" TO WITHSTAND MULTIPLE PLANES


pity nowhere did one of the tower designers state what you claimed.... but that is so typical for "truthers" - they just make garbage up to try and bolster their conspiracy theory!




Furthermore, al-Qaeda conspiracy theorists frequently point to the fact that the towers were designed to withstand a 707 impact, not the 767's which actually struck them. In fact, the two planes are very similar in terms of size, speed and fuel capacity.


SOURCE: FEMA's WTC Report -- www.fema.gov...


Let's just say that a 707 did hit the WTC and not a 767.

How on earth did they intend on removing the wreckage, so that they could fix it all up good as new again?

Elevator?

Crane?

Staircase?

Helicopter?

Telekinesis?

Flying Dragons?

[edit on 28-2-2010 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
thank you for finally providing a peice of evidence against the known facts, this is what we are trying to support. I don't entirely agree but thank you for showing us there is at least one sensible couter argument that isn't "your wrong, truther lol"

the reason I don't agree is because

“The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door—this intense grid—and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.”[25]

Demartini appeared to be so confident that the towers would not collapse that he stayed behind to help save at least 50 people.[26] As a result of his actions, he lost his life on 9/11. "

Previous yet relevant link

actions sometimes speak much louder than words, bless this man...



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrAnnunaki

Originally posted by captiva
I have a suggestion to the truthers and the OS brigade....First the Truthers, and yes I am logical and clever enough to be one. Stop covering the same topics over and over while sitting in your safe haven...get up off your ass and go do something about it !!

To the OS believers...whether a paid derailer or someone who chooses to follow the OS, please realise that your time for affecting any change in truther beliefs has long gone. Every bit of evidence creates doubt in the logical, open minded brain. Hense the truther movement will one day help show that there are US murderers who need to be brought to justice.

I am personally fed up with 9/11 threads and I bet Im not alone.

Truthers...take it to a new level !

OS...........you are wasting your time.


Respects


Why cant U take it to a new level and REALY DEBUNK THIS HEADACHE TOPIC OF YOURS.

Peace


MrAnnunaki, I don't know which side of the debate you support, but you have hit the nail on the head. Also, star & flag for the OP, I also agree 100% with the sentiment that drove you to start this thread. And captiva, I agree with you, too.

Individuals on both sides of the debate have grown weary of each other, both from beating the same dead horses long after the barn has burnt down as well as from various tactics each side plagues the other with. This is getting us nowhere nearer to the truth, which is what we are supposed to be caring about. Remember, sometimes someone from the other side really wants to understand what you're saying, or see where you got your information, and regardless of whose side of the debate you're on, if you really want to spread your point of view you have to retain some respect for the other side and be willing to help them see your point when they let you. So,Tsuki-no-Hikari, your post is very apt right now.

captiva, I share your pain--the "truthers" have the numbers and they have the evidence, yet remain quagmired in the face of limitless derision and smart-ass insults veiled as logical arguments from both main stream media sources and the entrenched opposition here on ATS. And I agree that such barrages are acts of desperation--but that doesn't mean they don't work. QWe do need to take this debate to a new level. As MrAnnunaki says, we need to DEBUNK THIS TOPIC.

"But isn't that what were doing?" one on either side of the debate may ask. The default reaction to the impasse seems to be one of "We can't because the other side is cheating/lying/idiots/incapable/paid by the government/etc" more and more often. I know that's how I've felt, especially when dealing with particular posters (dereks, you shall remain nameless in this). Recently in responding to posts by seethelight, I realized why he has been able to insult and insinuate his way through so many arguments: "our side" of this debate has gotten intellectually lazy, myself included. It's as if we are often so convinced of our own perceptions of the event that we think that fervent belief is sufficient to prove our case, that since we are correct we can reactively respond to any objections with the truth and put that debate to rest.

We know longer use the rules of debate and the rigors of logic to guide our minds and our posting. I sometimes feel that if one is right, one ought to be able to "shoot from the hip" and hit the target effectively more often than not. (Probably a meme I picked up from watching action genre movies.)

There are rules to debate that establish things like burden of proof and what form that burden takes, based on the type of argument being put forth. There are names for the fallacies of logic that both sides have fallen into using on each other. These ideas, logic and reasoned debate, use rules and the principles of mathematics to determine the outcome of opposing points of view. But to use them effectively takes time and some effort, although the rewards are numerous. If either side begins to use them across the board and reject fallacious arguments by calling them by name out for what they are, it will debunk the thread after a short period of debates about the fallacies themselves. How short that period is can only be determined by how rigorous the side that adopts this strategy is in its analysis of the other side's flawed arguments. Sometimes it is better to let your emotions cool down before deciding just how your cage has been kicked, so that you can accurately expose under what pretense the argument fails, thereby limiting debate. If everyone on, say, the "truther" side of the debate were to have the discipline to always respond to ad hominem attacks with the same tactic, to call it out for what it is and refuse to take the bait by answering the antagonistic side of the remark until the question or statement is put forth without the fallacy, the opposition will have to put up or shut up, or resort to even more juvenile tactics, which would amount to posts that could be protested and removed, or, in some perfect universe, blocked by the mods before they developed chain reactions within the thread.

This will only fit the goal of debunking the thread if enough people adopt it; the more who do will allow the opposition fewer and fewer opportunities to get away with their trolling, and we will gain the benefit of restructuring our arguments so that they are logically rigorous and easier to defend or promote.

What do you think?

Right now very little of



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crito

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by KKinsane2009
"DESIGNED" TO WITHSTAND MULTIPLE PLANES


pity nowhere did one of the tower designers state what you claimed.... but that is so typical for "truthers" - they just make garbage up to try and bolster their conspiracy theory!




as I said, none of the tower designers stated it could take multiple impacts - Frank was not the designer.... looks like "truthers" have trouble reading!



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by thinline
reply to post by In nothing we trust
 


Interesting point. Are you making a God reference or are you making a John Lear reference?


Which part are you wanting clarification on?

I made three posts in this thread prior to your question.



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks
as I said, none of the tower designers stated it could take multiple impacts - Frank was not the designer.... looks like "truthers" have trouble reading!


He doesn't have to be the designer to have a more educated opinion on the subject than you do. All you have is blind faith in what the gub'ment told you.



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Crito

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by KKinsane2009
"DESIGNED" TO WITHSTAND MULTIPLE PLANES


pity nowhere did one of the tower designers state what you claimed.... but that is so typical for "truthers" - they just make garbage up to try and bolster their conspiracy theory!




as I said, none of the tower designers stated it could take multiple impacts - Frank was not the designer.... looks like "truthers" have trouble reading!


Yup it looks like you are right dereks.

None of the STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS who designed the towers stated that they could withstand MULTIPLE 707 jetliner impacts.

Thanks for pointing that out.



[edit on 28-2-2010 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
The problems you address are quite valid. I know when myself and a lot of others encounter such a scenario, I just look up the evidence myself, if it's a big enough issue. Otherwise I won't waste my time on it. If the Mods enforced citation of sources, I agree it would be a much better board, accuracy-wise. There wouldn't be threads about some bulls%^@ posted on the front page with no sources, carrying on for 30 pages, only to be found out as a hoax later, or just simply lacking too much evidence (or having none at all). The Mods could just warn the poster and/or close the thread upon discovery.

Also, I don't think ALL YouTube videos should require additional sources. Some of the videos ARE the only source of the information. For example, if the video is an incognito camera shot of the FED Chairman admitting that everything on ATS about the NWO and banksters are true, then where are you gonna find a better source than that?? That's an extreme example... but you get my point.



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
No citation of sources is needed in this 10-minute compilation of news stories from 9/11 that PROVES 9/11 was an inside job:




posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I have a lot of sympathy towards the "...do your own research..." retort.

You have to realise that there are a lot of people on here who have not only been researching 911 for nearly ten years but the whole NWO agenda for decades. My first exposure to it was in '79. That's a lot of years of being awake to an agenda of global genocide and control that the majority of the western world cannot see. It's very easy to get fed up with noobs, delusional OS supporters, and people who have yet to experience the paradigm shift of an awakening consciousness.

Almost every day threads with supposedly new information or new angles pop up on here and the fact that the OP or later contributors haven't done their homework is obvious. Even if you restricted your research to ATS threads you would find that the majority of these new threads are just regurgitating old news.

I for example am so fed up with people in the real world who can't get their head round the idea of the NWO, but are so fascinated by it that they won't let the subject rest. They usually can't even get their heads round the simple and obvious fraud of the world's central banks. They refuse to look at the facts and probably never think about the subject until we meet up again. I get very tired of repeating the same proofs all the time to these people and in the end I just say 'Don't believe me, do your own research. Now can we move on to another subject please.'

The fact is the term 'do your own research' is a necessary evil and one first popularised by the early NWO whistleblowers. The position 'Don't trust me, don't believe me, go out and find out for yourself and do your own research.' is a valid and entirely necessary one.

just my two cents.



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by KKinsane2009
"DESIGNED" TO WITHSTAND MULTIPLE PLANES


pity nowhere did one of the tower designers state what you claimed.... but that is so typical for "truthers" - they just make garbage up to try and bolster their conspiracy theory!

History Commons Profile: Frank De Martini:


January 25, 2001: WTC Construction Manager Says Tower Could Sustain Multiple Plane Impacts

Frank De Martini, an architect who works as the World Trade Center’s construction manager, is interviewed for a History Channel documentary about the WTC towers. He says, “I believe the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing the screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.”[Dwyer and Flynn, 2005, pp. 149]

www.historycommons.org...



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Emerald The Paradigm
 


Emerald, stars for you.

I just posted a similar reply to Dimensional Detectives other similar thread.

Disclaimer: I too feel there is something completely odd with 9/11 and events that have happened since, but if I disagree with you, let it be known I'm not trying stop any further investigation or trying derail any current investigation. I'm just using my common sense.

So yes I'll agree there are many pieces of this puzzle that don't add up. Here's my problem though, all these pieces don't necessarily derail the official story. It's been almost 9 years now, and no large pieces have been discovered.

I believe this was all sort of covered in the Stack IRS crash conspiracy discussion. I advocate that if there is a conspiracy, there would have to be so many people in on it that it would be hard to keep secret. Surely somebody somewhere with big information would have come forward by now. Steps could be taken that even in the event your death your damn busting information would make out even after your death. Yet we still don't see this. Again I ask why is that.

Time will tell I guess but I'm not holding my breath.

Dave



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
To be fair, probably 97% of those posting their "facts" probably just did the copypasta thing from another site, without really verifying to see if it's legitimate. Most often from other conspiracy sites.

There has only been a few serious efforts to do ones own research regarding 9/11, and the biased conclusions were fruitless in the end.



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by davec0021
I advocate that if there is a conspiracy, there would have to be so many people in on it that it would be hard to keep secret. Surely somebody somewhere with big information would have come forward by now.

You mean like the JFK assassination? It took almost 50 years before E. Howard Hunt made a death-bed confession to his son that the CIA killed Kennedy:

The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt

It took 40 years to prove that the Gulf Of Tonkin incident never happened.

It also took 40 years for Operation Northwoods to become public.

Anyway, are...

200+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
1,060+ Engineers and Architects
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
400+ Professors Question 9/11
300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals

...enough for you?

www.patriotsquestion911.com...


[edit on 2/28/2010 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


Sphinx, hopefully I fall into your category of people who can intelligently debate the topic.

I too feel there is a lot that points to the effect that 9/11 was a staged event. i.e. Emeralds point about the passport in the rubble is excellent and I do believe that to be planted.

My problem is that in itself is not proof, it's odd and probably false, but not definitive proof of an inside job. If 9/11 was an inside job, surely some monumental proof must exist some where, but I still don't see it.

Respectfully all I want is some whistle blower to come forward with definitive proof. i.e. if the person who planted the passport or the planting of passport story came forward and said he/she was told to do it. That would work nicely, but we are not seeing that. Correct me if I'm wrong but I have not read of any insider any where discounting the official story with absolute proof.

Again I agree with most of you that the entire event smells of conspiracy but sorry that's good enough for me these days.

Dave



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   


Respectfully all I want is some whistle blower to come forward with definitive proof. i.e. if the person who planted the passport or the planting of passport story came forward and said he/she was told to do it. That would work nicely, but we are not seeing that. Correct me if I'm wrong but I have not read of any insider any where discounting the official story with absolute proof.

Dave


to Dave: don't you think "they" got rid of the guys on the field ? asylums, cemetaries or erasing memory...name it

------well said , OP
For those among us who can't dig real deep in the roots of sources because they lack time, providing a truckload of links is essential.

For example, if I read a thread during my lunch break and decide to read stuff later, a link that I can save is way better than a cold "do your own research ".



[edit on 28/2/10 by MattMulder]



posted on Feb, 28 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Emerald The Paradigm
 


I agree 100%. They were able to find passports of said hijackers, yet couldn't find 3 indestructible black boxes. Not sure, did they ever find the black box in Pennsylvinia?



top topics
 
56
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join