Nothing new here, however...

...I was wondering if there is a website, or even an ATS thread that has a simple and accessible list of the points "Truthers" typically bring up, as well as the rebuttles for those points. I realize that I could watch Loose Change and Screw Loose Change, but if such a page already exist, I'd rather read the abridged version.

I only ask this, because after watching Loose Change I decided to watch some debates on the subject, and I felt like the Loose Change guys were on the ropes a lot of the time.

reply to post by Jack Squat

...I was wondering if there is a website, or even an ATS thread that has a simple and accessible list of the points "Truthers" typically bring up, as well as the rebuttles for those points.

Ohhhh yeaaaa, there is plenty of discussion here, just go the 911 board(www.abovetopsecret.com...) or do an ats search.
Better bring some flame retardant, it get's heated in there sometimes. Just stay respectful and anticipate some strong contretemps.

Peace

[edit on 5-7-2010 by speculativeoptimist]

I don't mean to be antagonistic, but I already have to disagree with the way you are approaching this subject.


Let's put it this way. There is still no consensus as to what the hell happened that day. The most "official" accounts, are all government accounts, and you should read those first:

- 9/11 Commission Report (Kean Commission) -- reads like a novel and doesn't present a lot of technical information regarding the attacks themselves, but a lot of foreign/political information

- FEMA WTC report, a preliminary investigation that led to the NIST WTC report, which used many of the same engineers

- NIST Twin Tower & WTC7 reports - the ONLY technical investigations of the collapses of the buildings that had access to various pieces of physical evidence as well as the critical structural documents for all the buildings

- Auxiliary reports from transportation safety (NTSB) and other federal agencies, which provide simple information like times for hijackings, impacts, etc.


If you go straight to the online bickering, which is basically what you are asking, you are bound to read a lot of trash coming from all sources. Frankly every idiot and their three sisters can post on the internet, and you will come across material from everyone from high schoolers pumping their egos and experimenting with social identities online, to actual professional men and women experienced in relevant fields providing opinions and knowledge directly from experience. However even professionals need accurate data to come to scientific conclusions, and it is impossible to recreate and validate several tests and models without their parameters, and without complete structural documentation. This is what happens when you limit the amount of evidence available to the public in the first place, by not releasing the structural documentation, the parameters they used for their computer simulations, and all the rest, especially for a very controversial topic that is widely-discussed by all ranges of people. The logical and unavoidable consequence is that the general public by itself, and without the help of the federal investigators who had more resources, will NOT be able to paint a complete picture of what must have taken place, and will become emotional and irrational trying to force a conclusion based on nothing but what they WANT to believe.


Bickering about 9/11 online has turned into nothing but a pissing contest where everyone is trying to see who can piss the furthest. No one cares what happened on 9/11 anymore. I wish you luck and hope that you are genuinely concerned for the truth of the matter, so that someone may eventually find it.

[edit on 5-7-2010 by AquariusDescending]

Originally posted by AquariusDescending
No one cares what happened on 9/11 anymore.

I know it seems like that a lot of the time, but a lot of people care about what happened on 9/11. The relatives of victims for instance.

Many other people care as well. The US got up that morning as Dr. Jeckyll but before the day was out there were signs that it was turning into Mr. Hyde. The transformation is quite visible now and a lot of people are concerned about it. When they deal with the US they now wonder what exactly are we dealing with?

The importance of 9/11 is that the crimes were committed in the one jurisdiction where there is a slight chance that the perps could go to jail for it. That's why there is still interest in 9/11, although I grant you the interest seems to be academic at the moment.

Originally posted by Jack Squat
...I was wondering if there is a website, or even an ATS thread that has a simple and accessible list of the points "Truthers" typically bring up, as well as the rebuttles for those points. I realize that I could watch Loose Change and Screw Loose Change, but if such a page already exist, I'd rather read the abridged version.

Here is an abridged compendium of the "Truther" points. As far as rebuttals, all you need is one word: reality.

Cruise missiles were used instead of airplanes;
the airplanes were indeed airplanes but were remote-controlled;
the airplanes were beefed-up military stock aircraft;
the airplanes fired a missile into the buildings a nanosecond before impact; the airplanes has special pods attached to their undercarriage;
the airplanes had “forward spraying fuel sprayers” installed to help enhance the explosion of jet fuel;
there were NO AIRPLANES AT ALL;
it was a Global Hawk;
it was an A-3 Skywarrior;
it was a painted-up KC-135 Tanker aircraft;
it was done with holograms;
there were missiles fired from the Woolworth Building in NYC;
pre-set charges blew the holes in the WTC to LOOK like an airplane hit;
the media (ALL the media) is in on the charade;
the aircraft/missiles/whatever were invisible;
the various videos of the WTC2 impacts do not match up because…well…ummm….even though they were filmed from….ummm…different locations….;
the passengers never existed;
the passengers existed but were loaded up onto another aircraft and were shot down over the Atlantic;
The passengers were in on it;
the passengers were gassed;
the passengers are living in exile somewhere;
Barbara Olson (wife of former Solicitor General Ted Olson and a passenger on flight 77 that SUPPOSEDLY hit the Pentagon) was arrested in September of last year in Germany or Poland or West Snoblovia with a bajillion counterfeit lira (never mind the fact that Italy has not used lira since 2002); the steel melted;
the steel didn’t melt but buckled;
the steel didn’t melt or buckle, it was cut by thermite;
it wasn’t thermite, it was thermate;
It wasn't thermate, it was nano-thermate;
the steel didn't melt or buckle or was cut by thermite/thermate/nano-thermate, it was dustified;
it was a bomb in a truck carried up in an elevator;
controlled demolition is what brought the towers down;
a small nuclear bomb is what brought the towers down;
lasers are what brought the towers down;
a particle beam is what brought the towers down;
direct energy weapons destroyed the towers.

Take your pick.

reply to post by trebor451

The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Users and lurkers to this post. Please realized that the 'theories' put fourth by trebor are theories that no 911 truther or investigator has ever embraced. In fact those theories above have been debunked by truthers themselves and have been found to have been started and promoted by people who are in the business of covering up 911 by smearing the movement with stupid theories.

It has also been known that some of these theories were started by debunkers themselves posing as truth seekers in attempts to make it look like people who seek the truth concerning the terrorist attack of 2001 had nothing for evidence and were grasping at straws which couldnt be further from the truth.

Disinformation aimed at skeptics of the official story is more subtle than the simple promotion of that story to the masses. It may consist of ideas with no basis in evidence packaged as shocking new findings that supposedly prove the involvement of insiders. Its effect is to discredit the larger body of 9/11 research through guilt by association with its sensational and unscientific approach. An example is the idea that Twin Towers were not hit by Flights 11 or 175 but rather by completely different objects, such as military planes with missile-firing pods.

There are a few of these promoters and debunkers with multiple accounts and tag team friends that hang out here daily on Abovetopsecret, so be diligent and smart. Educate yourself in multiple sites and sources and if you feel irritated and insulted, there is a good chance that you have come across one of these debunker/pseudoskeptic/ pseudo truther. There aim is to irritate you and insult your intelligence.





[edit on 6-7-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Hoaxes are designed to fool people, and a well-crafted hoax can motivate sincere dedicated people to promote it.

Of the four reviewed videos, Loose Change shows a willingness by its creators to reject hoax claims, the film's third edition having far fewer errors than its earlier editions.


In Plane Site
Loose Change (Editions 1,2)
9/11 Eyewitness
PentaCon

These people are connected to the the Popular Mechanics people who "debunked" those stupid conspiracy theories. In short they put out and promote ridiculous theories and then later used the magazine to debunk the whole movement. More on this if you wish.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Originally posted by Jack Squat
...I was wondering if there is a website, or even an ATS thread that has a simple and accessible list of the points "Truthers" typically bring up, as well as the rebuttles for those points. I realize that I could watch Loose Change and Screw Loose Change, but if such a page already exist, I'd rather read the abridged version.

I only ask this, because after watching Loose Change I decided to watch some debates on the subject, and I felt like the Loose Change guys were on the ropes a lot of the time.

I see where you're going with this, but I have to tell you it doesn't matter in the least. I've talked to many, many, MANY 9/11 conspiracy people, here and in other sites, and I can tell you that almost to a man, the 9/11 conspiracy people really don't care as to what happened on 9/11. All they care about is what they WANT to have happened, and they will listen to no information that refutes what they want to believe. Heck, we have people here who refuse to believe planes can actually crash into the ground, and think the world is secretly controlled by satan worshipping numerologists. How can you even discuss the facts rationally with people who subscribe to fantasia?

More than once, Ive seen people post on this very site say things like "noone can ever convince them that there wasn't a conspiracy", telling me right away they're not here to learn anything. They're here to shove their conspiracy stories down other people's throat and they're so much in love with them that they don't care whether they're even true. The self styled truther movement is all but getting into fistfights amongst themselves over what the "blatantly a conspiracy" even is- be it controlled demolitions, nukes in the basement, lasers from outer space, no planes, whatever- so it's obvious they don't care what the conspiracy actually is...just as long as there is one.

The conspiracy people will simply see such a site as yet more evidence there's a never ending coverup of a much greater secret plot, just like they do everything else that attempts to debunk their conspiracy fantasies. In the end, it might as well not exist.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Good ole dave couldnt be more misleading.

The truth is that the official story put forth concerning the events of 911 has been debunked by scholars, investigators, historians, and first responders.

The reason why there are 911 sites and "truthers" is because the official story concerning 911 has been proven false. Thats is the key. The official story is false and people are now looking for the truth when it should be these agencies that are promoting the lies of 911 seeking the truth which is not the case.

Not one of these silly debunkers and their damned fooled 911 debunking sites has been able to prove the official story.

Bin Laden denied the attack and the FBI admitted they have no evidence linking Bin Laden to the 911 attacks. That is 0.1 % of the official story that has been debunked. It goes on.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation.

If you are genuinely trying to claim that Steven Jones isn't claiming that thermite/thermate/whatever brought down the towers, or that Judy Wood isn't claiming the towers weren't brought down by directed energy beams, or that guy in France (forgot his name) didn't write a book claiming the Pentagon was hit by a missile, or that Dylan Avery, et al, isn't claiming the planes that hit the towers were carrying missile pods, then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth. Your conspiracy monger partners in crime have directed me to all of these people at one time or another to "prove" their respective conspiracy claims so I've seen all these things personally.

Your not liking the fact that the truther movement is seriously polluted by hordes of crackpots and con artists doesn't make the fact any less of a fact.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation.

If you are genuinely trying to claim .......

Trying to group truth with rubbish is the only thing you got and it's a failure tactic.

I claim nothing but that the official story told to the american people as they laid their families to rest and mourned their deaths was nothing more than a poor cover up and a lie.

People want answers and they will get it. The official story is a lie and you know it as well as anyone who spends 10 minutes trying to support the official story.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by Shadow Herder]

But where is this official story? It doesn't sit in a bound document in the library of congress, does it?

In fact it's a straw man designed by the truth movement so that they can make claims like yours above: "I don't know what is true, but what I know for damn sure is that the "OS" is wrong." But there is no official story - at least I've never seen a working definition of one, because various official pronouncements differ with one another. The FBI, for example, have a different "OS" to me. Or to the Guardian newspaper in London.

I've even seen people claim the "OS" is wrong because one mainstream source disagrees with another! instead of thinking logically and assuming that this is because there is some confusion over what actually happened, and that there is therefore no Official Story, but rather a collection of overlapping voices and accounts, they take it as prima facie evidence of an inconsistency, and therefore of coverup.

The reason the TM has to employ this sleight of hand, is because its arguments are tissue thin. There is no counter hypothesis, no alternative theory, just a series of little chips at a monumental straw man. This will go nowhere, because it ignores the way in which ideas are formed within public, historical and scientific discourse - namely by the proposition of ideas and theories for debate and scrutiny.

You may like to think that

"The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation"

but in fact the notion of there being no plane at the Pentagon is mainstream 9/11 "Truth". So is the thermite proposition. The wackier notions expressed in the post may have less currency, but in fact there is no evidence to suggest they are put forward by debunkers or people trying to discredit 9/11 'Truth". You repeatedly claim this, but I've never seen you provide anything beyond basic assertion. A common problem for the TM.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
reply to post by trebor451

 

The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation.

Every single one of those items was taken from a bona fide and certified "conspiracy site" at some point over the past 9 years.

I know the truth hurts, but you should embrace the diversity of thought from the Truther camp rather than castigate such variety.

The fact that the aforementioned list is merely a partial listing of the "theories" available and that it is prima fascia evidence that the "Truther" movement has absolutely no freaking idea what they are after should matter none to you - there is no concept, theory, idea, plan or conspiracy too far out there for the Truther movement to embrace. On the contrary, the one common theory the "Truth" movement believes in is the "shotgun effect" - if you simply advocate *everything*, you are bound to hit on something that someone, somewhere will buy into. If you have a bit of luck, perhaps you can even get them to part with a bit of green scratch to purchase a CD or a hat or a little teddy with your trademarked logo on it.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by trebor451]

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

The reason why there are 911 sites and "truthers" is because the official story concerning 911 has been proven false. Thats is the key. The official story is false and people are now looking for the truth when it should be these agencies that are promoting the lies of 911 seeking the truth which is not the case.

Now that's a patently unrealistic claim. The one uniform characteristic of the conspiracy proponents is that they get 100% of their information from these damned fool conspiracy web sites exactly like Dylan Avery's that push out all sorts of paranoid rubbish that can be debunked in 30 seconds of Google searching. I've only seen ONE conspiracy supporter admit to have actually read the 9/11 commission report so I find it intellectually dishonest to claim there are flaws in the "official story" when 98% of you don't even know what the "official story" actually is.

Let's settle this bum argument of yours once and for all- have YOU ever read the 9/11 commission report?

reply to post by Shadow Herder

The reason why there are 911 sites and "truthers" is because the official story concerning 911 has been proven false.

Or, more likely, there are people dying for attention and the best way they can think of is to "publish" via the internet claims so outrageous that you almost can't help but look.

The official story is false and people are now looking for the truth....

No, "people" really aren't looking for what you think is the truth. The only people claiming to be looking for the "truth" are a submicroscopic subculture of the microscopic general conspiracy subculture.

Prove me wrong.

It is abosllutely wrong to say that no-one cares about what really happened on 9/11. I care deeply, as do many thousands of others. I care deeply that people were killed, I care deeply that it became the pretext for wars which have killed hundreds of thousands more, and I care deeply that based on all the evidence I have seen put forward by eye-witnesses, first-responders, pilots, building demolition experts and scientists, THINGS DON'T ADD UP.

I care deeply that the US government has refused an investigation, and I care deeply that evidence which would throw a lot of vital light on what happened is being withheld.

On a purely common sense level too, the Government stone-walling on this issue simply doesn't add up.

If this was such an atrocious terrorist attack, why in the world don't the authorities release all the info they have to prove it?

Since this became an issue of such gigantic consequences for the world, any honest government with nothing to hide would surely release everything they have to prove it. Proving this was indeed a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda would undoubtedly get more people on their side.

But their secrecy and refusal to enter into meaningful dialogue simply fuels suspicions. Add to this the fact that evidence that Saddam's WMD was knowingly distorted/maufactured, and that many competent legal specialists consider the war in Iraq to have been illegal...means that AT THE VERY LEAST, there are questions to which WE ALL SHOULD BE DEMANDING ANSWERS.

Is it the Government's duty to serve the people, or are the people supposed to serve and preserve the Government unconditionally?

In my understanding, if there is democracy (which I don't believe there is), it should be the former. So, if the people demand to know the facts, demand the release of documents, the Govermnet should comply.

It is simply not enough for Obama to stand there and stone-wall the people of America, and citizens all over the world, and state: 'There will be no enquiry into the Iraq war.' How convenient. Case closed.

This, my friends, is totalinarianism.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
I claim nothing but that the official story told to the american people as they laid their families to rest and mourned their deaths was nothing more than a poor cover up and a lie.

That's a lie and we both know it. You said, and I'm quoting your own post-

"The Above Post and it's theories were Never Supported by any 911 researcher or 911 truther seeker and has been proven to be sponsored disinformation."

The "above post and its theories" included the very "thermite", "energy weapons" and "cruise missile" claims that (cough cough) researchers like Jones, Woods, Avery, and that French guy are pushign out, and have been directed to more than once by their supporters here as legitimate references.

I said it before and I will say it again- just becuase you don't like the fact that there are a lot of crackpots and con artists polluting the conspiracy theorist movement it doesn't mean it makes the fact any less of a fact.

People want answers and they will get it. The official story is a lie and you know it as well as anyone who spends 10 minutes trying to support the official story.

That's not true either. What the conspiracy people want is proof that the individual conspiracy claims they subscribe to are real, and they don't give a flip about what other conspiracy supporters want. If, for example, the towers were shown to really have been destroyed by the fires, do you genuinely think the "controlled demolitions" people will ever accept it? If, for example, the towers really were destroyed by controlled demolitions, do you really think the "energy beams from outer space" conspiracy supporters will ever accept it?

The only inviolate truth in all of this is that the web site the OP mentioned will have zero impact just as every other web site debunking these conspiracy stories have had zero impact. This is becuase the conspiracy people will accept NO facts, evidence, eyewitness accounts, NOTHING, that disproves the conspiracy stories that they themselves support. That's been proven so many times that it cannot seriously be debated.

By the way, to the Government trolls - you have no facts to support your arguments. You simply dish out emotionally charged rebuttals, with a personal bias, designed to make people feel embarrassed, by extension, to question the official story.

QUESTIONING IS ESSENTIAL FOR DEMOCRACY TO FUNCTION.

But, oh yes, the idea that the US government is a democracy is also a hoax.

And you, Government trolls, shame on you for selling your soul to the criminals and working against the people.

posted twice in error, so second one deleted.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by wcitizen]

By the way, to the Government trolls - you have no facts to support your arguments. You simply dish out emotionally charged rebuttals, with a personal bias, designed to make people feel embarrassed, by extension, to question the official story.

QUESTIONING IS ESSENTIAL FOR DEMOCRACY TO FUNCTION.

But, oh yes, the idea that the US government is a democracy is also a hoax.

And you, Government trolls, shame on you for selling your soul to the criminals and working against the people.