It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 demolition theory debunkers

page: 15
14
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I've seen you "respond" by refusing to answer. That's not really sufficient to prove your assertions.


I am no longer interested in proving any assertions.

This event occurred 9 years ago...


Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I don't want to debate you about the details. How many times can I write this before you understand it? I want you to provide me with some indication that you have done what you claimed to do.


How many times can I write this before you understand it?

I don't care what you want me to provide.

Think for yourself and do your own research.

If you really need help starting here you go.

Complete 911 Timeline
www.historycommons.org...

September 11 Web Archive
lcweb4.loc.gov...

September 11 Television Archive
www.archive.org...

AboveTopSecret.com 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Master Index
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Free 9/11 Researcher Starter Pack
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Free 9/11 Documentaries & Videos
www.911docs.net...

Black Vault Encyclopedia
www.theblackvault.com...:9/11_Attacks

911summary.com...
www.911proof.com...
www.911scholars.org...
911review.org...
www.searchillion.com.../9/11/911-searchillion.html










[edit on 5-9-2010 by Jezus]




posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

I am no longer interested in proving any assertions.

This event occurred 9 years ago...


No it didn't. It occurred several days ago in this thread.

How can you seriously be confusing these two things? Is it not as painfully obvious as anything could possibly be?

I'm not asking you to prove your assertions re 9/11 - indeed I don't even know what they are, the usual pile of rubbish I imagine. I asked you to provide me with evidence of your original research. You know - the assertion you made in this very thread?

As an aside, it's interesting that you can't be bothered to do anything about an event of the magnitude of 9/11, especially if you think it was an inside job. "Yeah, the government killed all those people and launched those wars, but hey - it was nine years ago". Interesting moral compass. Almost seems to suggest that the importance of 9/11 for you is one of personal intellectual superiority, not justice.


How many times can I write this before you understand it?

I don't care what you want me to provide.


Then why are you still here? You've lost the argument.

This is how it works -

You: "I've done x"

Me: "Show me some evidence that you've done x"

You: "..."

Except you've managed to drag out your evasion for a dozen posts.


Think for yourself and do your own research.

If you really need help starting here you go.

Complete 911 Timeline
www.historycommons.org...

September 11 Web Archive
lcweb4.loc.gov...

September 11 Television Archive
www.archive.org...

AboveTopSecret.com 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Master Index
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Free 9/11 Researcher Starter Pack
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Free 9/11 Documentaries & Videos
www.911docs.net...

Black Vault Encyclopedia
www.theblackvault.com...:9/11_Attacks

911summary.com...
www.911proof.com...
www.911scholars.org...
911review.org...
www.searchillion.com.../9/11/911-searchillion.html










[edit on 5-9-2010 by Jezus]


Bingo.

Not much original thought there. Still less any original research.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


On what basis is the NIST report not plausible? On what basis did the NIST explanation not reflect the events and another explanation is an "undeniable, observable fact?"
There is only the tenuous position that "it didn't look right" and no physical evidence of any demolition.

You have not shown the original research that you claimed and avoid responding to TrickoftheShade. You have not explained why the NIST report is not plausible. You continue to avoid responding to specific questions and can only suggest that the questioner try some original thinking.

The only conclusion that can be drawn is that you have done no original research or thinking. You have no reason not to accept the NIST conclusions other than that you find fiction more interesting. You have completely bought into the clowns-for-truth explanations but don't respond to questions using their explanations. I can understand this last, as their explanations are often ridiculous, but you claim to be a proponent of original thought and should be able to respond, occasionally, with a little original thought.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
As an aside, it's interesting that you can't be bothered to do anything about an event of the magnitude of 9/11, especially if you think it was an inside job. "Yeah, the government killed all those people and launched those wars, but hey - it was nine years ago".


You are filling in the blanks with your own assumptions and speculation.

I don't know exactly what happened on 9/11.

I do know that the official story is ridiculous and unsubstantiated.

The official story simply does not explain what happened; it does not reflect reality. There must be unknown variables.

Do I know what these variables are?

No, controlled demolition is a possible theory but this is just a theory to explain what it otherwise an unexplained phenomenon.

I do not need to prove an alternative story to comprehend that the official story is impossible.




top topics
 
14
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join