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.

 

Scientists, Military Officers, and Actors are among new 9/11 research organizations

page: 9
121
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


I disagree and it seems the firefighters that were there would disagree with your claim too





edit on 12-9-2010 by Nonchalant because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by flamingmonkey
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Out of context eh?

You mean like putting Wes Clark and Max Clelland on a 9/11 truth website, even though they don't agree with your movement?

Cute photo huh?

Shame that truthers had to resort to faking photos...



No the shame is that you had to resort to deflecting. And the bigger shame is what a terrible job you did at it!

You deflected your taking me out of context with others taking people not involved in this thread out of context. I, Ciphor, am talking about the facts. Not what Wes Clark said, or Max. Or whatever else. And I, Ciphor, was referencing you taking me out of context, here on ATS.

It's my movement? I own it? Hmm. I could have sworn it was comprised of individuals. And individuals are individual. Are you comprehending any of this?

When did I reference any source material showing faked photos? I borrowed a link from a fellow board member from FEMA website showing the study of molten iron recovered from ground zero, no faked photos were needed to prove molten iron was present. It was shipped to labs in abundance. Was this another attempt at deflection? Or were you trying again? That attempt was less cute sadly, are you really being serious right now? Is this your argument of the facts? Dude, hahaha. Did you even look at the facts? Lab work? Research? One page of it? How did you decide what you believe? I'm curious. If nothing else answer that one for me.

You do realize NIST was just busted providing the public with edited photos and videos right? After 9 years and a lawsuit. Do you keep up with current times? It was posted on this board. I'm to lazy to dig, someone else do it for me.

Both sides fake photos and videos. They are individuals. Do you understand the difference between an individuals actions and an organized groups actions together? Can you show me evidence, not just say "i saw this once and my friend told me", but actually show evidence of a organized truther group "faking" photos together? A bunch of bloggers on a website don't constitute an organized anything. But go a.. Let's see your evidence, I'm content smashing you over and over. This is kind of fun.

I can reference things individuals did all night long. What the hell is the point of it?

Again. F A C T S are what I am interested. Facts that can only be obtained through another investigation done without government interference this time preferably.

Take your piddle paddle about she said he said to somewhere else please. Or I can make a fool of you all night long if you like, your choice. I don't wish to make a fool of you, I'd prefer intellectual conversation, but when you attack me with lies and slander. I really have no choice but to show people what you are.

Stay on topic please.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
actors? these people are so egotistical that they actually believe what they say matters. do you think alec [snip] baldwin knows anything about politics?





 

Mod Edit: Censor circumnavigation. Please see ABOUT ATS: Vulgarity and The Automatic ATS Censors. Thank you - Jak


edit on 12/9/10 by JAK because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by flamingmonkey

The rest of my response:

You say: The laws of physics are common knowledge - that's kind of a stretch, but ok, assume they are - that doesn't mean you're understanding of the collapses is correct.

Finally, go read my post which included the Landmark footage and answer that (no truther has of yet).

The towers don't ACTUALLY LOOK like demos.



I'm sorry you didn't pay attention in highschool, or did not attend, however that is no excuse. The basic laws of physics is not common knowledge? Did you say that? You don't understand how gravity and mass work? Is this really the people who are debating us on ATS? My understanding of the collapses? *sigh* WE ARE SAYING WE WANT ANOTHER INVESTIGATION BECAUSE WE DON'T UNDERSTAND THE COLLAPSES. Bolded and in caps. Just focus on that, I have a feeling the rest of my words will confuse you!

I'm not going to look at your thread about if the towers look or don't look like a controlled demolition. That would be a giant waste of my time as what they look like is irrelevant. I already stated exactly that too. Go back and read the rest of my posts, I'm not going to explain again how stupid the merits of a debate on whether or not they "look" like a controlled demolition is. I'd rather go talk about astrophysics with a bunch of rednecks in the forest.

Are you quite done attacking me now? You got 2 black eyes about about 50 broken bones, but we can keep going if you like...


edit on 12-9-2010 by Ciphor because: Why do I have to explain my edit?



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 



Originally posted by Ciphor
If you are so sure of this, then why are you playing into it? Why are you derailing your own threads by giving any validity to their invalid points?

It's simple my patron friend. State the facts and discuss the facts, and only the facts. Stay away from his speculation and theories. As well as others. People trying to fight on our side but really they do more harm then good by allowing things to be turned into a debacle.

They need you _BoneZ_. We don't need them. The facts stand alone. It's all they have, us arguing with them. They have no facts, no science, no logic. Just a million ways to argue anything. Everything can be argued. Can everything being argued legitimately? Of course not. However that does not stop the argument and you getting sucked into it though does it? Then what do you have? Who have you convinced now? Do you really want to convince someone who shuns critical thinking so easily? Throws logic out the window? I say let the fools be fools. Talk to the intellectuals that already have understanding as I am now. But when you stand on the street yelling back and forth at the fool for yelling, how do you now look? Anyones opinion who matters will have either a) done their homework, or b) have no problem researching something to find out for themselves.


Nicely put, Ciphor. It doesn't take long to see that a member is playing you up instead of joining in on the quest for knowledge. It's not always easy but putting them on disregard is the best option. It doesn't stop them from congesting the thread with rubbish but perhaps the mods can assist with the more blatant abusers.

Your "stick to the facts" advice is certainly correct when arguing with the derailers but not when dealing with intellectuals (to use your term.) Theories and speculation are what this site is all about and serves the grand purpose of eliciting facts and ideas for and against any hypothesis under discussion. As long as contributions are made respectfully and unemotionally, then the more the better.

That's my opinion and if you don't like it, then stick it where the sun don't shine!



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by 2weird2live2rare2die
 


They are definitely not experts in the respective fields that they are giving opinions in. However they serve a purpose in bringing attention to the subject in a way that the people respected in the field cannot. I wish this was not the case, sadly however it is. Also, anyone can do their part. I hope you are not implying that because they are actors and feel this way that they should not use their elevated social status to get word out. Do you really think they are egotistical in this cause? Or could you reconsider you might be racing to a conclusion without thinking it through a little more


I do see how you feel though. Actors in general tend to be egotistical, and I'm sure they are. I'm just not sure their reasons for doing this were motivated by their egos. In reality, speaking out about 9-11 is most likely damaging to their careers as they work hand and foot with the corporate media system, and the corporate media system is the biggest opponent of a new investigation.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnJasper
 


Thank you for the compliment. I enjoyed reading your comments as well. I actually agree with you in part. This is a conspiracy forum. And I do also partake in a thirst for knowledge of thee occult as most of us do that frequent sites like ATS.

I do feel however that ATS shifted over the years and is now also as a leading conspiracy site, taken on a certain responsibility to steer away from speculation on sensitive and important subjects such as doing right by the thousands that died on sept 11th. We especially owe them more on the anniversary. I know you agree with me, you just didn't give it much thought. Something we are all guilty of at what time or another. We owe them more then a discussion about speculations. 9 years has taken to long, and in regards to this topic, I think we have had enough time to talk about the conspiracy sides of it. It's always been senseless bickering anyway.

We have a lot of momentum right now, yahoo news articles, growing numbers of supporters, broadcasted national press club conferences. Don't you agree? Believe me John, I would love nothing more then a long conversation about other things, but as batman would say, "We have more important business to attend to today robin".



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Still no one willing to exlain why, if the WTCs bear none of the hallmarks of demos, truthers still claim they look exactly like demos.

I wonder how quickly the number of truthers would decrease if they actually went to a demo...



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ciphor

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
I say "liar" because there is NO WAY you have been a member here this long and still don't know this. Your statement has been debunked.

Oh they know it. They don't care. They're not here for facts or truth. They're here to derail, deride, and peddle the official conspiracy theory no matter what. After all, the Obama administration want's to infiltrate and ban conspiracy theories altogether.

There is an agenda going on and there are a few names in the 9/11 forum who will continuously peddle the official conspiracy theory without regard of the facts or evidence. There is absolutely nothing you can tell them. They are payed and/or programmed to say the same thing over and over and no amount of facts will ever change that because that's not what they're here for.






If you are so sure of this, then why are you playing into it? Why are you derailing your own threads by giving any validity to their invalid points?

It's simple my patron friend. State the facts and discuss the facts, and only the facts. Stay away from his speculation and theories. As well as others. People trying to fight on our side but really they do more harm then good by allowing things to be turned into a debacle.

They need you _BoneZ_. We don't need them. The facts stand alone. It's all they have, us arguing with them. They have no facts, no science, no logic. Just a million ways to argue anything. Everything can be argued. Can everything being argued legitimately? Of course not. However that does not stop the argument and you getting sucked into it though does it? Then what do you have? Who have you convinced now? Do you really want to convince someone who shuns critical thinking so easily? Throws logic out the window? I say let the fools be fools. Talk to the intellectuals that already have understanding as I am now. But when you stand on the street yelling back and forth at the fool for yelling, how do you now look? Anyones opinion who matters will have either a) done their homework, or b) have no problem researching something to find out for themselves.


Here's a FACT:

EVERY known demolition has had dozens of audible and visible timed explosions.

The best you could say about THREE buildings, totally over 200 stories is a FEW explosion sounds and NO visible timed explosions.

If you want facts, there's some facts.

Now, WITHOUT SPECULATION explain why you think this is a demo if it LOOKS NOTHING LIKE A DEMO.

Use facts.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


I agree with you Bones, that’s why I have no problem using my “ignore tab” on some of these members who enjoy using the 911 forums to spread outrages lies even when the hard facts have been shown to them repeatedly. Some like to keep us distracted in their game of deception by twisting everything we say and by teaming up with others and seeing who can get away with insulting their opponents without getting warned or ban. It’s a game to them. Some of them have told me they are not here to discuss the truth about 911, others have told me they are here, to play the game that they are always right at any cost.
So, here are some of the problems we have in trying to debate 911, we all know by using credible sources to back our claims and leaving our opinions at the door in presenting our facts and understanding the truth. I actually made a list of some of the misfits that I do run in to from time to time and yes, even I have been roped into their games sometimes.
So we have our disinformationist artist.
We have our railroad artist.
We have some that are patriotically blinded with ignorance.
We have some that are just pathological liars.
We have some that believe everything is black or white and no in between. (grey)
We actually have some that cannot think logically.
We have the emotional artists.
We have some who are never wrong artist.
We have the spin artist who enjoys spinning and twisting your quotes.
We have the ego artist who knows it all.
We have the “I am superior artist” who puts him or herself above everyone else.
We have the “I am the expert artist” who behaves as he or she is the authoritarian of science and I know best.
We have the “there is no conspiracies theories artists” yet they are in here 24/7.
The list goes on…

This is what the Truthers have to put up with while trying to have a civilized conversation in the 911 forums. Most good 911 threads mostly end in derailment, and believe me, people just don’t want to read the hurling insults anymore, people have enough garbage to deal with in the real world in their own lives. That is why many of these good threads die in a hurry and the only one’s left reading the 20 pages of mudsling are the one participating in retaliating in the art of mudslinging. That is why the owners of ATS designed the ignore tab if posters cannot deal with some of these posters we can just “ignore” them, eventually they will move on.




edit on 12-9-2010 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by flamingmonkey

Here's a FACT:

EVERY known demolition has had dozens of audible and visible timed explosions.

The best you could say about THREE buildings, totally over 200 stories is a FEW explosion sounds and NO visible timed explosions.

If you want facts, there's some facts.

Now, WITHOUT SPECULATION explain why you think this is a demo if it LOOKS NOTHING LIKE A DEMO.

Use facts.



I'm sorry what? That barely even made sense at all. Who said anything about explosions? Where the hell do you get this crap from? It sure as hell wasn't from me. EVERY known demolition has had dozens of audible and visible timed explosions? I would touch on that, especially since once again you provide ZERO source material for your claim of EVERY, except I don't care about your theories of controlled demo. I said it repeatedly, and I will say it again. F A C T S. And since you clearly need clarification of every little detail, i mean FACTS FROM SEPT 11th 2001. Not facts about controlled demos. Are you even human, you keep making the same mistakes over and over like a program.


edit on 12-9-2010 by Ciphor because: Why do I have to explain my edit?



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


No worries I'm trying to get rid of them right now. I've devised a plan of attack on the very fabric of their arguments in hopes that it will unravel to such a poor point they will run out of replies. Wish me luck!

Does it look like I'm making progress?
I don't think I am. But do I at least look eloquent trying? Probably not =(

Btw which one am I? I want to be this one "We have the “there is no conspiracies theories artists” yet they are in here 24/7." but I like conspiracy theories, just not about 9-11 anymore. I'm in more of a "ger er done" stage.

The conspiracy theories have just made a muck of all the good threads, just as you said. I think a new approach is required impressme.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Pah.

Here's all the source material you need.

www.youtube.com...

Go look. There's DOZENS of controlled demos.

Every one has:

Timed visible explosions

Dozens of timed audible explosions.

Every single one.

Here's the most comprable example:



And it's a cute ruse to state you have no idea why I would adress the very common belief that Truthers have, which is controlled demo.

Are you saying that you're unaware of Truthers who think it was demos?

And you yourself don't believe it was demos? What do you believe? Not natural collapse? Not demos?

Or are you pretending you have no belief (except that the governement is lying)?


edit on 12-9-2010 by flamingmonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by dubiousone
 


Hi dubiousone

I think the OS is that they folded neatly alongside the fuselage, although I don't know why we did not see this convienient 'Folding action' with the planes that hit two of the three towers.

Perhaps GenRadek or pteridine will come up with a fact to explain it, but I doubt they will address a straight forward question like yours.

Regards
MickC



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by flamingmonkey
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Pah.

Here's all the source material you need.

Go look. There's DOZENS of controlled demos.

Every one has:

Timed visible explosions

Dozens of timed audible explosions.

Every single one.

Here's the most comprable example:

And it's a cute ruse to state you have no idea why I would adress the very common belief that Truthers have, which is controlled demo.

Are you saying that you're unaware of Truthers who think it was demos?

And you yourself don't believe it was demos? What do you believe? Not natural collapse? Not demos?

Or are you pretending you have no belief (except that the governement is lying)?



So now your bad at math too? You said EVERY, in all caps like that too, placing strong emphases on the word. Now you show me a youtube clip of 12 buildings being blown up? Youtube is your source material... Did I not just say I don't care about your theories and I'm not here to talk to you about them? You are addressing me, personally. Not "all the truthers". Why is this concept such a struggle for you time and time again? Are you a gluten for punishment and that's why you keep coming back for more?

1) I never said government is anything. Is putting words in my mouth your replacement for taking me out of context?
2) I have an opinion, I choose not to share it on this forum at this time as it is irrelevant, it serves no purpose.
3) Don't use my stuff dude. It's cute? Try and be original. Yes, I have no idea why you would address the very common belief that truthers have of a controlled demo. This thread is not about 9-11 demo conspiracy theories. This thread is about more groups stepping forward and demanding an investigation. Some take it a step further, but that's their choice *shrug*. So. I will say again, in "SNIP" in hopes you will read it this time. STAY ON TOPIC


edit on 9/12/2010 by benevolent tyrant because: MOD EDIT : to "snip" (delete) attempted censor circumvention



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by flamingmonkey
Here's all the source material you need.
www.youtube.com...

Maybe it's all the source material you need, but real researchers and those looking for the real truth will do more than watch a 5-minute YouTube video.



Originally posted by flamingmonkey
Every one has: Timed visible explosions. Dozens of timed audible explosions. Every single one.

Maybe every single one in your 5-minutes of "research", but not every single controlled demolition exhibits those characteristics. Suffice it to say, the WTC's did exhibit timed visual explosions in the form of ejections:






And also timed visual explosions in the form of flashes going "up, down, and around" both towers with "popping or exploding sounds" associated with the flashes, according to the firefighter testimony.

And then there are the timed audible sounds as well.

The evidence is there. It's up to you whether you accept the evidence and the consequences of the evidence, or you choose to remain in denial.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
reply to post by pteridine
 

But that also doesn't mean that just because there might be problems, that we should just lay down and accept the OS as it is. The OS is flawed...badly.
This is not a scientific experiment where we must first produce a hypothesis of what happened (like what dereks insists we must do). This would be a new, more powerful, independent investigation into the events of 9/11 whose results could eliminate a lot of the questions people have.

I see you choose not to follow through on the exercise and state your best case.

You claim that the sum of Government sponsored reports, which may or may not be the ill-defined OS, are flawed and believe that we should reinvestigate. For this to happen, there should be a compelling reason that would convince the Congress to allocate funds for such. Unless dramatic new evidence is brought forward, it is unlikely that this will be revisited.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Nonchalant
 


If we assume that the molten metal was steel, although the firefighters did not sample it, my previous statement still applies; this only shows how hot underground fires can be and is not indicative of anything else.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


I find that those who use "liar" to describe other posters are basically insecure folk who may still be fighting the Civil war. The OS is that Virginia and the South lost, decisively, and that Sherman held a seminar on the horrors of war.
Did you sign up as a scientist, military officer, or actor?



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 08:37 AM
link   
"If we assume that the molten metal was steel, although the firefighters did not sample it, my previous statement still applies; this only shows how hot underground fires can be and is not indicative of anything else."

Yeah right...those oxygen starved underground fires must burn so hot that they would make a blast furnace seem cool to the touch. Maybe it wasn't melted metal...maybe it was melted chocolate. Maybe someone replaced all those gold bars which were allegedly removed with Hershey bars.



new topics

top topics



 
121
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join