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.

 

Does it make any sense to try to convince the believer of the official tale (OT)?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Some people are going to believe what they want. If people want to believe in the OT, that steele heated up enough to weaken it to the point of collapse, but not enough to set ALL of the building ablaze or reduce anybody to ash who did not make it out in time, they are going to.

No matter what anybody says, they will just keep saying how there is the OT and scream BELIEVE !!!

If Reagan on here wants to keep wearing his tinfoil hat and keep on believing in the OT and reptillians let him.
edit on 17-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I presume it is impossible to get complete idiots to think but children will need to learn physics over the next 1000 years. So information that anyone with half a brain can understand should be kept available.

The NIST can produce 10,000 pages about airliners hitting skyscrapers and supposedly destroying them but can't specify the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on each level.

Didn't the designers have to figure that out to make the buildings hold themselves up?

And this country put men on the Moon in 1969? It is disgusting that this is getting hilarious.

psik



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I presume it is impossible to get complete idiots to think
psik


Thats the point. I dont think they can not, because they are idiots, I think they are not idiots and do not want to.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I posted an enormous post debunking the OP and seeking answers to most of the points you made.

You basically ignored all of it and I am still waiting for a detailed reply.

So to tell you the truth, the only person it doesn't make sense trying to convince is you. When you are in the fringe of society, you need a lot more evidence than what you have now, which is essentially an opinion unsubstantiated by facts.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



Some people are going to believe what they want.


No, everybody is going to believe only what they want. You can't "make" someone believe something if they don't want to.


If people want to believe in the OT, that steele heated up enough to weaken it to the point of collapse, but not enough to set ALL of the building ablaze or reduce anybody to ash who did not make it out in time, they are going to.


And if you want to "believe" that energy has no effect on matter than that is what you will believe. It may be contradicted by common everyday observation, but it wouldn't be the first time that.


No matter what anybody says, they will just keep saying how there is the OT and scream BELIEVE !!!


This is just sour grapes, my opinions and beliefs, like the opinions and beliefs of most other people are based on learned and observed facts. You know that your failure to alter the opinions and beliefs of, well, the rest of humanity, is based not on their choice to be ignorant but is a reflection on the value of your arguments.


If Reagan on here wants to keep wearing his tinfoil hat and keep on believing in the OT and reptillians let him.


OK, I really don't know what this means.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Evanescence
I posted an enormous post debunking the OP and seeking answers to most of the points you made.

You basically ignored all of it and I am still waiting for a detailed reply.

So to tell you the truth, the only person it doesn't make sense trying to convince is you. When you are in the fringe of society, you need a lot more evidence than what you have now, which is essentially an opinion unsubstantiated by facts.


You did? In which thread? If I did not reply it isnt because I ignored you. If a reply is important to you either give it a day or 2 or send a pm. I did not enable forum notification.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666

Originally posted by Evanescence
I posted an enormous post debunking the OP and seeking answers to most of the points you made.

You basically ignored all of it and I am still waiting for a detailed reply.

So to tell you the truth, the only person it doesn't make sense trying to convince is you. When you are in the fringe of society, you need a lot more evidence than what you have now, which is essentially an opinion unsubstantiated by facts.


You did? In which thread? If I did not reply it isnt because I ignored you. If a reply is important to you either give it a day or 2 or send a pm. I did not enable forum notification.


Well here you go!

It's the big one with the intricate questions.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Evanescence
 


Took the words right Atta my mouth ...
for U know it , I know it and the OP knows it ...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



If Reagan on here wants to keep wearing his tinfoil hat and keep on believing in the OT and reptillians let him.


"Reagan" would tear you to shreds in a real debate but , you don't want a real debate . You want to play this same old silly little truther game that infests 100% of these threads that you guys start , in an attempt to convince yourselves that you are obviously so much smarter than those of us that , well , can see the ...obvious .

Please answer the questions that have been asked of you by myself and others .


ps . Please show also , where "Reagan" supports the reptillian theory . Put your money where your mouth is .
edit on 17-11-2010 by okbmd because: ETA



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by Cassius666
 



If Reagan on here wants to keep wearing his tinfoil hat and keep on believing in the OT and reptillians let him.


"Reagan" would tear you to shreds in a real debate but , you don't want a real debate . You want to play this same old silly little truther game that infests 100% of these threads that you guys start , in an attempt to convince yourselves that you are obviously so much smarter than those of us that , well , can see the ...obvious .

Please answer the questions that have been asked of you by myself and others .


ps . Please show also , where "Reagan" supports the reptillian theory . Put your money where your mouth is .
edit on 17-11-2010 by okbmd because: ETA


Well if "Reagan" does not want to be confused with somebody who believes in wild tales and as somebody who accepts a blurred pictures of a smudge on the sky for proof of alien invaders he should take off his tinfoil hat and stop reproducing the tinfoil hat tales of the official report.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I presume it is impossible to get complete idiots to think but children will need to learn physics over the next 1000 years. So information that anyone with half a brain can understand should be kept available.

The NIST can produce 10,000 pages about airliners hitting skyscrapers and supposedly destroying them but can't specify the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on each level.

Didn't the designers have to figure that out to make the buildings hold themselves up?

And this country put men on the Moon in 1969? It is disgusting that this is getting hilarious.

psik


I don't know why this person needs to resort to playing children's games like this, unless he's just lashing out from pent up frustration from not getting anywhere in foisting his conspiracy stories onto others in the same ease they were foisted onto him. You truthers can call us idiots, you can accuse us of being gullible, and you can even say we go around kicking pregnant dogs, for all I care, since noone is here to be friends with anyone. At the end of the day, what you truthers need to realize is that *we* have questions too, and it's almost with religious fervor that you truthers avoid answering them.

-How can you insist WTC 7 was suffering so little damage when NYC firefighters reported the fires in WTC 7 were burnign out of control and were causing buldes in the side of the building

-How can you insist Mohammed Atta was such a poor pilot when his own girlfriend reported he had pilot's licenses from every country he visited?

-How can you insist a cruise missile/predator drone/UFO/whatever hit the Pentagon when the Pentagon is in the middle of an industrial park and hordes of people specifically saw it was a passenger jet?

-Why are you truthers constantly repeating lies and falsehoods like, "no interceptors were scrambled", "all the bomb dogs were withdrawn from the WTC", etc, when all it takes is a 30 second Gogole search to show they're lies and falsehoods, and if your research is that poor, why should we believe anything else you claim?

-NIST isn't some disembodied brain sitting in a vat of fluid, or some super computer. They're an organization of many materials and fire engineers, and they actually looked at samples of the wreckage and actually interviewed many witnesses who were there. How can *every* person in NIST go along with some secret coverup plot in singled minded hive mentality? I mean, really, EVERYBODY?

...and so on. I find it ironic that the truthers insist they simply want their questions answered, and yet run away from everyone else's questions the same way three card monty players do when the cop show up. Why shouldn't our, "bullsh*t artist" alarms be going off when we see the antics you truthers are playing?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666

If people want to believe in the OT, that steele heated up enough to weaken it to the point of collapse,



As I pointed out in another thread, NIST doesn't say this about columns.

Therefore, all your opinions and questions are based on false info and needs correction.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
I presume it is impossible to get complete idiots to think but children will need to learn physics over the next 1000 years. So information that anyone with half a brain can understand should be kept available.

The NIST can produce 10,000 pages about airliners hitting skyscrapers and supposedly destroying them but can't specify the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on each level.

Didn't the designers have to figure that out to make the buildings hold themselves up?

And this country put men on the Moon in 1969? It is disgusting that this is getting hilarious.

psik


I don't know why this person needs to resort to playing children's games like this, unless he's just lashing out from pent up frustration from not getting anywhere in foisting his conspiracy stories onto others in the same ease they were foisted onto him. You truthers can call us idiots, you can accuse us of being gullible, and you can even say we go around kicking pregnant dogs, for all I care, since noone is here to be friends with anyone. At the end of the day, what you truthers need to realize is that *we* have questions too, and it's almost with religious fervor that you truthers avoid answering them.

-How can you insist WTC 7 was suffering so little damage when NYC firefighters reported the fires in WTC 7 were burnign out of control and were causing buldes in the side of the building

-How can you insist Mohammed Atta was such a poor pilot when his own girlfriend reported he had pilot's licenses from every country he visited?

-How can you insist a cruise missile/predator drone/UFO/whatever hit the Pentagon when the Pentagon is in the middle of an industrial park and hordes of people specifically saw it was a passenger jet?

-Why are you truthers constantly repeating lies and falsehoods like, "no interceptors were scrambled", "all the bomb dogs were withdrawn from the WTC", etc, when all it takes is a 30 second Gogole search to show they're lies and falsehoods, and if your research is that poor, why should we believe anything else you claim?

-NIST isn't some disembodied brain sitting in a vat of fluid, or some super computer. They're an organization of many materials and fire engineers, and they actually looked at samples of the wreckage and actually interviewed many witnesses who were there. How can *every* person in NIST go along with some secret coverup plot in singled minded hive mentality? I mean, really, EVERYBODY?

...and so on. I find it ironic that the truthers insist they simply want their questions answered, and yet run away from everyone else's questions the same way three card monty players do when the cop show up. Why shouldn't our, "bullsh*t artist" alarms be going off when we see the antics you truthers are playing?


I am sorry you feel attacked, but if the tinfoil hat fits, wear it.

We have all seen pictures of WTC 7 seconds before the collapse, what firefighter said that? I can just as esily say that building 7 was just as fine as it looked. And what makes you think what is written on the report is actually based on research?

There is also firefightersfortruth aviatorsfortruth engineersfortruth I did not look at any of those sites specifically, but went directly to experts on the subject, engineers, one architect.

There are people who say the impact hole of the pentagon is inconsistent with the impact of an airliner. Ill leave that debat to people who know what an impact hole from an airliner is supposed to look like.

I dont care how good the 2 pilots were, both planes hitting the tower at the same bank angle is quite a feat, it can happen, but it is just one in a string of special coincidences.

And again on the NIST report, it is basically the experts of the NIST report against every other expert who was not under the umbrella of the NIST report, assuming that what is written in the NIST report is actually based upon the research of all the Americans under that umbrella. Not to mention all the things the NIST report does not explain, like why ground zero was burning for months, to the point to melt some of the steele into a nice round ball.

Again only because the picture on the surface looks like an ufo and that thing on the pic could be an UFO from outer space, it is far more likely there is an more logical and less fantastic explanation, or that it was even fabricated.

Try to take off the tinfoil hat and you too might realize that the cause of the collapse is less fantastic than what the report suggests.
edit on 17-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


2 points. Get this: Only one side of WTC 7 was damaged because... omg, the tower didn't collapse debris from an inter-dimensional portal onto the north side! There are lots of pictures of the North, undamaged side of WTC 7 because, and I know it's hard for you to believe so hold onto your knickers, the other side had collapsed towers all over it and was cleared for safety!

And second, I would really, REALLY like to see the source you have for this molten ball. The "meteorite," as I heard you call it before, was actually compressed floors into a chunk of concrete, not molten metal.

Methinks thou dost protest too much. Perhaps the tinfoil hat is sized for someone who can't seem to stop repeating the same lines about tinfoil to somehow support his views?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Cassius666
 


2 points. Get this: Only one side of WTC 7 was damaged because... omg, the tower didn't collapse debris from an inter-dimensional portal onto the north side! There are lots of pictures of the North, undamaged side of WTC 7 because, and I know it's hard for you to believe so hold onto your knickers, the other side had collapsed towers all over it and was cleared for safety!

And second, I would really, REALLY like to see the source you have for this molten ball. The "meteorite," as I heard you call it before, was actually compressed floors into a chunk of concrete, not molten metal.

Methinks thou dost protest too much. Perhaps the tinfoil hat is sized for someone who can't seem to stop repeating the same lines about tinfoil to somehow support his views?


Like I said, I have seen videos of building 7 collapse and what it looked lieke before it collapsed. It was a good distance from building 1 and 2, still close enough to take minor damage I suppose, although not very visible at a distance from what I saw.

Building 1 2 and 7 werent the only ones. There were building 3 4 5 and 6 too. They took damage a lot worse than building 7 from the debries. It even looked like they partly had their concrete stripped off their steele at least those closest to 1 or 2. They were damaged beyond the point of repair and had to be demolished in the clean up process but did not collapse the way building 7 did.

If the NIST report keeps making claims at the fringe of society, it will have to make a better case and convince people outside the NIST umbrella.
That video of the alien autopsy you are trying to sell for real is looking less and less convincing with each time I play it. I am sorry, but I am not quite ready to BELIEVE and fold my very own tinfoil hat quite yet.
edit on 17-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 




If the NIST report keeps making claims at the fringe of society, it will have to make a better case and convince people outside the NIST umbrella.
That video of the alien autopsy you are trying to sell for real is looking less and less convincing with each time I play it. I am sorry, but I am not quite ready to BELIEVE and fold my very own tinfoil hat quite yet.


This appears to be an interesting new tack being employed by the true hardcore conspiracist - just pretend that you are in a majority, pretend that the majority is growing and then claim anyone else (the few that are left) that refuse the "light of reason" are living in delusion. It is, of course, contrary to any observable fact but that never stop a real conspiracist before so why would anyone expect to stop it now?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
I am sorry you feel attacked, but if the tinfoil hat fits, wear it.


Personally, I don't subscribe to the idea that truthers are a bunch of crackpots wearing tinfoil hats to ward off the mind control beams they think the gov't is zapping them with. I think the truthers are simply just gullible as all hell and they'll swallow anything those damned fool conspiracy web sites are putting out, becuase let's face it, claiming the towers were hit by lasers from outer space or hologram images of planes is a pretty tough sell otherwise. Simply calling the truthers crackpots just forces them on the defensive and does nothing to encourage them to think critically for themsleves.

The truthers certainly aren't stupid, they just don't know they're being fed a lot of drivel.


We have all seen pictures of WTC 7 seconds before the collapse, what firefighter said that? I can just as esily say that building 7 was just as fine as it looked. And what makes you think what is written on the report is actually based on research?


It came NYFD deputy fire chief Peter Hayden, who was physically there all day at the scene of WTC 7, and I know this is what he said because it came directly from an interview he gave. Would you like to see it? It's on the web.

FYI the 9/11 commission report has a HUGE bibliography that shows exactly where they got every tidbit of their information. A good quarter of the report is listing where they got all their material from.


There are people who say the impact hole of the pentagon is inconsistent with the impact of an airliner. Ill leave that debat to people who know what an impact hole from an airliner is supposed to look like.


As there are multitudes of eyewitnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon, the hole in the Pentagon was necessarily caused by a plane, regardless of what people anticipate the hole should or should not look like.


And again on the NIST report, it is basically the experts of the NIST report against every other expert who was not under the umbrella of the NIST report, assuming that what is written in the NIST report is actually based upon the research of all the Americans under that umbrella. Not to mention all the things the NIST report does not explain, like why ground zero was burning for months, to the point to melt some of the steele into a nice round ball.


This doesn't answer the question. How is the NIST report supposedly a lie becuase of the material they *didn't* go over?


Try to take off the tinfoil hat and you too might realize that the cause of the collapse is less fantastic than what the report suggests.


Ummm, what?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


My experience is that humans need to see first hand that conspiracies happen from gov and police before they question authority.

If they see corruption in police and gov they may listen, but if they do not and never see it, they seem to think all is well.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
most people believe in some religion

you know why? because they are zombies, they dont use their brain, they just eat, work, eat, work ...

I dont have a problem with religions, I have a problem that most people dont think, they just follow, thats why the world is the way it is: the ones that lead are not always the guys with the most humanitarian goals



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by Cassius666
 


My experience is that humans need to see first hand that conspiracies happen from gov and police before they question authority.

If they see corruption in police and gov they may listen, but if they do not and never see it, they seem to think all is well.


...so at what point of seeing conspircies first hand do they start suspecting hologram planes and lasers from outer space?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join