Wow, red paint blew up the WTC that’s a new one.
Apparently the Truth to 911 is a threat to National Security and I wouldn’t be surprised that some of these same old wannabe debunkers are on a
government payroll, (hired key board Ops) there certainly appears to be a familiar pattern of these same debunkers who show up in every 911 thread
spouting that there is no conspiracy in 911 and the OS is absolutely true. The same old tired debunkers giving the same old tired nonsense that all
Truthers believe in 911 holograms, lasers from out space, space aliens did 911, hush-a-boom explosives, and all websites against the OS proven lies
are all disinformation websites. Looks to me that these few debunkers are only trying reach out to the most ignorant and newbie’s who’ve never
research 911 on ATS.
The fact is any fifth grader can spend a few hours on Google search engine and see the mountains of evidence that the OS is all hogwash.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by budaruskie
Pointing out that someone is spreading lies isn't name calling. It's pointing out that someone is spreading lies. Propagating the claim that Harrit
said the materials he found had something to do with the reason for why the towers collapsed is spreading lies, whether you with to acknowledge the
fact or not.
If you don't appreciate that others are pointing out that you're spreading lies, then don't spread lies. It ain't a trick question.
Anyone reading the above nonsense that said scientist who’ve found scientific evidence of chemical compounds and particles of materials under
electronic microscope and recorded their tests and results, and the discoveries that have gone through lengthy critical peer review, and the fact is
Jones had to repeat some of his own tests to satisfy other scientists who had questions in order to satisfy the peer review process of Jones
However, the very few aggressive debunkers in this thread who have made claims that Jones peer review report is a lie and have called Jones and his
team of scientist liars have never proven any of thier accusation against Jones or that his science is flawed.
If you don't appreciate that others are pointing out that you're spreading lies, then don't spread lies. It ain't a trick
The level of personal attacks and lies spun against anyone who supports Jones science is disgustingly alarming considering that none of you debunkers
have ever proven your case against Jones or his Journal. Your “opinions” are not the facts.
A few of you debunkers have cooked up questions like:
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by zimishey
Many things can cut steel. There is just no evidence for any of them being used during the collapse of the towers.
In many threads and posts I have explained the errors in the Jones paper. I have explained the errors in interpretation of the results. The energetics
alone show that there is too much energy present for thermite and any combination of thermite and high explosive. The photos show that the
super-nano-thermite self extinguished and didn't completely burn even when held in an oven above its ignition point.
Jones may have convinced himself that red paint is thermite but he hasn't proposed how it was used, what its effects were, how it was placed, where it
was placed, or why 10-100 tons of it were unburned.
Jones' claims are unsupported by evidence and he is unable to offer any theory on the use and effect of the paint
I have questioned this poster to back up his opinions with some science to his claims and the fact is he never has. I want to remind the casual ATS
reader that anyone can make claims, but can we back up our claims?
The fact is there is a particular member who has spent over two years trying to debunk Steven Jones and I have yet to see him supply any “real
science” to back his claims against Jones and his peer review journal, all I have seen are his opinions nothing more.
No one, not even a Scientist anywhere in the world has written a peer review paper discrediting Jones Journal.
The fact is we have a few bloggers on ATS who spend 24/7 discrediting every piece of evidence and science only by spewing “nonsensical opinions”
straw man arguments, and making false allegation that they have debunked credible science ( by given their opinions only.)
Always remember to consider the source when information has been presented and the information is only as good as its source.
I will now await the personal attacks by the very opinionated posters who claims cannot be proven.
edit on 9-3-2011 by impressme because: (no