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.

 

#911truthwinning: A call to all infowarriors aka how i learned to stop worrying and love Charlie Sh

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Ok we get it pteridine, do you use your “imaginative theory,” to solve Jones science? Is your “imaginative theory,” the final answer to your science to what happend to the WTC?

edit on 12-3-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Pterdine, I will help you out. I merely asked you three times now to answer your own questions you asked of me.

What, exactly, brought down the towers and how?
What actually struck the Pentagon?
Did a plane crash in SW PA? "



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Game_Over
Pterdine, I will help you out. I merely asked you three times now to answer your own questions you asked of me.

What, exactly, brought down the towers and how?
What actually struck the Pentagon?
Did a plane crash in SW PA? "



How are you helping me out by asking me the questions I asked you? Now I'll help you out and provide answers to questions you can't answer.

Gravity brought the towers down after aircraft disrupted the integrity of the structures through impact and uncontrolled fires. There is no evidence that explosives or thermite instigated the collapse.

An airplane filled with passengers and fuel struck the Pentagon. There is no evidence for anything else.

Yes, a plane crashed in SW PA.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 

So you believe in the OS? I can tell you that most intelligent people that I have talked to and do not know about ATS still know the OS is mostly hogwash, yet a man with your education and intelligent that have been exposed to more evidence proving the OS is a lie and yet you still supports it, how patriotic of you.

You do not have any room to criticize me and my beliefs of demolition when the OS of how the WTC destruction have been proven a lie, and not just by Steven Jones. Science proves that the WTC could not have falling by jet fuel and office fires and we don’t need Steven Jones peer review Journal to prove that either. There are plenty of scientific technical papers written about the WTC destruction. The fact is there are no technical scientific papers written to the OS destruction of the WTC, which any scientists support.

The fact is, leaving out the lying NIST, most scientist support demolition to the WTC and you cannot debunk that.
edit on 12-3-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
I can tell you that most intelligent people that I have talked to and do not know about ATS still know the OS is mostly hogwash, yet a man with your education


What are you talking about? pteridine never said what his education was. In all honesty you could be talking about a high school education. And no degree is an excuse for hypocrisy, to demand total proof from others but be unable to prove your own beliefs to anyone else. Excusing yourself by claiming your opinions are automatically right until proven wrong is the opposite of an educated position.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by pteridine
 

So you believe in the OS? I can tell you that most intelligent people that I have talked to and do not know about ATS still know the OS is mostly hogwash, yet a man with your education and intelligent that have been exposed to more evidence proving the OS is a lie and yet you still supports it, how patriotic of you.

You do not have any room to criticize me and my beliefs of demolition when the OS of how the WTC destruction have been proven a lie, and not just by Steven Jones. Science proves that the WTC could not have falling by jet fuel and office fires and we don’t need Steven Jones peer review Journal to prove that either. There are plenty of scientific technical papers written about the WTC destruction. The fact is there are no technical scientific papers written to the OS destruction of the WTC, which any scientists support.

The fact is, leaving out the lying NIST, most scientist support demolition to the WTC and you cannot debunk that


What is the OS? Is it the sum of all reports commissioned by the Federal Government or is it just those which you vehemently disagree with?
I have plenty of room to criticize the lack of evidence of demolition in the many claims made for such. No one has proven CD and "science" has not shown that "the WTC could not have fallen by jet fuel and office fires." Only a few people support the theory that the collapse of the towers was a result of a controlled demolition. Scientists require something called evidence and the truthers haven't come up with any. The entire "truther" movement is scattered and disjointed because there are no consistent theories that they can agree on. The chances of a reinvestigation are about zero. To have such, one would need new evidence to convince Congress to fund it. There isn't any. "It didn't look right" and "it defied the laws of physics" aren't evidence; they are, in your favorite words, opinions, usually by people whose sole expertise consists of watching disaster movies.
Keep telling yourself that you are # winning.



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Thank you for finally answering your own questions.

Your question: "What, exactly, brought down the towers and how?
Your answer: Gravity brought the towers down after aircraft disrupted the integrity of the structures through impact and uncontrolled fires. There is no evidence that explosives or thermite instigated the collapse."

My response:
-- Very interesting answer. However you are wrong. Three towers fell that day slick and only two were hit by planes. Your entire theory is now useless. Did you hear me...it is clear for the entire world to view this thread and see that you are wrong. Why can you not handle wtc7? What about it makes your stay awake at night as your little brain tries to warp reality to make this one little piece fit into your airplanes fuel fantasies. You can't explain it without lying to yourself. But stop lying to us.

Your question: What actually struck the Pentagon?
Your answer: An airplane filled with passengers and fuel struck the Pentagon. There is no evidence for anything else.

My response:
-- sure I could humiliate you with photos of the initial hole at the pentagon but its been done before. Go and look for yourself, it is as clear as day that there are no impact markings from the wings and engines. But I am done providing you with readily available material. Go look yourself. Trust your eyes. Gee ya think the gov't would release the footage if it put this whole thing to bed don't ya?

Your question: Did a plane crash in SW PA?
Your answer: Yes, a plane crashed in SW PA.

My response:
--So if a plane crashes in SW PA that means it wasn't an inside job? Even if the passengers did overtake the terrorists and the plane did crash that does not mean this wasn't an inside job. Get it?

You're scared, I get it. It's a scary world. But I am letting you know I don't care. Get with the program pal. The guys have pulled a number on all of us. You're on the same side as me, you just don't know it. They have a term for people like you...useful idiot.

stop being one.

#911truthwinning

Now I'm going to ask you a few questions...

ready?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Have you ever read the Operation Northwood document?
Have you read the 911 Commission Report?
How do you explain wtc 7 falling?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


Yes.
Yes.
Gravity.

I feel obligated to enlighten you, Tinkerbell, out of sympathy for your plight. Are you ready to flatten points yet or are you still busy pounding 911?



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Game_Over
reply to post by pteridine
 


Thank you for finally answering your own questions.

Your question: "What, exactly, brought down the towers and how?
Your answer: Gravity brought the towers down after aircraft disrupted the integrity of the structures through impact and uncontrolled fires. There is no evidence that explosives or thermite instigated the collapse."

My response:
-- Very interesting answer. However you are wrong. Three towers fell that day slick and only two were hit by planes. Your entire theory is now useless. Did you hear me...it is clear for the entire world to view this thread and see that you are wrong. Why can you not handle wtc7? What about it makes your stay awake at night as your little brain tries to warp reality to make this one little piece fit into your airplanes fuel fantasies. You can't explain it without lying to yourself. But stop lying to us.

Your question: What actually struck the Pentagon?
Your answer: An airplane filled with passengers and fuel struck the Pentagon. There is no evidence for anything else.

My response:
-- sure I could humiliate you with photos of the initial hole at the pentagon but its been done before. Go and look for yourself, it is as clear as day that there are no impact markings from the wings and engines. But I am done providing you with readily available material. Go look yourself. Trust your eyes. Gee ya think the gov't would release the footage if it put this whole thing to bed don't ya?

Your question: Did a plane crash in SW PA?
Your answer: Yes, a plane crashed in SW PA.

My response:
--So if a plane crashes in SW PA that means it wasn't an inside job? Even if the passengers did overtake the terrorists and the plane did crash that does not mean this wasn't an inside job. Get it?

You're scared, I get it. It's a scary world. But I am letting you know I don't care. Get with the program pal. The guys have pulled a number on all of us. You're on the same side as me, you just don't know it. They have a term for people like you...useful idiot.

stop being one.

#911truthwinning

Now I'm going to ask you a few questions...

ready?



The towers are generally considered to be WTC #1 and #2. WTC#7 is a separate building. Get with the program, rookie.

The Pentagon strike was a fuel laden passenger plane. As you are as clueless and inexperienced as the other missileers on these boards, go to Google U and take the Youtube shortcourse on missile strikes. Watch the movies and you will see the difference between missiles exploding and the Pentagon strike.

The plane question was to see if you were one of the select few who don't believe a plane crashed.

Why would I be scared? It is you who are afraid of the real world and have to immerse yourself in fantasies to feel good about yourself. You are amusing in that you resort to calling me an idiot while you idolize Charlie Sheen. You should also learn to write a little more coherently or you will spend your life flipping burgers.

Are you ready to answer the questions I posed or are you still claiming ignorance?
edit on 3/12/2011 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


What is the OS? Is it the sum of all reports commissioned by the Federal Government or is it just those which you vehemently disagree with?


A question with a question?

No different than you vehemently disagreeing with anything outside the OS.


I have plenty of room to criticize the lack of evidence of demolition in the many claims made for such.


No you don’t, because there is plenty of science that supports demolition without Jones Journal; you just refuse to read any of the scientific technical papers that have been written by experts in their field.


No one has proven CD and "science" has not shown that "the WTC could not have fallen by jet fuel and office fires."


That is completely untrue, the NIST report explains their pseudo science showing the WTC fell by jet fuel and office fires, NIST claims that the fires weakened the steel or are you going to deny that to?


Only a few people support the theory that the collapse of the towers was a result of a controlled demolition.


How many? I didn’t think you could answer your own un proven opinion.



Scientists require something called evidence and the truthers haven't come up with any.


Truther don’t have any? You are only fooling yourself, its called “denial.” I have presented plenty of credible evidence since I have been a member on ATS or are you going to deny that to?


The entire "truther" movement is scattered and disjointed because there are no consistent theories that they can agree on.


The thread topic is not about what you believe or think about the Truth movement.
However, since you brought it up we can say the same about your OS believers they cannot agree on anything either.


The chances of a reinvestigation are about zero.


You do not know what the future hold for a new investigation, just your wishful thinking.


To have such, one would need new evidence to convince Congress to fund it.


Truth movement already has it and FYI most people do not want the government investigating what happened to the WTC, they had their chance and they blew it by covering up and destroying most of the evidence and have been caught lying to the American people. The Truth movement wants an independent investigation done by a team of qualified experts that have no ties to our corrupt government.


There isn't any


I disagree, the fact is plenty of evidence as been found and examined by experts in their field.


"It didn't look right" and "it defied the laws of physics" aren't evidence;


No, it is not evidence, but it does prove the OS is a lie.


They are, in your favorite words, opinions, usually by people whose sole expertise consists of watching disaster movies.


Who on ATS have said they are experts who watch disaster movies and compares 911?
Oh I get it; you are comparing all people who dare to have an opinion against the OS lies to all being experts in watching disaster movies and forming their opinions essentially from Hollywood.

We can say the same about a few people who support the OS after being exposed to scientific evidence and FOIA reports, perhaps they are experts in watching fairytales on the Disney channel and enjoy forming their opinions of 911 basic on too many fairytales, how does that work for you?


Keep telling yourself that you are # winning


The fact is we are, it is the OS believers that are rapidly dwindling, and the 911 pole that I did proved that.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 12-3-2011 by impressme because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   


However, since you brought it up we can say the same about your OS believers they cannot agree on anything either.

This is blatantly false. OS believers agree on jumping from one lie to another when their perpetual BS consistently ends up getting exposed. The OS will probably be unrecognizable in another 10 years.




The chances of a reinvestigation are about zero.

For your sake, I sure hope so.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal


The chances of a reinvestigation are about zero.

For your sake, I sure hope so.


Why would you hope so for my sake? Any reinvestigation would likely focus on previously unaddressed intelligence and agency failures and not on the CD theories. Jones' case for CD is far from compelling; it is actually more innuendo and bad analytical chemistry than anything else. The rest of the theories seem to be mainly based on videos of the collapse that have been edited by the addition of various colored lines and arrows that purport to show something or other, such as the "laws of physics" being violated. These are easily dismissed as gravity continues to work in spite of the best efforts of some theorists.
On several threads, I and other posters have asked the question of what happens when a reinvestigation says that we got things right the first time? Will we have to listen to demands for re-reinvestigations until everyone has their pet theory confirmed?
The 911 writers will make careers out of this and milk the believers by selling books and CD's to their audience, just as they are doing now. When sales drop, new "evidence" will surface that will be billed as "smoking gun," "overwhelming" or "conclusive." As usual, it will be nothing of the sort but it will stir the pot once more and sell the latest books and CD's to the customer base. It is all about money, just not the money the CT's think it's about.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



Why would you hope so for my sake? Any reinvestigation would likely focus on previously unaddressed intelligence and agency failures and not on the CD theories.


Would likely? Do you really think anyone in the Bush administration is going to admit to screwing up. Career suicide and criminal charges, so your assumptions are wrong.

The new investigation that people want is of the WTC and you know it.


Jones' case for CD is far from compelling; it is actually more innuendo and bad analytical chemistry than anything else.


More of your unproven opinions nothing else.


The rest of the theories seem to be mainly based on videos of the collapse that have been edited by the addition of various colored lines and arrows that purport to show something or other, such as the "laws of physics" being violated. These are easily dismissed as gravity continues to work in spite of the best efforts of some theorists.


Yet you cannot prove any of your allegations, or opinions.


On several threads, I and other posters have asked the question of what happens when a reinvestigation says that we got things right the first time? Will we have to listen to demands for re-reinvestigations until everyone has their pet theory confirmed?


Stop winning and complaining, you do not know the outcome of a second investigation.
This is what many of you debunkers do, always assuming the worst against people who want answers.


The 911 writers will make careers out of this and milk the believers by selling books and CD's to their audience, just as they are doing now.


The fact is you left out about the writers and movie makers who milk the believers who wrote books and made movies supporting the OS of 911, and fooled millions of their audience while raking in millions in profits.

Yes, it is about money either way why don’t you write your book of your “opinions” of how you assumed Steven Jones science is flawed.

Cheers



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme


On several threads, I and other posters have asked the question of what happens when a reinvestigation says that we got things right the first time? Will we have to listen to demands for re-reinvestigations until everyone has their pet theory confirmed?


Stop winning and complaining, you do not know the outcome of a second investigation.
This is what many of you debunkers do, always assuming the worst against people who want answers.



That spelling mistake would be ironic on any thread. On this one it's just brilliant.

I still maintain that impressme is a clever postmodern joke on us all.
edit on 14-3-2011 by TrickoftheShade because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Oh, and on the subject of the thread, if you have to repeatedly tell yourself and others that you're "winning", you're probably not winning.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


Looks like a couple people are getting emotionally involved enough that your exchange is starting to turn into a club starring contest. I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate your enthusiasm and reasoning, but you even probably already know that no one you will find to argue with here is in any state of mind to actually change it. They just come here to showcase to people like you their massive "intellects" since I guess no one expresses to them what they want to feel in real life.

Totally agree about not worrying about "winning" and loving Charlie Sheen. I just watched one of his "vlog rants" and it was hilarious, if only because he was so gone. Either way there is still only evidence to contradict the OS rather than support it, no proof as to what caused any of the 3 skyscrapers to collapse to this very day. If I have faith in anything it's direct reasoning. That the truth will have to come out one day is inevitable.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


Remember Bush and Afghanistan? It's the rhetoric of Western powers which is the greatest evil here.

As a general point you seem like someone who believes in the war on terror?
edit on 14-3-2011 by yyyyyyyyyy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


The 911 writers will make careers out of this and milk the believers by selling books and CD's to their audience, just as they are doing now. When sales drop, new "evidence" will surface that will be billed as "smoking gun," "overwhelming" or "conclusive." As usual, it will be nothing of the sort but it will stir the pot once more and sell the latest books and CD's to the customer base. It is all about money, just not the money the CT's think it's about.

I can hardly believe it, take a good look around the world and tell me who made money out of all of this. It isn't 9/11 truthers. Arms dealers, weapon makers and even from wiki .[4] United 93 grossed $31.4 million in the United States, and $76.2 million worldwide.

If it were not for 9/11 I could see a real global awakening taking place where we could unite as a planet but instead we get more divide and conquer.

Peace



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by yyyyyyyyyy
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


Remember Bush and Afghanistan? It's the rhetoric of Western powers which is the greatest evil here.

As a general point you seem like someone who believes in the war on terror?
edit on 14-3-2011 by yyyyyyyyyy because: (no reason given)


Not really. I dislike the US and most Americans if I'm being honest. They're a generally uninformed, uninquisitive nation, which goes a long way towards explaining why they get led around by the nose so much.

I also don't like "9/11 Truth" because it actually militates against a sensible discussion of the excesses of the "war on terror" and capitalism more generally. Partly by wasting time with nonsense, and partly by giving people a philosophical and emotional excuse to do nothing.

Put it this way, there's no doubt that we've been lied to by profiteers and that people have died as a result. But "Truthers" would rather bang on about explosives and fake planes and missiles than actually do something about it.

If you want irony, look at the posts by people here and elsewhere who think that their government murdered their fellow citizens in an overt - indeed easily provable - manner, but never do anything about it except argue on the internet. It's weird. And it suggests that they get something subtler an more personal out of the "truth" than an actual quest for reason and justice.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join