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.

 

Japan Skyscrapers Sway With 8.9 Earthquake but the WTC collapsed !! still beleive the 9/11 version?

page: 15
34
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


So basically you've abandoned discussion and reason, because they weren't working, and have replaced them with blind faith.

Good luck with that.




posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


I won't twist your post around at all. But what you've basically said is that you are no longer a truther. The whole point of being a truther is to discover the truth, not ignore all other perspectives and opinions. You can't "make up your mind" when it comes to truth. Truth is an ever changing idea that evolves into a solid idea of what happened.

For example, I support the idea that the towers were brought down by the planes. I'm not close-minded though, because I'm open to correction if someone can prove it to me in a way that makes some semblance of sense and logic. I support it, which is not the same as ignoring everyone who disagrees and shunning them. That's what ignorance is, ignoring things in order to continue believing something.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


Yeah, why watch the video when you can look at the disclaimer. Have you read the disclaimers to the NIST reports?

It is important to give new readers as much accurate information as possible. In an alleged democracy, good decisions require accurate information.

You haven't figured it out yet, but I'm not writing to you; I'm writing to new readers who are trying to learn the truth about 911...I'm writing to give you a chance to respond with a cogent argument few OS'ers can muster because they don't have the facts, physics or evidence on their side. You can't prove a lie, so you bluster and evade.

The facts are the facts, and this decision is an easy one to anyone who has bothered to scratch the surface of the available evidence. Everyone who has looked at the evidence with honest eyes comes to the same conclusion. There are differences in opinion as to the understanding of what really happened, but there is no dispute that the OS is an impossible lie.

The claim that an aluminum wing can slice structural steel is an extraordinary claim and we all know extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. It cannot be proven true because it is physically impossible. Anyone claiming it is physically possible will need to provide proof more compelling than Kung Fu videos.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yankee451
There are differences in opinion as to the understanding of what really happened, but there is no dispute that the OS is an impossible lie.


Sorry, but that's not true. There is dispute. That's why people are arguing against you and other truthers. They don't see the OS as being an impossible lie, meaning that there is dispute.

That's the most simple logic that exists. Does it make sense?



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343
Do you just ignore posts that explain how concrete "melts"? Look for the word degredation on page 12.


When you're not talking about anywhere near the same thing, yes, I do.

How does concrete "degrading" cause the guns to broken apart into pieces as they are encased? Hell, can you show me ANYTHING encased in concrete, that happened after the concrete had already been set?

My educated guess is no, you've never seen anything like this in your life either, and are just offering more layman guesses that will never amount to a legitimate study. There is nothing you can do online to determine what happened to those guns for them to be encased in concrete. You're going to have to learn to deal with that. If you don't care what really happened to them, or what happened at the WTC, and just want to argue with people online, that's all you and it's apparently all you really want anyway.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


You know, a lot of pressure with a little time could do that. Just throwing that out there.

I mean, in Geology it happens all the time, just on a larger scale. Concrete is already a conglomerate of material that can be molded.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
You know, a lot of pressure with a little time could do that. Just throwing that out there.


Yeah, and a flying pig could have crapped them out already like that, too. Just throwing that out there.

Hey, when are we going to stop throwing around wild guesses in an internet circle-jerk and actually figure out wtf happened here?



I mean, in Geology it happens all the time, just on a larger scale.


Yeah, right, it happens all the time. See how many examples you can find me of things becoming encased in concrete after the concrete had already set.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Game_Over
 


I won't twist your post around at all. But what you've basically said is that you are no longer a truther. The whole point of being a truther is to discover the truth, not ignore all other perspectives and opinions. You can't "make up your mind" when it comes to truth. Truth is an ever changing idea that evolves into a solid idea of what happened.

For example, I support the idea that the towers were brought down by the planes. I'm not close-minded though, because I'm open to correction if someone can prove it to me in a way that makes some semblance of sense and logic. I support it, which is not the same as ignoring everyone who disagrees and shunning them. That's what ignorance is, ignoring things in order to continue believing something.


If you're are not close-minded, as you say...can you honestly say you've examined all the evidence? How can anyone make any decision about something as profound as 911 until they're sure they've examined all the available evidence? Most folks only examine enough to gratify their own suspicions...this is something I did for years. But to be honest with myself, I had to force myself to look at all the evidence I could find, even that which shed doubt on my conclusions at the time. New evidence can change everything, but only if you've seen it.

This means YEARS of research; 8 for me, and I'm still at it. My conclusions have changed several times along the way, thanks to new evidence.

I keep running into folks who are demanding a better explanation, and if you're serious I can provide you with one that suits the facts much better than the authorities' story...but it won't really sink in unless you do the leg work yourself.

Here are some excellent resources for deconstructing the 911 story...it is important to learn about Operation Code Angel and Operation Brownstone. The motive is always important in any crime, and this will give you an idea of who the real terrorists are. The original article is hard to find, but here's a blog posting about it:

aangirfan.blogspot.com...

The Naudet 911 film is a must have for anyone who is genuinely interested in learning the truth. Leslie Raphael has done an amazing job at deconstructing the film...very detailed, very LONG expose (I'm still reading it...no immediate gratification here). For the record, Raphael is not a no-planer like me, so it may be more palatable to the mainstream types.

Jules Naudet's First Plane Shot Was Staged



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by Yankee451
There are differences in opinion as to the understanding of what really happened, but there is no dispute that the OS is an impossible lie.


Sorry, but that's not true. There is dispute. That's why people are arguing against you and other truthers. They don't see the OS as being an impossible lie, meaning that there is dispute.

That's the most simple logic that exists. Does it make sense?


You're arguing because you haven't been exposed to the same information.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Hey, when are we going to stop throwing around wild guesses in an internet circle-jerk and actually figure out wtf happened here?


Not any time soon, given that most people who ascribe to 9/11 "Truth" don't bother to do anything concrete towards actually advancing their cause. Too much like hard work I suppose.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by bsbray11
Hey, when are we going to stop throwing around wild guesses in an internet circle-jerk and actually figure out wtf happened here?


Not any time soon, given that most people who ascribe to 9/11 "Truth" don't bother to do anything concrete towards actually advancing their cause. Too much like hard work I suppose.


I beg to differ.

We'll let the readers decide who's doing the hard work of researching and who's not bothering to do anything.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by bsbray11
Hey, when are we going to stop throwing around wild guesses in an internet circle-jerk and actually figure out wtf happened here?


Not any time soon


Well at least you are finally willing to admit that nothing you post comes anywhere near resolving what actually happened that day.

You give me enough money and I'll do the investigation myself.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


"So basically you've abandoned discussion and reason, because they weren't working, and have replaced them with blind faith."

-- I will never abandon discussion and reason. In fact that is what brought me here to begin with. What you fail to understand is that most of "us" were just like "you" at one point.

See, when I believed in fairy tales. I was a child, just like you. However after several years of "discussion" and "reasoning" I have come to the conclusion that the Official Story is a lie.

I can illustrate this very easily to you by "discussing" the fact that WTC 7 was left out of the 9-11 Commission Report. You see it is not just what the Report contains but what it OMITS that is important to look at. I can use "reason" to deduce that they left out that and many other items that would alter their desired outcome. Just like you do, daily, here on this very site.

< snip >

I am not claiming I am superior to you. This knowledge is available to everyone who looks. However I will say I am smarter than you because I have seen through the lies.

As for "blind faith"...you have no idea how silly you sound. If we, "truthers" blindly put our faith in things, we would actually be on your side!

Easy. Next.

Mod note: ALL MEMBERS: We expect civility and decorum within all topics.


edit on 3/15/11 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Allow me to respond...

"I won't twist your post around at all. But what you've basically said is that you are no longer a truther."
-- Am I the only one who notices the bizarre logic here. He tells me at once that he won't twist my post around and then does that very thing? I never suggested I wasn't a "truther".

"The whole point of being a truther is to discover the truth, not ignore all other perspectives and opinions."
-- In the initial baby steps of truth seeking this is correct. I think this is the stage you are currently in. Now let's say after you have looked into all other perspectives and opinions that you make a ...(gasp)..DECISION and it is that the Official Story is a lie? Is that okay? Or do I have to keep researching until the end of time, arguing with fools and trolls? You tell me please, so I know what to do.

"You can't "make up your mind" when it comes to truth. Truth is an ever changing idea that evolves into a solid idea of what happened."
-- uhhh, no. Actualy what you are describing is OPINION.

You see, truth is not dependent of your interpretation of it. Do you understand this? There are many opinions on what really happened...but guess what my friend, there is only one TRUTH about what really happened.

Do you get this? The truth, in fact, never changes.
Sure the truth that you are told is ever changing but the event that the truth refers to remains the same.

And I know deep down, this is what bothers you the most. That the event happened...you were lied to about it...it seems so mean...so harsh...too many people involved...etc. Face it. It happened.

And the longer I have to sit here and argue with guys like you when we should both be on the same side is the funniest part about the whole scenario.

But it's what we do. I don't like it. I would rather sit and discuss the various geo-political events with you through the same shared understanding of how the world works.

Unfortunately, you have not yet learned how the world works.

So until you do, the battle continues.

"For example, I support the idea that the towers were brought down by the planes. I'm not close-minded though, because I'm open to correction if someone can prove it to me in a way that makes some semblance of sense and logic."
-- Fine. You win. The towers were hit by planes. WTC 7 was not but still came down. Now maybe you can prove to us in a way that makes some semblance of sense and logic how this occurred. Oh wait, some brainiac answered that on another thread... I think he said "gravity".

"That's what ignorance is, ignoring things in order to continue believing something."
-- Umm, no it's not. Ignorance is defined as a state of being uninformed. It's correct context would be something similar to this...
"ATS member Varemia, while good natured, is ignorant of the truth behind the events on 9-11". You see it has little to do with the fact that you are ignoring things in order to continue believing the OS, rather, your ignorance stems from the fact that you are uniformed.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


I take it then that you claim to have the knowledge of God? Honestly, that is what you sound like you are saying. You appear to have researched 'every' 'single' 'detail' of 9/11, and yet you seem to have completely forgotten that WTC 7 was damaged by debris from WTC 1. If you haven't even seen the many pictures of the WTC 7's damage (yes, only one segment of damage couldn't be captured because of all the smoke and the fact that no one thought to BRING A CAMERA into a disaster zone when they were still trying to recover from the collapses), I have to assume that you are, in fact, not knowledgeable about everything having to do with 9/11.

I can admit that when I first saw a video of WTC 7 collapsing that I thought it was a controlled demolition. It was the only explanation that I could find. Then, I did my research, and it appeared to be otherwise.

You are right about the truth not changing, but you are wrong in thinking you have the perfect truth. No one has the perfect truth of every detail of that day. To claim so is to be highly ignorant. You may FEEL all you want about your "truth," but in the end, it really is your honest-to-God opinion. I mean, that's how the Mormons tell people to begin believing in Joseph Smith. They tell you to read their text and feel in your heart that it is true. Unfortunately, truth does not just reveal itself to peoples' feelings as much as one might wish it to.

Human beings have the ability to be logical and rational. Claiming to have all the answers without any appearance of true evidence is just silly! At least with the official explanation of events I have videos of fire, damage, and collapses. There isn't a single report of an actual demo charge. Only the sound of booms that no camera in all of New York could catch... That sure is a solid theory, eh?
edit on 15-3-2011 by Varemia because: typo



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Game_Over
 


Well I wont change my name and dont have an avatar YET I can only add one!

Now since going through school and taking subjects like Engineering science (physics with more detail) engineering drawing and physics then working in the design/drawing office of a STRUCTURAL STEELWORK company while doing civil eng at college at night and now giving advice to engineers and architects and testing STRUCTURAL FIXINGS sometimes to destruction and having 30+years in the construction industry I think I have a fair idea how things work.

I undestand why the os is more than possible and I also know why it may not seem possible to others
the problem with the net is everyone is an expert, even when during the working day the most technical question they ask people is "DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT"

So what DO YOU BRING ie "WHAT IS YOUR EXPERTISE?"



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I think what he's trying to say is that we've been there. I can't tell you how many times I was sure I had it all figured out only to find another piece of the puzzle to change everything.

There really is only one answer though...one way to answer all the questions, and the official explanations don't come close to doing that, as evidenced by the parameters NIST gave itself for its reports.

As a military operation, electronic devices would be jammed in the combat theater. This was corroborated by the front linemen for the OEM, the NYPD and the FDNY.

Any working cameras would take an image of what? Burning towers? Explosions? Sure. But no planes.

This is why the only images of jets on the public domain have been proven to be frauds...all the private footage has been tampered with, many of them using the same shots and simply changing foreground and background layering techniques.

Why would any single image be tampered with?


edit on 15-3-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Yankee451
 


I have seen a lot more than a few camera angles of the plane hitting the tower. I know the plane is real. If it's not (meaning you can apparently prove that every single video of a plane hitting is a fake), then how in the heck can I believe anything at all in the world is real? Am I supposed to assume that all reality is not really reality? If that's the case, then honestly I would prefer to be ignorant since I am not interested in being a paranoid weirdo.

I agree that many of the videos have been tampered with, but not to add planes in. In fact, most of the time it is just little skips here and there that are almost like data errors, except that they happen at just the right times. Those "glitches" are the reason I am open to other possibilities within the towers, but I am not sold on them yet. The planes still make more sense.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join