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.

 

9/11 INTERCEPTED

page: 6
45
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I said OR.. anyways.. lol




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by Morpheas
reply to post by maxella1
 


Thanks for posting this video! Some people just can't handle the truth! (or are paid to support the OS).. you know who you are.



Would you cut that crap out? It's bullcrap and it doesn't contribute to the discussion. Labeling people who disagree as paid supporters is immature and stupid. It just drives the discussion away from anything meaningful and shows that you can only defend your position by ad hominem on everyone else.







Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by maxella1



You know I didn't say that. You're just being a jerk now.
reply to post by Varemia
 


I didn't mean to hurt you feelings. I'll try be a little more sensitive if you start to make sense. okay?


Damn it, you're being dishonest and trying to steer this discussion down the tubes. If anyone is being paid to mess with the facts and keep things unsolved, it's you. I think it's likely that you're the shill.



Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by Varemia

I think it's likely that you're the shill.


Interesting you say that, actually. And you're right - Maxella's tactics are continually unconstructive. They look like they're designed to maintain an endless debate in the face of ever reaching any kind of conclusion - or truth.

I wonder if he's paid by one of the bigger sites in order to suggest there's still a debate surrounding this stuff? Certainly it would make sense for them to propagate traffic with a couple of minimum-wagers bringing up the same old nonsense every once in a while and then continuing a fake 'debate' by refusing to accept the most basic logical answers.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
The thing that puts me on edge about the pilots for 9/11 truth is when I talk to actual pilots, and they say they're full of baloney. The main thing that they seem to do is make up physics laws as they relate to airplanes, deciding that various things are absolutely impossible, yet not testing these theories. It's a similar story with many others, such as the architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. They say things are impossible, but never really back it up.

I'm just not going to take their word for it.


Show just one instance of this being true, you should at least attempt to make the effort to link at least one instance of what your friends think is the pilots "making up physics laws".

Just what exactly do you mean by "Making up physics laws"?, if you mean creatively fitting the known laws to the data available, that is not "Making up laws of physics" is it.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by The X

Originally posted by Varemia
The thing that puts me on edge about the pilots for 9/11 truth is when I talk to actual pilots, and they say they're full of baloney. The main thing that they seem to do is make up physics laws as they relate to airplanes, deciding that various things are absolutely impossible, yet not testing these theories. It's a similar story with many others, such as the architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. They say things are impossible, but never really back it up.

I'm just not going to take their word for it.


Show just one instance of this being true, you should at least attempt to make the effort to link at least one instance of what your friends think is the pilots "making up physics laws".

Just what exactly do you mean by "Making up physics laws"?, if you mean creatively fitting the known laws to the data available, that is not "Making up laws of physics" is it.


Well, the impossibilities are the main laws that the P4T use. They come up with all these limits that apparently an aircraft cannot pass without breaking apart like confetti or dive-bombing into the ground. They don't really consider all the physics, just saying that because the air is denser at lower altitudes, that stuff is impossible. They don't consider that higher density air also means more volume that the jet engines can suck, or any number of other physics laws that apply to aerodynamics.

When I talk to pilots, mostly around my university, these are the kinds of things that come up. Besides, it's not like I'm interrogating them. They're friends. We're not trying to produce empirical evidence so that you can sleep soundly knowing that you're wrong. I doubt you'll ever change your mind. That's your choice.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by The X


Show just one instance of this being true, you should at least attempt to make the effort to link at least one instance of what your friends think is the pilots "making up physics laws".




Rob Balsamo's 11.2 Gs is my personal favourite.

How could any pilot come up with 11.2 Gs for that manoeuvre and think it's the right answer ?

www.cesura17.net...



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I've always been one to teeter back and forth as to whether or not this was an inside job. I will never know for sure. The one thing this video truly exploits is our very very poor handling of the situation. Very unorganized and just no direction. I mean this video almost to a certain extent confirms to me that it wasn't an inside job and the fact that we poorly handled it.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?



As an interested party, please quote the part where he said that you did call someone a name, because I'm not seeing it.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by HawkeyeNation
I've always been one to teeter back and forth as to whether or not this was an inside job. I will never know for sure. The one thing this video truly exploits is our very very poor handling of the situation. Very unorganized and just no direction. I mean this video almost to a certain extent confirms to me that it wasn't an inside job and the fact that we poorly handled it.


lol

Please explain how this video confirmed anything except that it doesn't add up ?

And maybe this video also explains why nobody was held accountable for screwing up ?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?



As an interested party, please quote the part where he said that you did call someone a name, because I'm not seeing it.



what does he mean by

You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?





posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?



I think mostly I was just inflamed over the excessive name-calling happening in the thread you participated in. I reviewed your posts expecting to find it, but the closest I got was a number of times you used "debunker" in a derogatory fashion.

As it is, you never used "shill." I think maybe 4hero is one of the ones to blame for the flagrant abuse of that word.

Apologies.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by Morpheas
reply to post by maxella1
 


Thanks for posting this video! Some people just can't handle the truth! (or are paid to support the OS).. you know who you are.



Would you cut that crap out? It's bullcrap and it doesn't contribute to the discussion. Labeling people who disagree as paid supporters is immature and stupid. It just drives the discussion away from anything meaningful and shows that you can only defend your position by ad hominem on everyone else.







Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by maxella1



You know I didn't say that. You're just being a jerk now.
reply to post by Varemia
 


I didn't mean to hurt you feelings. I'll try be a little more sensitive if you start to make sense. okay?


Damn it, you're being dishonest and trying to steer this discussion down the tubes. If anyone is being paid to mess with the facts and keep things unsolved, it's you. I think it's likely that you're the shill.



Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by Varemia

I think it's likely that you're the shill.


Interesting you say that, actually. And you're right - Maxella's tactics are continually unconstructive. They look like they're designed to maintain an endless debate in the face of ever reaching any kind of conclusion - or truth.

I wonder if he's paid by one of the bigger sites in order to suggest there's still a debate surrounding this stuff? Certainly it would make sense for them to propagate traffic with a couple of minimum-wagers bringing up the same old nonsense every once in a while and then continuing a fake 'debate' by refusing to accept the most basic logical answers.


I hope you all realize how ridiculous you look when you say things like that..



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?



I think mostly I was just inflamed over the excessive name-calling happening in the thread you participated in. I reviewed your posts expecting to find it, but the closest I got was a number of times you used "debunker" in a derogatory fashion.

As it is, you never used "shill." I think maybe 4hero is one of the ones to blame for the flagrant abuse of that word.

Apologies.


Apology accepted.

But is there another way a “debunker”specifically “9/11 debunker” could be used? Everybody knows that you cannot debunk reality without lies.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1
Apology accepted.

But is there another way a “debunker”specifically “9/11 debunker” could be used? Everybody knows that you cannot debunk reality without lies.


Well, that's the problem. I don't feel like I'm debunking reality. I'm debunking lies spread by conspiracy theorists, and it's kinda like you and others are just falling for their untruths.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by maxella1
 


You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?


Oh you were trying to show me how stupid it is to call others names?

Please show everyone what names I was calling you that made you want to teach me a lesson. You do know how to quote right?



As an interested party, please quote the part where he said that you did call someone a name, because I'm not seeing it.



what does he mean by

You do realize that I was just showing you how you sound to me. It wasn't actually an attack on you. You realize now how stupid it is to use name-calling?




I cannot speak to what he intended, but nothing in the line you quoted actually calls you out for name calling.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by maxella1
Apology accepted.

But is there another way a “debunker”specifically “9/11 debunker” could be used? Everybody knows that you cannot debunk reality without lies.


Well, that's the problem. I don't feel like I'm debunking reality. I'm debunking lies spread by conspiracy theorists, and it's kinda like you and others are just falling for their untruths.


You ARE a conspiracy theorist..



I can see agents of the government "allowing" an attack to take place in order to further an agenda, but the conspiracy toted on this site is just too far-reaching to be plausible.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

You debunk your own lies.
lol



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1
You ARE a conspiracy theorist..


I'm aware of this. I just don't believe the same things you do. I require more proof.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by intrptr
I almost responded to this thread, then I saw who was posting it.



I'm not sure if you realize it, but you did respond to this thread.

LOL... Classic. Star for the reply.
I've read quite a few comments regarding pilots being no more than oversized taxi drivers and the like. Nothing could be further from the truth. Having flown quite a bit in my life as a passenger, I can attest to the professionalism and skill of pilots. Pilots are responsible for each life that boards that plane and getting that soul safely to the destination. That is no small task, especially considering how many are aboard the plane, how fast it is traveling and the sheer marvel of airflight that we take for granted. There are still a few people alive who were born into an age when there was no heavier-than-air flight. Further, there are many people alive before the advent of mass commercial air travel, let alone the jet age. People who minimalize the role of pilots simply do not understand or properly respect how difficult it is to take tons of metal into the air, race through the sky and gently, safely land it.

Sure, pilots are people and there are good and bad ones, just like in any profession. There are good and bad surgeons and cops and fast food workers. Any profession has crackpots and dangerous folks. No different with pilots. So, if you ask any "average" pilot about 911, unless they have curiosity and a sense for truth within them (enough to prompt a personal investigation regarding the blatant anomalies and contradictions of 911), you're probably going to get about the same percentage of canned responses typical of someone who has not awakened to the reality of it all. It's good to see the *awakened* pilots uniting and sharing information for the case against the official story. The case against the official story is growing stronger by the hour as more people look into the facts and contradictions... and then slowly realize they have been mislead on a seemingly impossibly grand scale.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


Nope the list stays the same... makes no difference if your religious beliefs have something called a soul and you think it goes somewhere after you die. Even if you have an imaginary friend named Jesus or God...

So can I see that list of actual pilots now and their time in the air etc... that oppose...?

I guess I will also need to know thier religious beliefs as well...?



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join