Why do 'debunkers' devote so much time to defending the Official 9/11 story??

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mayabong
Hopefully they are paid. If not I feel sorry for them. I can't imagine hanging out in the 911 forum and just the 911 forum all the time like good ole dave and hooper do.


Wow, I never realized I was such a celebrity here, since so many people are so interested in what I myself consider fairly boring. If you really want to know...

A) I'm a 9/11 scholar myself, and believe it or not I do pick up quite a lot of interesting tidbits here. In fact it was from this forum that I first found out about Operation Northwoods. It's just that once I found out about it I actually bothered to do more research on it and found out you people neglected to mention it was cancelled and thrown into the garbage can.

B) After seeing the outrageously BAD quality of information the truthers are passing around, somebody needs to set the record straight and post real information, once in a while. You truthers certainly aren't stupid- you've just been suckered by a lot of crackpots and con artists behind those damned fool conspiracy web sites, and if even one person says, "you know, Dave's right, what those guys said doesn't make much sense" I'll know I've gotten people to start thinking for themselves.

C) I actually get to practice valuable debating tactics here, like how to say things, how not to say things, how to lay traps for know it alls to step into, and so on, for reasons I won't go into. Strawman arguments, ad-hominim arguments, guilt by six degrees of separation, cherry picking, bait and switch, circular logic, you've taught me how to respond to all of that because stunts like those are really all the 9/11 conspiracy movement has to go on.

D) I don't stay here as long as you think. My work load involves a lot of "hurry up and wait" and I simply hang out here during the "wait" stage to pass the time until the "hurry up" stage comes along. You'll see me signed on all day, but all that means is that I've logged in but the window is minimized while I'm doing something else.

Does that clear anything up?




posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
You are not making it clear what side of the fence you are on, I don't see you pulling up OS'ers omn some of their fabricated theories?

If the OS was as water tight as the 'debunkers' like to claim, then my thread or this forum both would not exist.

A lot of people that are considered as 'truthers' have done extensive research and found a lot of faults in the OS, and 'debunkers' try to normalise that research at every avaiable opportunity. So you are not giving credit, where credit is due.

As mentioned, anyone that sells a CD, is only really a few people out of millions that don't, so it's not even worth wasting any energy over. Most are just interested in finding the real truth, not the story presented to everyone by their government.

Gage, seems to be respected by many, but then he may think that you are not very credible either, horses for courses, as they say.

ATS, still profits, and if you disagree with profiting from conspiracy theories, including 9/11, then you should technically not be on this website.


You continue to assume that if someone rebuts arguments made to support one conspiracy theory or another, then that person is a supporter of some "official story." Your black-and-white view is simplistic. Those who have found faults in the "official story" have not yet shown solid evidence of any other explanation. They may have done "a lot of research" but that does not validate their arguments, especially in those cases where "research" is really a literature search that includes sites who trade on innuendo and heresay.
You still have trouble reading. I said that I don't believe anyone profiting from a conspiracy. Disinterested individuals will be unbiased but those with a financial stake have a vested interest in perpetuating their favorite fantasy. Gage was a pick of someone profiting [$76,000/year] that was easily supported by Gage's non-profit income disclosure.
ATS profits by maintaining a discussion board not by selling a specific theory. Technically, I should be on this website if only to instruct those like you in the technical aspects of the latest alternate reality.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Taking a vid out of context is not the same as ginning up a half baked theory dependent on super-secret silent explosives or death rays of some sort.


I don't recall Richard Gage mentioning death rays! Maybe you've been watching too much star wars?!

He mentioned thermate, which is more plausible than the building coming down the way it did due to fires.

Anyway, this is about debunkers, not WTC7 etc.


Death rays were mentioned by Judy Wood, not Gage. Gage is only one crackpot among many. Cole showed thermate doing what it was designed to do but fails to mention that it can't be timed to do anything but initiate a gravitational collapse. If thermate was used, the collapse was due to gravity. All he needs is evidence of the initiation but all he has is innuendo. He could show hacksaw blades cutting steel or a ratchet unbolting connections and claim those as collapse initiators but he has no evidence for those either.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
You continue to assume that if someone rebuts arguments made to support one conspiracy theory or another, then that person is a supporter of some "official story." Your black-and-white view is simplistic. Those who have found faults in the "official story" have not yet shown solid evidence of any other explanation. They may have done "a lot of research" but that does not validate their arguments, especially in those cases where "research" is really a literature search that includes sites who trade on innuendo and heresay.
You still have trouble reading. I said that I don't believe anyone profiting from a conspiracy. Disinterested individuals will be unbiased but those with a financial stake have a vested interest in perpetuating their favorite fantasy. Gage was a pick of someone profiting [$76,000/year] that was easily supported by Gage's non-profit income disclosure.
ATS profits by maintaining a discussion board not by selling a specific theory. Technically, I should be on this website if only to instruct those like you in the technical aspects of the latest alternate reality.


No, I'm just echoing what the 'debunkers' say that there is 'debunkers' (OS'ers) & 'truthers'.

I don't even consider myself as a 'truther', yeah I disbelieve a lot of the OS, but the actual term 'truther' is just a slang term, a label that I did not create, a label that I really don't care if I'm called. All I know is, the OS is not to be trusted.

Those that have spotted the lies in the OS have provided a lot of evidence, but 'debunkers' will never accept it, and the American government obviously never will, because all the evidence they presented in their reports was naturally biased, to fit the story they wanted to portray.

It makes no odds, if you disapprove of anyone making any money out of any conspiracy theory, then you should not be on ATS, otherwise you're what is considered a hypocrtite.


I should be on this website if only to instruct those like you in the technical aspects of the latest alternate reality


Cool, I'm glad to have you here to control my thoughts, I'm not sure how I would manage if it was not for people like you controlling my reality. Where do I send the cheque? Will $76,000 a year be ok?

So let me ask you this, what do you actually believe happened on 9/11? I want to see your view is, because you rabbit on about not being on either side, but everything you say is always biased to the OS, and you never give anything to indicate that you disbelieve the OS, therefore you are an OS'er! Please do tell me.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Taking a vid out of context is not the same as ginning up a half baked theory dependent on super-secret silent explosives or death rays of some sort.


I don't recall Richard Gage mentioning death rays! Maybe you've been watching too much star wars?!

He mentioned thermate, which is more plausible than the building coming down the way it did due to fires.

Anyway, this is about debunkers, not WTC7 etc.


Death rays were mentioned by Judy Wood, not Gage. Gage is only one crackpot among many. Cole showed thermate doing what it was designed to do but fails to mention that it can't be timed to do anything but initiate a gravitational collapse. If thermate was used, the collapse was due to gravity. All he needs is evidence of the initiation but all he has is innuendo. He could show hacksaw blades cutting steel or a ratchet unbolting connections and claim those as collapse initiators but he has no evidence for those either.


Judy Wood never mentioned death rays at all, she spoke of directed energy, and never called them death rays as far as I know, that is a 'debunkers' term.
I do not go into her work, I go off what is available evidence.

As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

Prove Richard Gage is a 'crackpot' as you call him, I doubt you can. You're just spouting hot air like all 'debunkers'. You couldnt debunk something is your life depended on it.

You're another one of those debunkers that chats rubbish, coming out with idiotic stuff like death rays and hacksaws, and you've got the cheek to call Richard Gage a crackpot! Hahahaha! Your 'debunking' cult gets weirder by the hour. Rain it in, you're making yourself look foolish.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Taking a vid out of context is not the same as ginning up a half baked theory dependent on super-secret silent explosives or death rays of some sort.


I don't recall Richard Gage mentioning death rays! Maybe you've been watching too much star wars?!

He mentioned thermate, which is more plausible than the building coming down the way it did due to fires.

Anyway, this is about debunkers, not WTC7 etc.




Death rays were mentioned by Judy Wood, not Gage. Gage is only one crackpot among many. Cole showed thermate doing what it was designed to do but fails to mention that it can't be timed to do anything but initiate a gravitational collapse. If thermate was used, the collapse was due to gravity. All he needs is evidence of the initiation but all he has is innuendo. He could show hacksaw blades cutting steel or a ratchet unbolting connections and claim those as collapse initiators but he has no evidence for those either.


Judy Wood never mentioned death rays at all, she spoke of directed energy, and never called them death rays as far as I know, that is a 'debunkers' term.
I do not go into her work, I go off what is available evidence.

As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

Prove Richard Gage is a 'crackpot' as you call him, I doubt you can. You're just spouting hot air like all 'debunkers'. You couldnt debunk something is your life depended on it.

You're another one of those debunkers that chats rubbish, coming out with idiotic stuff like death rays and hacksaws, and you've got the cheek to call Richard Gage a crackpot! Hahahaha! Your 'debunking' cult gets weirder by the hour. Rain it in, you're making yourself look foolish.


What would you call a person that has 1500 Architects and Engineers at his disposal and his most technical proof is one of dropping boxes on each other?

This is not a trick question. I would like to know.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
all you have to do is have someone oppose a fact, and its no longer a fact.

You see this all the time with political conversations.



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
Death rays were mentioned by Judy Wood, not Gage. Gage is only one crackpot among many. Cole showed thermate doing what it was designed to do but fails to mention that it can't be timed to do anything but initiate a gravitational collapse. If thermate was used, the collapse was due to gravity. All he needs is evidence of the initiation but all he has is innuendo. He could show hacksaw blades cutting steel or a ratchet unbolting connections and claim those as collapse initiators but he has no evidence for those either.
Judy Wood never mentioned death rays at all, she spoke of directed energy, and never called them death rays as far as I know, that is a 'debunkers' term.
I do not go into her work, I go off what is available evidence.

As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

Prove Richard Gage is a 'crackpot' as you call him, I doubt you can. You're just spouting hot air like all 'debunkers'. You couldnt debunk something is your life depended on it.

You're another one of those debunkers that chats rubbish, coming out with idiotic stuff like death rays and hacksaws, and you've got the cheek to call Richard Gage a crackpot! Hahahaha! Your 'debunking' cult gets weirder by the hour. Rain it in, you're making yourself look foolish.


Judy is a case unto herself and her theory is energetically bankrupt. If you "go off what is available evidence" [sic] perhaps you can explain the engineering and physics behind Gage's cardboard box analogy. No one really pays attention to him but the true believers and even many of those try to distance themselves from his silliness. Crackpot is the word that best describes Gage unless he is being paid to keep the gullible looking at the physical collapse and not focusing on other issues. Then he would be a "disinformation agent."

Hot air spouting is the diagnostic for the "truthers" as they like to call themselves. They have only air and no evidence of anything other than airplanes striking buildings.

"Rain it in?" Maybe you meant "rein it in." I am educating you, again. Now you can impress your prom date with your newfound vocabulary.
edit on 7/12/2012 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

It makes no odds, if you disapprove of anyone making any money out of any conspiracy theory, then you should not be on ATS, otherwise you're what is considered a hypocrtite.


My words were "I don't believe anyone profiting from a conspiracy." I didn't say anything about approval or disapproval, I said "believe." Is English a second language for you even though you are from the Commonwealth?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup

Prove Richard Gage is a 'crackpot' as you call him, I doubt you can.


It is very easy to do.... just watch this



and here we see that he is a crackpot!



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
I don't buy that anyone started as a truther, people start out buying the OS that was sold to them, and then if they are not of the sheep mentality they eventually will see that the OS is a lie. It takes a while, but all 'truthers' once beleived the OS.

You comments are strange, it seems you are easily influenced by anything you hear, one minute you believe the OS, then you don't, then you do.

The more people research 9/11 the more they realise it's full of lies. How can you put your faith in the NIST report if they didn't do a thorough investigation, and fudge the data to fit their bioased story?

It seem you still have a lot to learn about 9/11, and need think for yourself instead of taking everything people say at face value. When you start thinking for yourself, then your research will your own.


This is typical paranoia.

I swing back and forth as my awareness of various facts change. If any one thing the truth movement says ends up being true about the conspiracy, it puts everything else in question. The problem I'm running into is that continued research has proven every single point to be backed up by the OS by several different sources. I'm talking firefighters, news video, dust analysis, etc.

Are you saying that I need to stop reading anything that is official because you have auto-denied it? Isn't that the opposite of denying ignorance, since ignorance is the denial of facts? This site is for revealing the truth, not hugging a theory that makes you sleep better at night.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 




As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

No he's a snake oil salesman. He's in it for the income stream.
He make all sorts of claims based on his degrees. But he never presents any proof.
If he wanted a resolution of his claims he would produce a paper with facts and calculations and present it for peer review. It would then make world wide news and he would become a household name. HE would then be able to work for any engineering compnay on the planet. His future would be assured.

But he won't do that. Why is that? If you think MIB might make him disappear, ask yourself why haven't they done it already? He already goes from town to town giving paid speeches about 911
edit on 13-7-2012 by samkent because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   
Al qaeda is a puppet of US govt and the events in Libya or Syria prove it. Controlled demolition becomes irrelevant as US govt is helping Al qaeda.

Nugh said.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


"every single point is backed up by several sources" ? You make a statement like that, and expect people to treat you with respect. So, you would have us believe that you're her just to look out for us? C'mon, man. This is getting ridiculous. Mods, why is this guy allowed to spew this obvious dis-info?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by huh2142

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by thegameisup

Originally posted by pteridine

Taking a vid out of context is not the same as ginning up a half baked theory dependent on super-secret silent explosives or death rays of some sort.


I don't recall Richard Gage mentioning death rays! Maybe you've been watching too much star wars?!

He mentioned thermate, which is more plausible than the building coming down the way it did due to fires.

Anyway, this is about debunkers, not WTC7 etc.




Death rays were mentioned by Judy Wood, not Gage. Gage is only one crackpot among many. Cole showed thermate doing what it was designed to do but fails to mention that it can't be timed to do anything but initiate a gravitational collapse. If thermate was used, the collapse was due to gravity. All he needs is evidence of the initiation but all he has is innuendo. He could show hacksaw blades cutting steel or a ratchet unbolting connections and claim those as collapse initiators but he has no evidence for those either.


Judy Wood never mentioned death rays at all, she spoke of directed energy, and never called them death rays as far as I know, that is a 'debunkers' term.
I do not go into her work, I go off what is available evidence.

As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

Prove Richard Gage is a 'crackpot' as you call him, I doubt you can. You're just spouting hot air like all 'debunkers'. You couldnt debunk something is your life depended on it.

You're another one of those debunkers that chats rubbish, coming out with idiotic stuff like death rays and hacksaws, and you've got the cheek to call Richard Gage a crackpot! Hahahaha! Your 'debunking' cult gets weirder by the hour. Rain it in, you're making yourself look foolish.


What would you call a person that has 1500 Architects and Engineers at his disposal and his most technical proof is one of dropping boxes on each other?

This is not a trick question. I would like to know.


It has nothing to do with that, he could make an expensive model if he wants, but he is demonstrating something in the most simple way possible to get through to the legion of idiots that do not understand the basic concept of physics.

I'm sure if you write to him he will make you a pretty computer model!

If you do not even have the brains to undserstand why he made such a basic video then you need to get back to school.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 



As I have already said to another member, Richard Gage is demonstrating something in the most simple way possible, to get through to the legion of idiots that do not understand the basic concept of physics.

I'm sure if you write to him he will make you a pretty computer model!

If you do not even have the brains to understand why he made such a basic video, then you need to get back to school.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia

This is typical paranoia.

I swing back and forth as my awareness of various facts change. If any one thing the truth movement says ends up being true about the conspiracy, it puts everything else in question. The problem I'm running into is that continued research has proven every single point to be backed up by the OS by several different sources. I'm talking firefighters, news video, dust analysis, etc.

Are you saying that I need to stop reading anything that is official because you have auto-denied it? Isn't that the opposite of denying ignorance, since ignorance is the denial of facts? This site is for revealing the truth, not hugging a theory that makes you sleep better at night.


Yeah, all the people that disbelieve the OS are paranoid! You must be pretty paranoid if you're an OS'er on minute, and a 'truther' the next!

There are loads of firefighters that think 9/11 was an inside job.. All you and your fellow 'debunkers' do is post quotes from dubious sources, I have never seen one video interview by any of these firemen you quote, that is highly suspicious. It seems you just believe anything you read on any website, and dont check to see if it's factual.

Have you seen this video?:

Interview with John Schroeder 911 FIREMAN


What about this one from NY Policeman Craig Bartmer?

9/11 First Responder - Interview with Craig Bartmer


Which is more believable, a real video interview, or some words on a screen that a child could have written?

What have you got to say about what this fireman and policeman have to say?


What about this guy being interviewed, is he telling lies?

New 9/11 Eyewitness Evidence of Bombs at WTC


I tell you who is telling lies, and it's someone you 'debunkers' support, John Gross from NIST's and his denial of moulton metal.
This is the kind of NIST junk you support and believe! What a joke.

John Gross denies existance of molten metal


Debunkers are a joke, plain and simple. Please do give me your thoughts on the John Schroeder, and Craig Bartmer video interviews, because they go against all your dubious random quotes that you claim to be real evidence. You are just posting lies. All debunkers normally avoid the John Schroeder, and Craig Bartmer video interviews, I wonder if you will address them, and if so will you address them with an unbiased mind?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by thegameisup
 




As for Richard Gage, he is no crackpot, you and your debunking chums all like to portray him as that, because you are sockpuppets defending the OS.

No he's a snake oil salesman. He's in it for the income stream.
He make all sorts of claims based on his degrees. But he never presents any proof.
If he wanted a resolution of his claims he would produce a paper with facts and calculations and present it for peer review. It would then make world wide news and he would become a household name. HE would then be able to work for any engineering compnay on the planet. His future would be assured.

But he won't do that. Why is that? If you think MIB might make him disappear, ask yourself why haven't they done it already? He already goes from town to town giving paid speeches about 911
edit on 13-7-2012 by samkent because: (no reason given)


No, you are out to attack him because he is one of the biggest threats to the official story. You are deliberately trying to run the man's reputation down, when he does nothing but great work.

Everything you or anyone needs to know is on his website, and the man has more credentials than you will ever have. I guess you are just jealous that he actually does more with his life than you.

Your lies about Richard are pointless, his reputation speaks for itself. He has the support of many professionals and experts, no lies you say about him will ever stop him from achieving his goal.

Now let's see, you support the Official story, and the mainstream (96% Jewish owned) media that have sold that story for 11 years now, and the OS has been monetised by all these TV and news networks, they showed it live, and made millions in adverts on 09/11/01 alone, then all the shows after 9/11 where they made money from adverts, and then all the biased documantaries that they made to support the OS lies, which they again made money from adverts, and they also made money from sselling their documentaries on DVD etc.

The mainstream that support the OS have made stupid amounts of millions from 9/11, and you support that, you are part of that, yet you moan about Richard Gage making a few thousand to keep his campaign going? Are you for real? Do you actually have a sane brain?



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
As I have already said to another member, Richard Gage is demonstrating something in the most simple way possible, to get through to the legion of idiots that do not understand the basic concept of physics.


And thats is indeed his audience. People who do understand physics think he is an idiot.


I'm sure if you write to him he will make you a pretty computer model!


I am 100% sure he won't and he can't. I dare you to write to him and share his response.


If you do not even have the brains to understand why he made such a basic video, then you need to get back to school.


True. The reason he made such a video is because he is an idiot and/or charlatan. If you don't understand that you indeed need to go back to school.



posted on Jul, 13 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by thegameisup

It makes no odds, if you disapprove of anyone making any money out of any conspiracy theory, then you should not be on ATS, otherwise you're what is considered a hypocrtite.


My words were "I don't believe anyone profiting from a conspiracy." I didn't say anything about approval or disapproval, I said "believe." Is English a second language for you even though you are from the Commonwealth?


Just like all 'debunkers' you change your story to suit a comment. You earlier disagreed with Richard trying to raise money to keep his campaign going, then you change your views so you can attempt to trump my response!

As I have written below, all mainstream TV networks have profitted from 9/11 over the last 11 years, from adverts during the live TV event on 9/11, from every other program that has been on since then, which all support the OS, and from al lthe documentaries that they have sold on DVD, so if you do not believe anyone that oprofits from a conspiracy then I take it you disbelieve the OS because many TV and news networks have profitted from selling the OS to the public. There is no denying these facts.

Are you from this planet?





top topics
 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join