9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-02-2015, 08:51 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(16-02-2015 07:37 AM)roro Wrote:  
(15-02-2015 11:49 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  But also don't challenge shit ideas right?

I watched a bit and was not impressed. I watched the part where the guy was trying to convince people that it was an explosion through stretching people's eye witness testimony. He kept going on and on about eye witness like they were the Holy grail of evidence and that the NIST report didn't take into account it.

The biggest weakness to it? The fuck were the charges? To quote Marvin: Where was the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering ka boom!

Absolutely challenge shit ideas!
What I am looking for is credible EVIDENCE from both sides.
So, you watched a presentation by a university professor. That was all circumstantial evidence...interesting, but it is what it is.
I focused on the information from architects, engineers, physicists, and other scientists giving a detailed analysis of what happened. That is more direct evidence. The question is, are there any flaws in the analyses? That is why I asked for reference to other evidence. Have there been any peer reviews of the information?

I am interested in what these professionals have to say, not some layman's opinion.
So, any additional information from qualified sources is appreciated.

Thanks!

Then do the research Roro, watch the videos i posted for you. Remember though, once a conspiracy creeps into your head, you may end up chasing bigfoot for the rest of your life. By the way, as a crim just major I can tell you that the least reliable evidence is eyewitness testimony. fact. That goes contrary to common sense, but there are a lot of reasons people think they see what they said they saw, group think, bias, personal agenda, etc etc. There is a reason why eyewitness testimony doesn't a guilty verdict make anymore.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 04:35 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(16-02-2015 07:37 AM)roro Wrote:  The question is, are there any flaws in the analyses?

I think this is where you are going wrong. The question with acceptance of the theory of evolution is not "are there any flaws in the analysis?". The question with acceptance of the theory of gravity is not "are there any flaws in the analysis?". The question with the the acceptance or rejection of religion is not "are there any flaws in the religion?". The question with acceptance or rejection of the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks is not "are there any flaws in their analysis?".

The question is: "Is there an explanation that better or using fewer unproven assumptions explains the facts and/or produces testable predictions that differ from the official explanation and are provably correct?"

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 07:26 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(16-02-2015 08:51 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(16-02-2015 07:37 AM)roro Wrote:  Absolutely challenge shit ideas!
What I am looking for is credible EVIDENCE from both sides.
So, you watched a presentation by a university professor. That was all circumstantial evidence...interesting, but it is what it is.
I focused on the information from architects, engineers, physicists, and other scientists giving a detailed analysis of what happened. That is more direct evidence. The question is, are there any flaws in the analyses? That is why I asked for reference to other evidence. Have there been any peer reviews of the information?

I am interested in what these professionals have to say, not some layman's opinion.
So, any additional information from qualified sources is appreciated.

Thanks!

Then do the research Roro, watch the videos i posted for you. Remember though, once a conspiracy creeps into your head, you may end up chasing bigfoot for the rest of your life. By the way, as a crim just major I can tell you that the least reliable evidence is eyewitness testimony. fact. That goes contrary to common sense, but there are a lot of reasons people think they see what they said they saw, group think, bias, personal agenda, etc etc. There is a reason why eyewitness testimony doesn't a guilty verdict make anymore.

Firstly, goodwithoutgod, at no time have I ever brought up eyewitness testimony.
I am looking for scientific analyses from qualified professionals in their field of expertise. The videos you presented were made by a chemist whose hobby seems to be debunking almost anything. Hardly credible. If this guy presented his own analysis of the WTC dust, for example, that would be worth considering.

I am looking for scientific evidence from both sides of the argument (engineers, architects, physicists, etc.). I found some for one side, but all I seem to be getting is push-back in this forum when I ask for references to info for the other side.

Disappointing...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 07:35 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Here's a type, bringing up year old threads on a forum and trying to engage in the debate like it's fresh or new or not been said before is a problem. This is 1 of dozens of 9/11 threads that has been on here and it's not even engagingly current.

Anything you could of come to say or desire for counter points are mainly going to be seen as tired and had by the most active members here who will likely respond, since this debate has happened in longer more deeper threads in the past where the type of engaging you may be disappointing to not find actually took place.

Maybe if you started out with your own thread and formulated your ideas not in a manner that could come off as unpleasant, it would of worked out better for you. I don't see you getting the benefit of the doubt here, but you could try that elsewhere and it may succeed.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 09:20 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2015 07:26 AM)roro Wrote:  .....I am looking for scientific evidence from both sides of the argument......

Wait.... this bit right here.

What 'Both sides" ? There aren't/isn't 'Both sides", Science doesn't work that way.

The people with the relevant knowledge and skills have been consulted. Their thoughts, opinions, explanations, data etc has been peer reviewed etc.

'X' amount of people took control of 'Y' amount of aircraft and flew the into 'Z' amount of targets.

What 'other' ideas are there that even pass muster?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 02:07 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(15-02-2015 03:35 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(15-02-2015 03:25 PM)roro Wrote:  Well, I watched them with an open mind, and think that their conclusions are based on the evidence provided. Being unwilling to look at evidence provided for fear that it may challenge your beliefs is , to me, being afraid of the truth. If there is evidence that refutes what is presented, I'd want to see it.

The tag-line for this site is:
Assume Nothing. Question Everything. Challenge the Opposition. And Start Thinking.

Anyone not willing to abide by that should probably discontinue using the site.
Dismissing evidence without even looking at it is unacceptable, no matter what the topic.
Best Regards

Valid point, but anybody that tries to present the truther's conspiracy of 9/11 deserves nothing short of ridicule. Only the severely challenged would buy into those long debunked theories, since you like youtube as a method of learning, may I suggest these.





























best wishes on your journey

I have to add to this topic, I am amazed there is actually a person with that name. It's not just like the Sonic The Hedgehog joke of Tails being Miles "pr"ower alone as the bastion of that name joke.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 02:12 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2015 02:07 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(15-02-2015 03:35 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Valid point, but anybody that tries to present the truther's conspiracy of 9/11 deserves nothing short of ridicule. Only the severely challenged would buy into those long debunked theories, since you like youtube as a method of learning, may I suggest these.





























best wishes on your journey

I have to add to this topic, I am amazed there is actually a person with that name. It's not just like the Sonic The Hedgehog joke of Tails being Miles "pr"ower alone as the bastion of that name joke.

IIRC, that's not his real name.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 02:30 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2015 07:26 AM)roro Wrote:  
(16-02-2015 08:51 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Then do the research Roro, watch the videos i posted for you. Remember though, once a conspiracy creeps into your head, you may end up chasing bigfoot for the rest of your life. By the way, as a crim just major I can tell you that the least reliable evidence is eyewitness testimony. fact. That goes contrary to common sense, but there are a lot of reasons people think they see what they said they saw, group think, bias, personal agenda, etc etc. There is a reason why eyewitness testimony doesn't a guilty verdict make anymore.

Firstly, goodwithoutgod, at no time have I ever brought up eyewitness testimony.
I am looking for scientific analyses from qualified professionals in their field of expertise. The videos you presented were made by a chemist whose hobby seems to be debunking almost anything. Hardly credible. If this guy presented his own analysis of the WTC dust, for example, that would be worth considering.

I am looking for scientific evidence from both sides of the argument (engineers, architects, physicists, etc.). I found some for one side, but all I seem to be getting is push-back in this forum when I ask for references to info for the other side.

Disappointing...

No, what you're doing is ignoring the facts bought up in the videos and preferring your fairy tales. You say keep an open mind, but you're not applying any sort of skepticism to the ideas you prefer.

There isn't another good explanation presented for 9/11 besides a plane flew into buildings, caused fatal damage and weakened the World Trade Center buildings, which eventually brought the building down. The WTC was only rated for surviving small airplane collisions, not giant Boeing 737s with tons of jet fuel ramming into the building at hundreds of miles per hour. Then there are simulations from the NIST report showing simulations of all the building damage.

Thermite? Can't burn through steel without several kilos of the stuff; it would have been noticed by many. Explosives? Where were they? Why was there no definitive explosions or kaboom in any recordings right before the towers collapsed?

Dismissing those questions as layman questions doesn't actually answer them and shows your blindness and confirmation bias.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 02:43 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-02-2015 07:26 AM)roro Wrote:  
(16-02-2015 08:51 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Then do the research Roro, watch the videos i posted for you. Remember though, once a conspiracy creeps into your head, you may end up chasing bigfoot for the rest of your life. By the way, as a crim just major I can tell you that the least reliable evidence is eyewitness testimony. fact. That goes contrary to common sense, but there are a lot of reasons people think they see what they said they saw, group think, bias, personal agenda, etc etc. There is a reason why eyewitness testimony doesn't a guilty verdict make anymore.

Firstly, goodwithoutgod, at no time have I ever brought up eyewitness testimony.
I am looking for scientific analyses from qualified professionals in their field of expertise. The videos you presented were made by a chemist whose hobby seems to be debunking almost anything. Hardly credible. If this guy presented his own analysis of the WTC dust, for example, that would be worth considering.

I am looking for scientific evidence from both sides of the argument (engineers, architects, physicists, etc.). I found some for one side, but all I seem to be getting is push-back in this forum when I ask for references to info for the other side.

Disappointing...

You're right sorry, it was the OP I was thinking of..."After two months, after I had noticed a strange blip on the 9/11 plane immediately before it hit the twin towers. A blip which I researched thoroughly (I go to the LSU library for this investigation). I looked into the picture and have come to a startling conclusion, many eyewitness accounts..."

Search away dear friend, once the conspiracy bug gets in you, the ability to think rationally starts to drift away....If I am wrong and the world is not flat, we didn't land on the moon, and 9/11 was a CIA murder plot to draw us into the war I will be very shocked....but I wont hold my breath. We can't hold secrets in the government, not for long, all of the people it would have required to carry this off someone would have leaked it by the time, but regardless all of the evidence shows it was real, including the videos of planes slamming into the building....I fear you have let some BS conspiracy websites do a shake and bake presentation and you may be buying into it...people believe in bigfoot too...or jesus...both of which have more evidence than the 911 conspiracy nuts...and that isn't saying much..but anyway, best of luck on your journey.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2015, 05:48 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Thanks for your input... the responses have been very enlightening
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: