Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-01-2017, 04:02 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 03:56 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Oh. I've been talking to a crazy person. My mistake.

[Image: giphy.gif]

Well if nothing else at least this thread will die now hopefully.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 04:29 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 04:02 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  
(27-01-2017 03:56 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Oh. I've been talking to a crazy person. My mistake.

[Image: giphy.gif]

Well if nothing else at least this thread will die now hopefully.

So that you can wait for people to forget how fucking dense you are and start another one a bit later? You've got a long wait, pal.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
27-01-2017, 04:31 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
At work.

(27-01-2017 02:29 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  
(27-01-2017 02:21 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So, thanks for the reply C_W.

Are you actually going to ever address the points of;

How your hypothesis demolition material was enacted?

2) How the planes were directed to imact at only those correct, pre-chosen zones and no where else?

Cheers.

Probably not peebothuhul, right now I'm just wanting to end the topic but I don't want to be rude by not replying to some legitimate concerns while not focusing on some rather obscure details.

I I have no way of knowing exactly how it was done. Maybe someone somewhere pushed a button, or perhaps they were on timed charges (unlikely in my opinion) or perhaps a combination of the two.

And for 2

Could have been the same way Nasa directs its satellites or could have even been drone technology.

See. This is the realm of speculation. I don't like being in the realm of speculation because you can speculate just as much as I can. (Whiskey loves the realm of speculation though)

Its like me asking you to explain how a black hole is supposed to work or for that matter what even is a black hole (rhetorical question don't try and answer)

Your reply does not answer the question to your hypothesis.

1) How were the buildings pre-prepared for the event?

2) What methods would have been taken/used to ensure 5he planes reached the pre-prepared locations?

For the last one, have you done research/asked questions into the error parameters of modern guided munitions?


As a side note, the mods have already indicated that this discussion won't move beyond this thread.

So, I'm going to pull up the comfy chairs and settle in. Smile

Cheers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 05:56 AM (This post was last modified: 27-01-2017 06:13 AM by Deesse23.)
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
Quote:Sometimes the simplest explanation isn't always the right explanation. Otherwise we would all be satisfied with 'god did it'.

"God did it" is not the simplest explanation but the most complex!
Saying "god did it" would be simple", god actually doing it would be most complex (because an godly entity would be most complex).

Thats why you dont see that "CIA did it" isnt the most simple but most complex explanation. Its easy for you to say "CIA did it", it would have incredibly complex if CIA actually did it. Thats what people are trying to explain to you for dozens of pages now.

While the most simple explanation (aka. deluded terrorists hijack planes and fly them into big tower, on TV) is not always the correct one, it mostly is. Thats what Occhams razor is all about (having to make the least assumptions and additions). So if you want to sell a "more than the simplest" explanation like "CIA..mossad. thremite...remote controlled...passenger disappearing...thousands of conspirators keeping their moth shut..Osama risking being chased for something he never actually orchestrated...et.c..pp", then you need evidence with explanatory power, which you dont have until now.

Its even questionable, reading some of your replies, that you actually have read the official reports and original claims that were made of how the attack actually went.

But thanks anyway for arguing against your own position, and being somehwat condescending with it. Rolleyes

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Deesse23's post
27-01-2017, 06:07 AM (This post was last modified: 27-01-2017 06:13 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 02:56 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Your conspiracy theories sound exactly like the people who claim Jews run the world and secretly pull the strings behind everything for some poorly-specified but "clearly" nefarious purpose.

They don't? I read Mossad was keeping the families of Mohamed Atta and the others hostage and told them they could either die for Allah or they'd kill their families in the name of Zion. No?

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 06:12 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 04:02 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Well if nothing else at least this thread will die now hopefully.

No fucking way nitwit. I'll keep it active just to keep making fun of you going full retard.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
27-01-2017, 06:19 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 06:07 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(27-01-2017 02:56 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Your conspiracy theories sound exactly like the people who claim Jews run the world and secretly pull the strings behind everything for some poorly-specified but "clearly" nefarious purpose.

They don't? I read Mossad was keeping the families of Mohamed Atta and the others hostage and told them they could either die for Allah or they'd kill their families in the name of Zion. No?
Bowing Rolleyes Facepalm

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 10:17 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
The funniest thing here is how CW keeps accusing others of "speculation" when his entire argument is 100% speculation!

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
27-01-2017, 11:44 AM (This post was last modified: 27-01-2017 11:47 AM by Celestial_Wonder.)
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(27-01-2017 10:17 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  The funniest thing here is how CW keeps accusing others of "speculation" when his entire argument is 100% speculation!

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

Well there is always eye witness testimony.

But who are they... just filthy survivors who didn't die that day like they were supposed to. I urge you grasshopper. If eye witness testimony is enough to hold itself up in a court of law as a form of evidence. Watch the videos all three parts of them.

Do you have the gall to call the survivors of 911 liars? To tell them, they don't know what they're talking about? Especially the 3rd video. Here I'll just line them up for you.













Youtube is your friend in any investigation my dear ones, and you can find a multitude of eye witnesses who will not agree with the official story, who believe it was a conspiracy. People who lived through the event.

If you will not listen to me, will your ears fall deaf to them as well? For you have seem to have such a tremendous capability at ignoring the obvious already. Though I highly doubt any of you here actually care what these survivors have to say. Because you don't really care about them, your extent for caring about them only extends to the point where you can try to use them against us who do not agree with you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2017, 11:59 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
At work.

No

My industry is well versed in 'Relyability' of eyewitnesses.

Documentation of evidence at the scene? Yes.

A written testimony as verifyably written as soon as is possible after the events? Quite possibly.

The problem is that the human eliment is sadly unrelyable under stress. Hence wrote, reaction training for professional personnel.

I do not belittle the traumatised victims. I simply point out the problems inherant and caused by such trauma.

Please C_W, address simple questions in regards to your hypothesis.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: