Why the 9-11 conspiracies won't go away...

[Makalakumu]

Are you certain of the qualifications of these people? I have read your posts about the scholars for 9-11 truth. You took the stance that those guys were beyond question at first and that others should defer to their greater knowledge. Then it turns out that their qualifications were pretty much worthless and the engineering department of the university of the lead guy said his stuff was full of holes.

I'm just as blind as you. All I can see is what they post about themselves.

See this link...

http://www.ae911truth.org/joinus.php

 

[tshadowchaser]

The latest one about 9/11 making the internet rounds is "proof" that nobody actually saw any planes strike the WTC on 9/11. That what we saw on TV was "movie magic".

Thhis one is so stupid it dose not really need to be considered. I had a friend that was driving in from N.J. that saw the 2nd plan hit or maybe he just imagined it and had nightmares for a week after for nothing.

 

[Mr. E]

And since when does asking questions, discussing ideas and arguing their merits qualify as "pushing" one's theories?

I think there is a difference between honest questioning and those that are sneaky ways of pushing an agenda. When I see someone start a thread linking to a silly conspiracy theory site and say 'wow- what do you think', watch as all the theories they say they want people to to think about get shot down in reasoned debate and they slowly back off from that thread as it becomes clear that there is no merit to the theories only to repeat that behavior when the old thread seems to have been forgotten I think I see someone not interested in honest questions.

I believe that my next post politely asked if you would provide some specific concrete examples of things that would cause you to reconsider. My comment that your post was diffuse was because you left it up to me to imagine what you think. I wanted to hear what you think, specifically.

If you really can't think of something, how about this. If something like the New York Times said that they found a body that was a few years old that they matched the DNA to Osama Bin Laden I would then doubt that the tapes he supposably made were by him. If other sources of the same quality as the NYT did their own research and confirmed it as they do, then you could convince me that someone had some explaining to do.

Or maybe this- if one of these web sites that so want to push their ideas that the official story's science does not add up convinced a paper like the NYT or Financial Times of London to come out and agree with them, I would take notice- especially if the science held up and was confired by other reputable sources.

My idea of a reliable source is not some group that seems to exist mainly on the internet or in publications I have never even seen.

 

[Mr. E]

I'm just as blind as you. All I can see is what they post about themselves.

I never trust what people like this say about themselves. Why would anyone trust someone like this without independent proof? That would be like trusting some of these ninja that post on the internet. After the way you went on about the Scholars for 9-11 truth you would think that a reasonbale person would reserve judgement until they knew more from established sources.

 

[Mr. E]

Thhis one is so stupid it dose not really need to be considered. I had a friend that was driving in from N.J. that saw the 2nd plan hit or maybe he just imagined it and had nightmares for a week after for nothing.

Well if you think about it, there are plenty of sites that try to say that the Pentagon was not hit by a plane. That was also witnessed by people stuck in traffic. So it is not much of a stretch.

Here is what someone on a forum actually said when faced with a list of witnesses that said they saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

Consider this - how many witnesses say they saw something different? How many witnesses say they saw a truck or a small plane, or even a cruise missile? Has anyone ever bothered to count that? Too many times negative data is ignored in favor of the positive - this is special pleading. A great example of this is the specific decision by the FBI to choose witnesses who heard three shots, anyone else who heard anything else was ignored. Also, consider all of the people who claim to have seen aliens or have been abducted by aliens. There are a lot of fine and upstanding citizens who have made such claims. Yet, are they to believed because they are many? Here is an example of an interaction...

Confused bystander 1 - "oh my god the pentagon is on fire?"
Official interviewer - "Did you see a plane?"
Confused bystander 1 "No"
Official interviewer - "thank you for your help."

Confused bystander 2 - "oh my god the pentagon is on fire?"
Official interviewer - "Did you see a plane?"
Confused bystander 2 - "uh maybe.. it was really fast."
Official interviewer - "what did the plane look like?"
Confused bystander 2 - "it had wings, uhh blue markings with a red stripe?"
Official interviewer - "Was it large..."

See where this is going? This is a common tactic used by people who are looking for specific information.

Yeah, this really pushes things. But considering that even 6 years later we are still discussing whether a plane hit the Pentagon or not, it is one of those things that make you wonder about humanity.

 

[Big Don]

While I have read more than a few articles in which the truther's assertions are debunked point by point, I have yet to see any conspiracy theorist attempt to debunk Popular Mechanics.
In every facet of life you are known by those you associate with, Rosie O'Donnel l and her completely stupid claim that "Fire doesn't melt steel" isn't something I would want to have associated with me. Nor, would the towering intellect of Charlie Sheen be a rallying point...

 

[shesulsa]

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Moderation note:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assist. Admin.

 

[Mr. E]

While I have read more than a few articles in which the truther's assertions are debunked point by point, I have yet to see any conspiracy theorist attempt to debunk Popular Mechanics.

Some have. For example, I have seen posts by people saying that the Scholars for 9-11 Truth have shot down what they wrote as if we should accept them as being bigger experts than Popular Mechanics and bow to their authority. Few attempts to really deal with the matters so the rest of us can see how things went on, and really it is above most of our heads. And then it turns out that these guys really are not as experts as they would have us believe.

But if you punch in 9-11 and Popular Mechanics, you will see site after site listed talking about how they were shot down as if it were fact.

 

[Makalakumu]

If you really can't think of something, how about this.

I can think of plenty of things, but they probably wouldn't meet the criteria that you set.

If something like the New York Times said that they found a body that was a few years old that they matched the DNA to Osama Bin Laden I would then doubt that the tapes he supposably made were by him. If other sources of the same quality as the NYT did their own research and confirmed it as they do, then you could convince me that someone had some explaining to do.

Or maybe this- if one of these web sites that so want to push their ideas that the official story's science does not add up convinced a paper like the NYT or Financial Times of London to come out and agree with them, I would take notice- especially if the science held up and was confired by other reputable sources.

My idea of a reliable source is not some group that seems to exist mainly on the internet or in publications I have never even seen.

I see your point regarding the DNA, but what if other experts analyzed certain features of the tapes and determined that they were either mistranslated by the US or it was not UBL speaking in the tapes?

Other then that, the rest of your evidential criterion reads like a classical appeal to authority.

I'm also finding a little irony in the fact that certain people criticize the NYT in some discussions and then hold them up as a journalistic standard in others. One would think that the general criticisms raised in other threads would hold up across the board...

So, how about some more concrete examples of things that would convince you? How about some that specifically addressing some of the broader points in this thread?

 

[Blotan Hunka]

This is turning into a "what will make you believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy?" thread. Re-wording "heres proof 9/11 was a conspiracy", to "what will make you believe it" isnt very productive.

In a "NUT" shell, I havent seen any "proof" from any significant (in qualifications or numbers) source that counters the avalanche of studies, experts, foundations and associations that currently explain the WTC collapse. The last "expert" held up was shot down in flames. How the conspiracy crowd can ignore that and soldier on is beyond me.

 

[Makalakumu]

This is turning into a "what will make you believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy?" thread. Re-wording "heres proof 9/11 was a conspiracy", to "what will make you believe it" isnt very productive.

BH, I hold no such delusions of granduer that I would even think for one second that I could suddenly sway you are certain other MT members that there is reason to doubt.

Perhaps you really do see something really simple and I am way to biased and dimwitted to understand.

This is why I'm probing for more concrete examples and testing to see if they hold water. I'd like to get a sense of you and other members hold the bar in regards to these things and I'd like to try and test that position a bit to see how it stands.

Maybe it really does have merit?

 

[Blotan Hunka]

So much for the A&E for 9/11 truth..check out this thread.

http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-83483.html

I wonder how many on that list are real people at all. I just added myself. Lets see if Dr. Hunka appears shortly.

 

[Makalakumu]

So much for the A&E for 9/11 truth..check out this thread.

http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-83483.html

I wonder how many on that list are real people at all. I just added myself. Lets see if Dr. Hunka appears shortly.

Hmm. I think that's it. If your name shows up, I'm done with this. Truly.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Is Ae911truth.org A 9/11 Cover Up Perp Site?

Less than 24 hours later, Gage disabled the forums. This did not come as a surprise actually, since Gage is promoting Steven Jones and is therefore a 9/11 Coverup Perp distracting people from the REAL provable inside job evidence of Exotic Weaponry and TV-Fakery at the WTC.

Steven Jones worked at Los Alamos where directed energy weapons are researched.

Another Cover Up Perp, Greg Jenkins, did an ambush interview of Dr Judy Wood. It has recently been discovered that Jenkins' has ties to the NSA. Only after a close analysis of this interview:
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/Jenkins_transcript.html did Dr Wood realize what Jenkins wanted kept secret.

Judy's new paper is based on the data that Jones/Jenkins want kept hidden:

Molecular Dissociation: from Dust to Dirt
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/dirt1.html


Jones and his group have been doing everything possible to discourage people from looking at Judy Wood's directed energy weapon work and the obvious TV-Fakery evidence. (Yes, obvious, as demonstrated in the links at the top.) Why is Jones doing this?


Wood filed a Request for Correction (RFC) with NIST, and this RFC is archived on a US Government website:
http://www.ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandProg...y/PROD01_002619

Where is Jones' RFC? I don't see it there. Where is it? Where is the proof that he even sent one? No, a press release is not proof. Dr Wood sent her RFC registered mail, return receipt requested. Did Jones do this? I doubt it.

Jones is a cold fusion and 9/11 fraud. People need to wake up and look at the bigger picture to what's happening.

9/11 wasn't about the "Neocon political agenda", it was about energy. It was about population reduction. Read the info here and learn that Jones was a plant in 1989 to discredit free-energy research:
http://www.911researchers.com/node/125

Are you aware that, in 2004, Dr Eugene Mallove wrote an open letter to the world asking for research funds for Cold Fusion and Zero Point energy? A few months later, Eugene was murdered.

A very similar situation is of Michael Zebuhr, a 9/11 research student of Judy Wood's, who did experiments to prove Jones' research faulty. A few weeks later, he was murdered.

And then there's the Virginia Tech "inside job". Why didn't the police close off the area following that massacre? Perhaps it's because they knew who the perpetrators were. It just so happens that Judy Wood graduated from V-Tech and it was some of her instructors who were killed, one of them in the very classroom she sat in. The first murder took place in the only dorm she used on campus.

All Judy wants people to do is look at the data, the same data that Jones and his group discourage people from looking at. There is mass internet censorship of Dr Wood's work. Yet, it's her work that stands up to the facts.

People say that a directed energy weapon cannot "dustify" steel. But it can! Watch the film "Race To Zero Point" on google and you will learn. Zero Point... the same technology that Dr Mallove wanted research funds for. And then he was murdered.

People need to start thinking for themselves and looking at evidence. Where is the proof that Jones found evidence of thermate? For all we know his baggie could be contents from his vacuum cleaner.

Jones/Jenkins have ties to Los Alamos directed energy weapon research. This is the same technology that Judy Wood's censored work is about.

For everyone's sake, I hope the bigger picture is becoming clearer to everyone!

The new OGCT will soon become "conventional controlled demolition" of the towers and WTC 7 after "the airplanes hit". No mention of the round cylindrical holes in WTC 5, no mention of toasted cars, no mention of TV-Fakery. What will happen then? A new investigation based on the work of a former Los Alamos researcher? What will happen then? Impeach Bush? What will that do? We must remove the 9/11 perpetrators from power. This includes people associated with directed energy weapons, as well as the corporate media.

For the future of humanity, this is what must be done.

Are we now getting the bigger picture?

Man O' Man. Thats it. Im starting my own theory.

These conspiracy theories were born out of Islamic propaganda spread on the 'net which began less then 3 days after the attacks of 9/11.

The truthers are too stupid to see who cause it is they serve.

BTW heres another story by those Government Stooges at Scientific American.

 

[grydth]

I hope all of you realize that, in a few months when Hellary is elected President, you will all have to trade places.... you left guys will have to argue faith in the government and you conservatives will become the conspiracy theorists...:uhohh:

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I hope all of you realize that, in a few months when Hellary is elected President, you will all have to trade places.... you left guys will have to argue faith in the government and you conservatives will become the conspiracy theorists...:uhohh:

I can hardly wait. That could be fun.

 

[Makalakumu]

I hope all of you realize that, in a few months when Hellary is elected President, you will all have to trade places.... you left guys will have to argue faith in the government and you conservatives will become the conspiracy theorists...:uhohh:

I don't know man. I'm pretty tired of all this. Mr. E asked if I had examined my own biases and I truly have. And I've long expected that all of this is more of a reflection of what's inside then out. This is one of the reason's I think I need to move because if I really feel this way, why bother people with my rants on the internet about it and go with my gut. Being on the other side of this debate would be like pounding a straw into your brain with a feather.

 

[grydth]

I don't know man. I'm pretty tired of all this. Mr. E asked if I had examined my own biases and I truly have. And I've long expected that all of this is more of a reflection of what's inside then out. This is one of the reason's I think I need to move because if I really feel this way, why bother people with my rants on the internet about it and go with my gut. Being on the other side of this debate would be like pounding a straw into your brain with a feather.

If it bothers you at that personal a level, then why not post exclusively on MA related topics and give the politics a vacation? You certainly have valuable things to share on a variety of MA themes. I think its good, if not necessary, for most of us to take periodic sabbaticals from the craziness of today's current affairs.

 

[Makalakumu]

If it bothers you at that personal a level, then why not post exclusively on MA related topics and give the politics a vacation? You certainly have valuable things to share on a variety of MA themes. I think its good, if not necessary, for most of us to take periodic sabbaticals from the craziness of today's current affairs.

Good advice...

 

[crushing]

Good advice...

But, not before you offer your thoughts on the UF Student Getting Tazed, please. If you don't mind.