IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 14th December 2013, 12:28 PM   #641
egalicontrarian
Scholar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
...
Anyway,... Also at around the same time, while the nation was fully aware it was under attack the Air Force used super-secret stealth planes to shoot down Flight 93 then lie about it OR forced Flight 93 to secretly land for reasons unknown, and fired missiles into the dirt in Shanksville that made a perfect airplane outline in the ground and littered the area with passenger DNA and 757 parts. Reasons for doing this? Unknown.

I think that pretty well sums it up.
You missed a key part. After "Reasons for doing this? Unknown" you have to say: "And that's precisely why we need a new investigation!"
egalicontrarian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 12:42 PM   #642
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post


In fact it would probably be more productive to explore why real events happened - aircraft impact into Twin Towers for example - rather than rely on models which are difficult to process.
you are playing a smartass here. You know very well that the impact can not be realistically explored since you need a real tower and a real plane. Even if it was possible the person doing the exploring would be legit only to himself and no one else.


Quote:
2) All the 'scaling factors' - velocities, masses, structural aspects of both "missile"' and "target" - don't help understanding for lay persons who are not proficient in using modelling techniques.
you make three models of the Boeing, one bigger that the other and shoot it through the chicken machine against scaled models of the tower. Record the impacts with a fast camera. If you can achieve the result shown on the Hazarkhani video at least in one of your recordings, you can convince or fool many more people.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 01:24 PM   #643
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by egalicontrarian View Post
You missed a key part. After "Reasons for doing this? Unknown" you have to say: "And that's precisely why we need a new investigation!"
The point flew over your head.

Your attempt to justify ridiculous is transparent.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 01:33 PM   #644
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
you are playing a smartass here. You know very well that the impact can not be realistically explored since you need a real tower and a real plane. Even if it was possible the person doing the exploring would be legit only to himself and no one else.


you make three models of the Boeing, one bigger that the other and shoot it through the chicken machine against scaled models of the tower. Record the impacts with a fast camera. If you can achieve the result shown on the Hazarkhani video at least in one of your recordings, you can convince or fool many more people.
Yes, there'd be no convincing you with a scale model. Unabashed, religious belief will do that to a person.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 01:37 PM   #645
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
you are playing a smartass here. You know very well that the impact can not be realistically explored since you need a real tower and a real plane. Even if it was possible the person doing the exploring would be legit only to himself and no one else.
It is necessary to construct replicas of the twin tower at any expense, the procure replicas of the aircraft involved, populate them with credible simulcrams of the dead, install remote guidance hardware and software which said aircraft are ill equipped to take, and at the end of such an expenditure of effort and money, you would still find some reason to nitpick and whinge.

Let us be honest here. You have a religious belief in 911truth. There is nothing anyone could do to change it, and it is pointless to say why you are wrong. You are wrong BTW.


Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
you make three models of the Boeing, one bigger that the other and shoot it through the chicken machine against scaled models of the tower. Record the impacts with a fast camera. If you can achieve the result shown on the Hazarkhani video at least in one of your recordings, you can convince or fool many more people.
If you want. Sure. No problem. Pony up the moolah. Put your money where your mouth is. Or is it that you prefer to hide behind requirements that are so unattainable as to be forever out of reach? Is that not what you are really about? Putting the burden of proof beyond any possibility of demonstration? That is what you want, right? You have just posted that you require the twin towers to be rebuilt somewhere, and a couple of Boeings flown into them just to satisfy your conceit, right? Have you that little in your life?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 01:59 PM   #646
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
I wasn't talking about myself. just coming with some ideas how to crank up the sheeple. You do your best and what do you get for it
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:10 PM   #647
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
I wasn't talking about myself. just coming with some ideas how to crank up the sheeple. You do your best and what do you get for it
The problem is, there really are no "sheeple". You construct a challenge for something that has already been answered.

Maybe you would understand if you weren't so confused about the real world.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:18 PM   #648
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by egalicontrarian View Post
You missed a key part. After "Reasons for doing this? Unknown" you have to say: "And that's precisely why we need a new investigation!"
911 truth makes up fantasy, and then want a new investigation to explain the fantasy. They need to sign up for a visit do the psychiatrist who can explain why they are so darn gullible, and help them think for themselves using reality based research, sound judgment, and knowledge.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:27 PM   #649
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Wait,,,what? We need a new investigation to find out why a ridiculously complicated, utterly stupid plan was carried out by persons unknown?

That itself is utterly ridiculous and stupid.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:27 PM   #650
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
The problem is, there really are no "sheeple". You construct a challenge for something that has already been answered.

Maybe you would understand if you weren't so confused about the real world.
If there are no "sheeple" then tell me who is the one whom "truthers" are cranking up?
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:29 PM   #651
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
If there are no "sheeple" then tell me who is the one whom "truthers" are cranking up?
People who take umbrage at others promulgating nonsense as if it is scientific and technical in scope and practice.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:39 PM   #652
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
I wasn't talking about myself. just coming with some ideas how to crank up the sheeple. You do your best and what do you get for it
You admit your purpose is winding people up. OK, then.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 02:40 PM   #653
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
If there are no "sheeple" then tell me who is the one whom "truthers" are cranking up?
Honest people. Simples.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 03:41 PM   #654
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,202
Carnies and rubes.... Three words to describe the TM. Especially this late in the game.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 03:49 PM   #655
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
Carnies and rubes.... Three words to describe the TM. Especially this late in the game.
50 years hence the 911 malarkey will still continue, much like the JFK rubbish.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 04:45 PM   #656
sonofgloin
Thinker
 
sonofgloin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 215
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Really? About 3000 people died on 9/11 and this is all the respect you can muster for this topic? Do you not think something as tragic and serious as 9/11 deserves just a bit more effort? If you want to make 9/11 you "thing", fine. You should show to topic enough respect to come up with something a bit better than this. What you posted is shameful.
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."

Last edited by sonofgloin; 14th December 2013 at 04:59 PM.
sonofgloin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:05 PM   #657
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,202
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
19 Islamic extremists crashed 3 planes into buildings and one into a field murdering thousands. None of our enemies have denied this.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:06 PM   #658
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
If there are no "sheeple" then tell me who is the one whom "truthers" are cranking up?

No one really. Outside of a few people on internet sites, no one is actually actively countering this non-sense. Fact is, no one is paying you any attention.

A "sheeple" is a group you made up to explain why "truthers" have so little support. You need something to explain why everyone doesn't agree with you. Simple really.

Sorry if this is too blunt.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:07 PM   #659
BangBang
Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 234
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
I don't think that sentence means what you think it does.
BangBang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:11 PM   #660
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by BangBang View Post
I don't think that sentence means what you think it does.
It doesn't matter when all of the "anomalies" and "firsts" are figments of their imagination(or out right lies).
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:31 PM   #661
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,744
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
Oh look, SoG is finally back, changing the subject and avoiding questions previously put to him exactly as predicted.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 05:32 PM   #662
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
There is no Bush line. We have reality of 19 murderers who did 911, and we have idiotic claims by 911 truth.

The anomalies are due to 911 truth followers' extreme ignorance on relevant subjects and issues. Kind of sums up all 911 truth claims, nonsenses based on ignorance, lie, and no evidence. 911 truth 12 years of failure, 100 percent wrong.

Which failed 24 hard fact is your favorite? Why have all 24 failed.

Last edited by beachnut; 14th December 2013 at 05:39 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 06:18 PM   #663
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Honest people. Simples.
Yes, just simple farmers, people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 07:18 PM   #664
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
you are playing a smartass here.
Quote mining evasion noted.

My full statement was obviously too good for your ability to respond. I'm not bad at explaining the forensic physics of the collapses to honest persons genuinely seeking the truth.

Clearly you do not qualify.
I'll stand by my statements - briefly summarised as:
"It is easier to explain what actually happened than it is to demonstrate using physical models."

I understand why any dishonest "truther" would want discussion down a dead end path.

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

...especially when they see defeat looming ahead.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 07:43 PM   #665
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line
You will be providing evidence to contradict it, soon?

Quote:
find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts"
1) You will be providing evidence of these "anomalies," soon?

2) There were no "firsts." You are quoting wingnut websites. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
You will be providing evidence to contradict it, soon?
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."
Robrob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 08:27 PM   #666
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by Huttosaurus View Post
No it wouldn't as mass and structure wise it isn't a like for like comparison.
What is it with truthers and not understanding the square-cube law as it relates to scale models?

Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
I suspect that many CT'ers glom onto phraseology that sounds impressively techie - think "nanothermite" - that they themselves have not the slightest knowledge of or first hand experience with.

Back when thermite was the big thing, I'd explain how the material becomes molten at ignition and how difficult it would be to use it on any vertical structure, the come-back would be that if the thermite was "painted" on...and down the rabbit hole they would go.

We haven't seen the end of it, I'm sure. In 50 years some folks will be on whatever the 'net becomes and will be arguing fact against fiction, just like the JFK CT's
Not painted. Applied in an X micron layer to structural members.

Originally Posted by BNRT View Post
I've seen this from CTs in other, non-technology related areas as well. Stuff like trying to spot a 'fallacy' or writing a peer reviewed science paper. I suspect they have seen skeptics using them and use those terms without knowing what they really mean.
Hence the term "cargo cult science".

Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
I buckled down and type a bit faster now. I taught myself to use my left hand thumb for the space bar while maintaining use of each index finger for pecking at the other keys.
No more pay docking for me.
I use the computer so much I just tried it one day and found I could touch type.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 10:13 PM   #667
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
You will be providing evidence to contradict it, soon?


1) You will be providing evidence of these "anomalies," soon?

2) There were no "firsts." You are quoting wingnut websites. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.


You will be providing evidence to contradict it, soon?
Sure there were firsts. Firsts happen all the time, so they don't mean anything unexplainable happened. The burden is on the Truther to explain why something happening for the first time could mean it could not happen at all.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2013, 11:44 PM   #668
egalicontrarian
Scholar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 65
Just so people know, because it's very important, I was joking about the missing part in Mark F's satire. Or, rather, I was perfectly serious in trying to add to the satire. The "that's why we need a new investigation" line is commonly used by truthers when pressed with problems in their own account.
egalicontrarian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 12:01 AM   #669
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Sure there were firsts. Firsts happen all the time, so they don't mean anything unexplainable happened. The burden is on the Truther to explain why something happening for the first time could mean it could not happen at all.
Well this is true, however the particular "first" over which they are typically ranting is the canard "first time in history a steel framed building collapsed from fire."

That's something I've noticed with Truthers (over other CT), they rarely come out and say what they mean. They love to insinuate their POV. You'll never have one simply explain, "Since X, I therefore believe Y to be true." It's always;

Truther: "It fell into its own footprint."

Normal Person: "What do you think that means?"

Truther: "IT FELL INTO ITS OWN FOOTPRINT!"

Normal Person" "Yes, I heard you but what do you think that means?"

Truther" "Paid shill!"
__________________
Mister Earl: "The plural of bollocks is not evidence."
Robrob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 12:23 AM   #670
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,710
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
But people like you made up the anomalies dishonestly. There were no anomalies until you lied and said there were. The lunacy about there being no planes, and the nonsense about buildings rigged with explosives. You made up inconsistencies and now you want an investigation into the things you made up. All you've done is turn a massive tragedy into a meaningless hobby. You don't even have the decency to learn some basic facts about the science or the event. This topic deserves better than you.

Now, do like I told you to and tell us everything the coroner said. Failing to do that for this long smacks of intellectual cowardice.

Last edited by Craig4; 15th December 2013 at 12:26 AM.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 12:31 AM   #671
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by egalicontrarian View Post
Just so people know, because it's very important, I was joking about the missing part in Mark F's satire. Or, rather, I was perfectly serious in trying to add to the satire. The "that's why we need a new investigation" line is commonly used by truthers when pressed with problems in their own account.
I read you clearly without need of the explanation.

BUT take care with satire, irony, even straight forward analogies.

...experience tells me that far too many people cannot process them.

Last edited by ozeco41; 15th December 2013 at 12:41 AM.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 12:49 AM   #672
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Sure there were firsts. Firsts happen all the time, so they don't mean anything unexplainable happened. The burden is on the Truther to explain why something happening for the first time could mean it could not happen at all.
And if a truther did explain something that would itself qualify as a "First time"....

...which would sort of seriously damage the "nothing can happen a first time" meme.

ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 05:38 AM   #673
Richard the G
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Yes exactly Craig....and we who do not believe the "Bush" line find it offensive that the apparent and factual anomalies and "firsts" received no more investigation than the selective and corrupted "9/11 put it to bed findings."
Agreed, and we the majority of engineers, who would like to discuss the anomalies and implications of the collapses on the future of building design, find it offensive that we are unable to do so without the stupidity of CD, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.
Richard the G is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 10:48 AM   #674
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
you are playing a smartass here. You know very well that the impact can not be realistically explored since you need a real tower and a real plane. Even if it was possible the person doing the exploring would be legit only to himself and no one else.


you make three models of the Boeing, one bigger that the other and shoot it through the chicken machine against scaled models of the tower. Record the impacts with a fast camera. If you can achieve the result shown on the Hazarkhani video at least in one of your recordings, you can convince or fool many more people.
Why not use a real boeing jet and fly it into the BOK Tower in Tulsa?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BOK_Tower
It was designed by the same company as the Twin Towers and shares many design features.
I don't think the owners or the city would mind as it would be destroyed in the name of twoofer science.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 12:54 PM   #675
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
Quote mining evasion noted.

My full statement was obviously too good for your ability to respond. I'm not bad at explaining the forensic physics of the collapses to honest persons genuinely seeking the truth.

Clearly you do not qualify.
I'll stand by my statements - briefly summarised as:
"It is easier to explain what actually happened than it is to demonstrate using physical models."

I understand why any dishonest "truther" would want discussion down a dead end path.

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

...especially when they see defeat looming ahead.
There is so many hacks in conspiracy rhetoric that mentioning one is futile.

Models are not the best representation, still they may help to establish principles. Lets take the top down collapse proposition from 911. It would be easier to accept it if you came with a model which is used in the real world that collapses top down When something happens for the first time, surely it should be possible to repeat it or at least propose a principle of how could it could be done again while adjusting cube square law to make it work on models. Even nuclear bombs have their equivalents in working models.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 01:00 PM   #676
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Sure there were firsts. Firsts happen all the time
but not in a rapid succession unless made on purpose, which kind of closes the loop? You employ physicists to make every incident very hard to vindicate, and then run all through a conventional Hollywood script. I watched recently a film where two men, one poor, another rich were screwed up on purpose in the way that the poor black guy seemingly accidentally stumbled on plenty of money while the rich dude was made very poor and thrown out into the street. The bet was whether the black dude could stay rich and the one who lost his money could put himself back together.The bet was for 1 dollar.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 01:18 PM   #677
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
but not in a rapid succession unless made on purpose, which kind of closes the loop? You employ physicists to make every incident very hard to vindicate, and then run all through a conventional Hollywood script. I watched recently a film where two men, one poor, another rich were screwed up on purpose in the way that the poor black guy seemingly accidentally stumbled on plenty of money while the rich dude was made very poor and thrown out into the street. The bet was whether the black dude could stay rich and the one who lost his money could put himself back together.The bet was for 1 dollar.
Firsts happen in rapid succession all the time too. So what?

Here's a first: Proof by Trading Places.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 01:19 PM   #678
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
Originally Posted by Mikeys View Post
There is so many hacks in conspiracy rhetoric that mentioning one is futile.

Models are not the best representation, still they may help to establish principles. Lets take the top down collapse proposition from 911. It would be easier to accept it if you came with a model which is used in the real world that collapses top down When something happens for the first time, surely it should be possible to repeat it or at least propose a principle of how could it could be done again while adjusting cube square law to make it work on models. Even nuclear bombs have their equivalents in working models.
Too bad 911 truth can't do the math and physics to avoid spreading lies like CD and thermite. 911 truth only exists due to the ignorance of 911 truth disciples, and the fantasy claim they have overwhelming evidence.

911 truth has no evidence, and 911 truth followers don't know it.

Is one of the 24 hard facts 911 truth does not have about models? Or are you lost in off topic woo-land?

http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/

Check it out. The lies from a failed journalist, so dumb poor Joe has no clue he is posting woo.

Sorry, models are not in the 24 hard facts fantasy stuff.

But 911 truth, and yourself prove you don't understand models, math, and physics.

Which is your favorite "hard fact" from the real topic, like the OP, which is based on this junk?

http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 03:09 PM   #679
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Firsts happen in rapid succession all the time too. So what?
I know. Its called the winning streak.
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2013, 03:20 PM   #680
Mikeys
Muse
 
Mikeys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 501
[quote=beachnut;9696384]




Quote:
Which is your favorite "hard fact" from the real topic, like the OP, which is based on this junk?

http://www.collective-evolution.com/...t-be-debunked/
Junk is the only hard fact here. I like NORAD but I don't know what it means. Dick Chayney, is it the guy who was humping Diane Sawyer, or was it Henry Kissinger?
__________________
There is no escape from truth.
Mikeys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.