|
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. |
25th July 2008, 08:23 AM | #41 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
What attack? Ok, now provide evidence BESIDES his claim. Now if you think it is possible please show me a school in the USA that did it. I am aware of it happening recently at the University of Guleph but that is not in the USA and if that is where it took place we have a serious indication that as far as citizen the OP lied.
|
25th July 2008, 08:41 AM | #42 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
I don't understand why Enigma is so adamant about this. What about someone who was 7 years old in 2001? Any reason why he couldn't be a fencesitter?
Enigma seems to think that everyone has been thinking about/investigoogling 9/11 for the last seven years. I will agree that anyone who has been doing so, and still claims to be a fencesitter, is either stupid or disingenuous. But not everybody has been. |
25th July 2008, 08:49 AM | #43 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
25th July 2008, 08:55 AM | #44 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
Well, the problem is that if someone gets interested in the subjects of conspiracy theories (9/11, JFK, whatever) then the first things that come up in any search for information on them tend to be conspiraloon sites.
I'm sure I'm not alone on this forum in having believed in a JFK conspiracy at one point in the distant past. And the reason I came to this forum in the first place was because I was interested in reading some rebuttal of the claims made in "Loose Change". I suppose at that point you could have called me a "fencesitter". I just think that the notion that because the science is settled, then there will never be any more people who need convincing of that fact, is naive at best. |
25th July 2008, 08:58 AM | #45 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 824
|
I suggest you read up on the Gulf Of Tonkin Incident. It is remarkably similar to the Intel that lead up to the Iraq invasion. In other words fabricated, deceitful, and in some cases outright false. The decisions made based on this bogus and fabricated information cost 58,000 American lives. Taking poor, incomplete, or downright fabricated information, and using this to involve the US in war with no or extremely limited justification to have as its result the death of thousands of Americans didnt start on 9/11. |
25th July 2008, 09:03 AM | #46 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
25th July 2008, 09:18 AM | #47 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
No, People will not tolerate liars. Truth movement apologist's lack of understanding in this "pull it" issue is indicative of their major problems getting a handle on 9/11 issues. That lack of logic, and ignorance on 9/11 leads to believing pure fantasy. Truth movement apologists need to mature to understand they need evidence, and stop supporting the rant of fantasy?
To actually support "pull it" as a plank in the failed truth movement platform, is the sign of woo. MM, it is your lack of skepticism with your own kind, those that lack knowledge on 9/11 and make up lies, that is your downfall. |
25th July 2008, 09:25 AM | #48 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
Well, thanks for the smile - at least you're not calling me stupid!
But if you think that 9/11 isn't like JFK, I think you're wrong. There'll be people believing this nonsense for years to come, just like there are with JFK. And in ten years' time, some of them will be people who weren't even alive in 2001. At some point in their lives they'll be "fencesitters" - people who don't yet know what to believe, but who are questioning the information they've been fed up to then. When they come to somewhere like this, and the first response they get is "go away, truther scum", or something similar, I don't think we'll be doing much in the way of moulding young minds or influencing people to think critically. |
25th July 2008, 09:31 AM | #49 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
I didn't say that. I said JFK is not 9/11. "Like" is a word you used.
Quote:
Quote:
ETA - There is a difference between being critical and being gullible. |
25th July 2008, 09:39 AM | #50 |
Hipster Doofus
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nutsack, FL
Posts: 2,502
|
|
__________________
Knowledge is good.... Emil Faber |
|
25th July 2008, 09:40 AM | #51 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
I agree, you can stumble upon the truth movement and panic, as if the world went pure stupid. Imagine discovering for the fist time, your kind professor is a fraud on 9/11!
You understood 9/11 in a general sense, then by surprise, a high school dropout, Charlie Sheen, says 77 could not have made the maneuver turning 330 degree and descending 7000 feet. You are forced to look up the facts to prove the pure stupid statement is crap! Without specific knowledge on 77's flight path, you sit there with your mouth open, how can a guy who has spent more money in one year on drugs and girls than you will make in a lifetime, make such a insanely stupid statement (was it the drugs or the girls, or the lack of knowledge)! And to counter his claims you have to study 9/11 for a few hours, or find JREF to help you. The quick fix, is to ask for some help. Watch out, the hounds of woo are posting to the new guy trying to warn him to avoid using evidence, and stick with the woo of the truth movement. There are posts with data, and skills to combat pure ignorance! Good luck to the new guy combating the insane ideas of his kind professor. I can't imagine teaching stuff from the truth movement, except to point out how it is pure anti-intellectual claptrap. |
25th July 2008, 09:45 AM | #52 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
|
Generally speaking, I agree with you. The 9/11 CT will be around, probably forever. If someone comes to a site like this with a genuine interest in learning they should be educated (or directed to where they can be) in an equally genuine way.
However, in the years I've been here, I can probably count on one hand how many of this kind of "fence sitter" there were. Personally, I have no tolerance for the arrogant and ignorant and less when they are disingenuous regarding their intentions. I've lost track of their numbers. |
25th July 2008, 09:47 AM | #53 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 824
|
|
25th July 2008, 09:54 AM | #54 |
Hipster Doofus
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Nutsack, FL
Posts: 2,502
|
That sound you just heard was the joke going over your head.
|
__________________
Knowledge is good.... Emil Faber |
|
25th July 2008, 09:56 AM | #55 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
|
25th July 2008, 10:20 AM | #56 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
I know you didn't say it, and I didn't say that you said it - that's why I put "If you think ...." at the beginning of the sentence. If you don't think that, then that's fine. You're not the only person reading this thread.
Quote:
Quote:
|
25th July 2008, 10:22 AM | #57 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
I know you didn't say it, and I didn't say that you said it - that's why I put "If you think ...." at the beginning of the sentence. If you don't think that, then that's fine. You're not the only person reading this thread.
Quote:
Quote:
|
25th July 2008, 04:06 PM | #58 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,546
|
Yes, nothing proves one conspiracy theory like using another conspiracy theory as evidence. If you want proof of bother 9/11 and Gulf of T, then look at JFK. We can go on and on can't we?
If you don't believe me that 2+2=5 then just look at the incident of 6+6=13. Same thing. |
25th July 2008, 04:09 PM | #59 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
|
Audesapre:
1. This is an open forum, but it is dominated by people, such as myself, who not only do not believe the 9/11 CTs, but despise those who promote them. 2. We have a few truthers. We would have more, but for some reason they seem incapable of following the rules and regs of the JREF Forums (of which there is MUCH MORE than 9/11 CTs). 3. Some of the truthers here (a small minority) are civil and can at least be engaged with , in terms of a discussion. 4. Most truthers here spend a lot of their time antagonizing, flame baiting, trolling, etc... 5. The links I provided you will take you several days, if not weeks, to go through thoroughly. As well, my suggestion is you pick up the 9/11 commission report in paperback. Now mind you, once you do, if you mention it to a truther, they will immediately say "go read David Ray Griffin's book on the commission report". Be aware that DRG is a first rate Snake Oil Salesmen. He speculates, connects things that he shouldn't, misquotes, quote mines. Good luck. TAM |
25th July 2008, 04:34 PM | #60 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,768
|
You might be wondering why your conversation with Enigma isn’t going as smoothly as you had hoped it would. “This guy’s being slightly unreasonable,” you initially thought, “but if I broach the matter politely and rationally, I’m sure he’ll come round. After all, he opposes conspiracy theories, so he’s bound to be reasonable enough.” Now, normally – on this forum, at least – that’s a fairly prudent rule of thumb. Enigma, however, is an irrationalist: dogmatic, intellectually dishonest and abusive. Countless such people just so happen to oppose trutherism, and Enigma just so happens to be one of them. In short, he – like the conspiracy theorist – has rejected reason. That is why you cannot reason with him. |
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts) |
|
25th July 2008, 04:39 PM | #61 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 396
|
Reading can be fun! You should try it as your wrong on both counts! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident Gulf of Tonkin Incident was a pair of attacks initiated by naval forces of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (the Communist government of North Vietnam) against two American destroyers, the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy. The incident occurred on August 2 and 4, 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin.[1] The incident prompted the first large-scale involvement of U.S. armed forces in Vietnam. |
25th July 2008, 05:08 PM | #62 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,009
|
Is your professor Dylan Avery? Though counterintuitive, professors can be idiots too.
|
25th July 2008, 05:12 PM | #63 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,009
|
|
25th July 2008, 08:41 PM | #64 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
25th July 2008, 09:58 PM | #65 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
So you read it and you still think I've accused you (or someone else) of having already done something that (in my hypothetical example) takes place up to ten years in the future?
Par - thanks for the information. |
25th July 2008, 11:38 PM | #66 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,143
|
Your Prof is a smart man, you should listen to him.
Ask yourselves how you get 'cauliflower' (pyroclastic flow) type smoke clouds from a falling building Image of pyroclastic flow http://www.geo.umn.edu/courses/1001/...ion/img011.JPG Image of dust flow http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...AP_468x312.jpg Also think about the amount of force it took for those heavy steel beams to shoot across 350 feet and cut through the core columns of WTC7. Is that gravity induced? When the Penthouse fell, why did the building pause for a few seconds before falling? The beams supporting the Penthouse obviously broke loose from the remainder of the building, otherwise it all would have move at once, correct? So how did the other columns fail simultaneously? Stop frame analysis: http://www.procision-auto.com/Tino/wtc7.1.jpg http://www.procision-auto.com/Tino/wtc7.2.jpg http://www.procision-auto.com/Tino/wtc7.3.jpg http://www.procision-auto.com/Tino/wtc7.4.jpg |
25th July 2008, 11:55 PM | #67 |
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,577
|
|
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon |
|
26th July 2008, 12:07 AM | #68 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,143
|
What's even funnier is you twisted my reply and misquoted the content. The reference to gravity induced was about the steel beams :
Quote:
gravity driven, but what produces the 'cauliflower' appeal as compared to a normal dust cloud (see photo references above)? |
26th July 2008, 12:13 AM | #69 |
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,577
|
Heh. Pot, kettle, etc.
Quote:
Lovely. The juxtaposition was too funny to pass up, especially as it basically answered your question for you.
Quote:
Gravity. Look it up.
Quote:
A pyroclastic flow is basically dust, ash, and super-heated gas. A "normal" dust cloud is perfectly capable of billowing in a similar manner. So the short answer is typical fluid dynamics create the appearance you note in your photo. There are videos of buildings collapsing in earthquakes that demonstrate identical dust clouds. Those are gravity driven as well. |
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon |
|
26th July 2008, 01:14 AM | #70 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 10,281
|
Surely truthers have managed to figure out by now that "pyroclastic" doesn't mean what they think it means, haven't they?
Even the stupid ones, I mean. |
26th July 2008, 01:18 AM | #71 |
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,577
|
Sadly, no. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post3530735 See the goofiness posted by tanabear. |
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon |
|
26th July 2008, 06:01 AM | #72 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
26th July 2008, 06:12 AM | #73 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,143
|
Typical. Nobody answered the questions, but rather asked questions...about
the questions.... So you have proof of pyroclastic flow of buildings which fell from earthquakes? Link them up. I 'd like to see your proof of this. We can also watch the building(s) fall from side to side in your videos and not straight down. |
26th July 2008, 06:18 AM | #74 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
|
for those idiots who do not think you can get "Cauliflower" clouds from a falling building...
and no, before you mention it, the clouds are not the results of the explosives (for the love of god)... go to the 52-58 second mark http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkiwNxfB4GM TAM |
26th July 2008, 06:26 AM | #75 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
26th July 2008, 06:35 AM | #76 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,143
|
|
26th July 2008, 06:39 AM | #77 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
26th July 2008, 08:14 AM | #78 |
Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 145
|
Why not call Controlled Demolitions Inc and ask them? Not that you'd be the first. Pumpitout.com's 'Jeff' did exactly that - and here is the result of his enquiry:
Receptionist: Good afternoon, Loizeaux Company. Jeff: Um, sorry, do I -- is this Controlled Demolitions? Receptionist: Yes it is. Jeff: Ok - I was wondering if there was someone I could talk to briefly -- just ask a question I had? Receptionist: Well, what kind of question? Jeff: Well, I just wanted to know what a term meant in demolition terms. Receptionist: Ok - what type of term? Jeff: Well, if you were in the demolition business and you said the, the term "pull it," I was wondering what exactly that would mean? Receptionist: "Pull it"? Jeff: Yeah. Receptionist: Hmm......... Hold on a minute. Jeff: Thank you. (Pause while receptionist consults CDI colleagues) Receptionist: Sir? Jeff: Yes? Receptionist: "Pull it" is when they actually pull it down. Jeff: Oh. Well, thank you very much for your time. Receptionist: Okay! Jeff: Bye. Receptionist: Bye. http://www.pumpitout.com/phone_calls...emolitions.mp3 As to it referring to 'pulling' the firefighters out, we would need to examine when any such firefighting took place. According to NIST's Shyam Sunder: "There was no firefighting in WTC 7". http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=5 As to no one dying in the collapse of WTC7, we can be certain that at least one person did: "When 7 World Trade Center came down on Sept. 11, an agent on loan from Washington, special officer Craig Miller, perished, and the entire Secret Service office was buried in that building."Steve Carey, SS special agent I hope you find this information helpful. |
26th July 2008, 08:16 AM | #79 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
|
There was, I believe, some initial firefighting, but not sustained. I also recall that they still had a contingent of firefighters holding a perimeter around the building.
TAM |
26th July 2008, 08:29 AM | #80 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|