ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

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

Notices


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 19th April 2007, 07:03 PM   #1
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
What are your favorite arguments that never fail to stump the twoofers?

By this I mean the arguments that leave twoofers with no room to manouver.

When confronted with questions, most twoofers either flat out lie or make up something on the spot.

I'm looking for the kind of questions that leave them with the deer-in-the-headlights look; the long silence when they realize they're cornered.

For example, my favorite is to ask them to reconcile WTC7s demolition with the FDNY knowing the building would collapse well before it did. This also works with Silverstein's "pull it" comment to the fire chief.

Most twoofers know better than to claim the FDNY was in on the 9/11 plot, so they struggle to invent a logical scenario that explains the demolition without implicating the fire department in the plot. An impossible task, as we see here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ad.php?t=75954

The more one tries to reconcile the FDNY testimony the more ridiculous the story becomes.

Another example would be what pomeroo calls the Osama Conundrum - asking the twoofer to explain Bush not using Osama to prevent the recent election loss.

Anyone have any other faves?
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 07:08 PM   #2
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,482
whenever they get on about witnesses and experts being paid off ask how much it would take to pay the truthers off (if in person whip out your checkbook)

give a price, they undercut their "noble truthseeker" image, if they say they cant be paid off even they realize its unfair to assume everyone can be, on forums they just ignore it, ive never had the pleasure of asking anyone in person
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe 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 19th April 2007, 07:19 PM   #3
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,000
Originally Posted by CHF View Post
By this I mean the arguments that leave twoofers with no room to manouver.
Payne Stewart's plane and the eastern/central time zones.
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 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 19th April 2007, 07:21 PM   #4
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
Another good one is: why didn't Bush plant WMD in Iraq?
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 07:31 PM   #5
T.A.M.
Keeper of the Kool-Vax
 
T.A.M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,816
Ya the lack of planting WMDs by the all powerful cabal is my favorite.

TAM
T.A.M. 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 19th April 2007, 07:33 PM   #6
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
Payne Stewart's plane and the eastern/central time zones.
Originally Posted by CHF View Post
Another good one is: why didn't Bush plant WMD in Iraq?
never had either of these stump a truther, but watching them run in circles trying to explain it is even better, lol
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe 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 19th April 2007, 07:34 PM   #7
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,137
Some questions that never fail to stump the deniers:

What does NIST say caused the towers to collapse?

How were the explosives planted? How did the workers and their work remain unseen? How did the work survive the impacts and fires? How did it leave no visible, audible, seismic, or physical evidence?

Why did the super-secret NWO explosives experts choose to plant charges in one outer corner of WTC 7, at the top?

Why did the conspirators use no Iraqis as patsies?

What, specifically, does the NIST report get wrong?

What, specifically, does the 9/11 Commission report get wrong?

Do scientists who work in that field support your position?

Why did the Democrats overwhelmingly win the recent U.S. elections?

Have you spoken to anyone who was there?

Here's a list of contacts for people who were there, and people who investigated. Will you contact them?
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

Last edited by Gravy; 19th April 2007 at 07:36 PM.
Gravy 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 19th April 2007, 07:39 PM   #8
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 24,676
Gravy has hit the nail on the head... the best way to stump CTers is ask them to provide any information about the "official story" that they are so positive is wrong.

None of them have a clue.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot 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 19th April 2007, 07:39 PM   #9
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
never had either of these stump a truther, but watching them run in circles trying to explain it is even better, lol
That's as good as stumping them. They know they're stumped but can't admit it. Yeah - it's pretty fun to watch.
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 07:46 PM   #10
Dr Adequate
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17,897
Why did the conspirators come up with such a damn silly conspiracy? (See The White House Tapes. No answers from the loons). If they wanted terrorists to be blamed for crashing planes into the Twin Towers, then why not crash planes into the Twin Towers and then blame some terrorists?

Why were none of the hijackers Afghans or Iraqis? If you're going to have a "false flag" operation, it's important to use the right "false flag".

Why drag Afghanistan into it anyway? Do they have oil?
Dr Adequate 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 19th April 2007, 07:49 PM   #11
T.A.M.
Keeper of the Kool-Vax
 
T.A.M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,816
no deh got da opium man....

TAM
T.A.M. 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 19th April 2007, 07:51 PM   #12
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
Why replace Flight 77 with a missile when you have to get rid of flight 77 anyway?
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 07:52 PM   #13
babazaroni
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 787
Why would the insurance companies pay a man who openly admitted to destroying his building?
babazaroni 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 19th April 2007, 08:01 PM   #14
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
Originally Posted by Dr Adequate View Post
Why drag Afghanistan into it anyway? Do they have oil?
"It's cuz the neo-cons wanna build a pipeline!"

Question: so where's the pipeline?

"Ummmmm...."
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 08:04 PM   #15
Mobyseven
President of Covert-Ops
 
Mobyseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,672
Originally Posted by babazaroni View Post
Why would the insurance companies pay a man who openly admitted to destroying his building?
Doesn't stump them. They simply include them in the conspiracy.

I never said it wouldn't show their complete lack of understanding of how the insurance industry works, I just said it wouldn't stump them...
__________________
"[Mobyseven is] a fantastically friendly, open, curious, happy, charming, sweet and adorable young man! And those are his bad points." - HistoryGal on Mobyseven

"Damn, you're good." - Ichneumonwasp on Mobyseven
Mobyseven 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 19th April 2007, 08:11 PM   #16
babazaroni
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 787
Originally Posted by Mobyseven View Post
Doesn't stump them. They simply include them in the conspiracy.

I never said it wouldn't show their complete lack of understanding of how the insurance industry works, I just said it wouldn't stump them...
True. I should have added it makes them make even stupider statements.

If there was a true stumping question, there would be little to talk about.
babazaroni 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 19th April 2007, 08:17 PM   #17
Newtons Bit
Philosopher
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,451
Originally Posted by T.A.M. View Post
Ya the lack of planting WMDs by the all powerful cabal is my favorite.

TAM
That's obvious, the NWO deliberately removed all the WMD's secretly after the invasion. Seriously, does anyone believe that Saddam DIDNT have WMD when all the evidence pointed to it?

They found WMD, they just removed it in secret to advance their plans!
Newtons Bit 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 19th April 2007, 09:21 PM   #18
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,050
I find, "Can you tie your shoelaces without your Mummy's help?" generally works for me.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto 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 19th April 2007, 09:22 PM   #19
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,429
How, exactly, has anyone who is accused of being complicit in the attacks benefited from the attacks?

If it was to steal oil, then why didn't they steal it?

If it was to create a police state, then why hasn't this happened? Has anyone actually seen these supposed prison camps?

If it was for money, well what money, who got rich?

As I noted in another thread, this seems to be the most perfect conspiracy that achieved exactly zero of its goals.
Travis 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 19th April 2007, 09:30 PM   #20
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 33,839
Great thread. I'm going to bookmark it and also print it out.

I've had good results from this one:

How exactly was DNA (provided by AA77 victims' family members & matched to the victims remains) evidence faked? Name the Coroner(s) pathologists, scientists, lab technicians and their methodology.

And stump them with their own "logic".

For example, at another forum, one twoofer who was adamant about there being thermite used at the WTC posted a link to Judy Wood's site to support his argument. I quoted from her about how she totally refutes' Steven Jones' thermite theory, and the twoofer hasn't been heard from since.


Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
whenever they get on about witnesses and experts being paid off ask how much it would take to pay the truthers off (if in person whip out your checkbook)

give a price, they undercut their "noble truthseeker" image, if they say they cant be paid off even they realize its unfair to assume everyone can be, on forums they just ignore it, ive never had the pleasure of asking anyone in person
Brilliant! I like that one immensely.
__________________
Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay 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 19th April 2007, 09:34 PM   #21
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Off the top of my head; troofers typical responses in italic:

- Perimeter column bowing; heat refraction !
- Molten metal flowing down the walls!!! ..... in WTC6; Botched thermite CD??
- Why is the worlds civil/structural engineering community(hundreds of thousands of people, I'm sure) covering up 9/11, especially those engineers in countries that aren't exactly friendly to the US?; They've been bribed and threatened!
- Why blow up WTC7 while the entire world was watching instead of simply destroying the evidence it housed?; Silverstein is an eebil money grubbing JOOO!
__________________
Nature abhors a moron. -H.L. Mencken
apathoid 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 19th April 2007, 09:36 PM   #22
pomeroo
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,091
[quote]
Originally Posted by CHF View Post
By this I mean the arguments that leave twoofers with no room to manouver.

When confronted with questions, most twoofers either flat out lie or make up something on the spot.

I'm looking for the kind of questions that leave them with the deer-in-the-headlights look; the long silence when they realize they're cornered.

For example, my favorite is to ask them to reconcile WTC7s demolition with the FDNY knowing the building would collapse well before it did. This also works with Silverstein's "pull it" comment to the fire chief.

Most twoofers know better than to claim the FDNY was in on the 9/11 plot, so they struggle to invent a logical scenario that explains the demolition without implicating the fire department in the plot. An impossible task, as we see here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ad.php?t=75954

The more one tries to reconcile the FDNY testimony the more ridiculous the story becomes.


Another example would be what pomeroo calls the Osama Conundrum - asking the twoofer to explain Bush not using Osama to prevent the recent election loss.


Anyone have any other faves?


Again, the Osama Conundrum is devastating to a leftwing loon. With the Alex Jones/Ace Baker anarcho-libertarian types it's not as effective. They can't distinguish George Bush from Barack Obama and Bush is merely a stooge of the invisible army that controls everything.

Asking loons of all stripes why the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy manufactured wars with Afghanistan and Iraq while neglecting to make even one of their "hijackers" an Afghani or an Iraqi tends to give them pause.

The problem with all of these clever ploys is that they are designed to stimulate thought, to reveal irremediable flaws in their arguments. Nothing--absolutely nothing--is capable of stimulating thought in a twoofer. You can drive an eighteen-wheeler through the holes in their arguments, but, as they inhabit a zone outside logic and reason, they just don't care.
pomeroo 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 19th April 2007, 09:36 PM   #23
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,360
Odd as it may seem mine is:

"Do you know how much a 30 ton press weighs?"
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
332nd 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 19th April 2007, 09:36 PM   #24
CHF
Illuminator
 
CHF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,875
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
whenever they get on about witnesses and experts being paid off ask how much it would take to pay the truthers off (if in person whip out your checkbook)

give a price, they undercut their "noble truthseeker" image, if they say they cant be paid off even they realize its unfair to assume everyone can be
I agree with orphia nay - that's one of the best ones I've heard.
CHF 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 19th April 2007, 09:53 PM   #25
EeneyMinnieMoe
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,223
How in God's name can you move several tons of explosives up two of the tallest structures in the world smack dab in the middle of lower Manhattan without a single person nor the NYPD nor the Port Authority police nor the swarms of other security guards and staff there 24/7 noticing?

Bought off? Do you really believe the NYPD, which lost so many of their own that day, which showed such bravery and self-sacrifice, was bought off and if you do, how can you?

Two, why is it so hard for you to believe that pissed off Muslims were behind 9/11 ?! Didn't they have a motive? Didn't Osama bin Laden and Al-Queda and the governments of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan have a motive and a history of violence?! They're wanted terrorists for god's sake! Why can't you believe that terrorists could want to make a terrorist attack?! Don't you see a pattern in the USS Cole and the embassy bombing and all the rest?

Three, if this is so true, why are these CTs so conflicting with each other? Some people think it was the Jews, some think it was the Christians, anyone but fundamentalist Muslims.

Four, are you retarded? Is the answer yes?

Five, what are you smoking and can I have some of it?
EeneyMinnieMoe 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 19th April 2007, 09:58 PM   #26
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,325
I know I've said it before- but the easiest way to defeat a truther in one step is to ask the question "what fact or piece of evidence would it take for you to admit you're wrong?" Often times they're not only unprepared to deal with the logic of the issue, but they're also confronted with what they quickly realize is an appropriate way to shine a gigantic spotlight on their bias.

For the ones who do attempt to answer, they either present a requirement that is so obviously irrational that they shoot themselves in the foot- or they present criteria that actually makes sense, but is easily satisfied with the evidence. I may have even convinced some individuals with just that one question (I'll never know).

I'm still sometimes shocked by just how unfamiliar a lot of people are with reason and logic, though. Often I have this uncontrollable response which can best be described as a guffaw. For these types of people, the Challenge makes no difference- but then again, nothing in reality does.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!

Last edited by Totovader; 19th April 2007 at 10:01 PM. Reason: grammar
Totovader 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 19th April 2007, 10:03 PM   #27
Mr.D
Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,178
What was the plan to destroy WTC7 if a gigantic piece of WTC1 did not fall on it, severely damaging one side and setting it on fire?
Mr.D 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 19th April 2007, 10:09 PM   #28
David Wong
Graduate Poster
 
David Wong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,774
1. Why not just use bombs to bring down the buildings, and say it was the terrorists who planted the bombs? Why involve planes at all?

2. Even if all American news outlets and experts can be intimidated into silence ("They're afraid of losing their jobs!") what is stopping foreign journalists or scientists from blowing the lid? After all, CD is "obvious" from a glance at any video of the collapses...
__________________
Author, John Dies at the End. Available now in hardcover.

Editor, Cracked.com.
David Wong 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 19th April 2007, 10:12 PM   #29
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 33,839
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
I know I've said it before- but the easiest way to defeat a truther in one step is to ask the question "what fact or piece of evidence would it take for you to admit you're wrong?" Often times they're not only unprepared to deal with the logic of the issue, but they're also confronted with what they quickly realize is an appropriate way to shine a gigantic spotlight on their bias.

For the ones who do attempt to answer, they either present a requirement that is so obviously irrational that they shoot themselves in the foot- or they present criteria that actually makes sense, but is easily satisfied with the evidence. I may have even convinced some individuals with just that one question (I'll never know).

I'm still sometimes shocked by just how unfamiliar a lot of people are with reason and logic, though. Often I have this uncontrollable response which can best be described as a guffaw. For these types of people, the Challenge makes no difference- but then again, nothing in reality does.
Good points.

Most of us will never know we've convinced anyone of anything. I have found that 99% of twoofers will never admit that they were wrong about anything (at least, to their debunkers). Luckily, there are a few we know here who have given us great insight into the way their minds were working during their twooferdom, and it seems we are correct about their thought processes and mindset.

Highlighting these thought processes and logical fallacies is beneficial. One twoofer I was debating (almost) stopped instantly after I demonstrated the logical fallacies in her arguments. Posting links to logical fallacy definitions was very effective. She hasn't posted about 9/11 since even though she posts about other topics.
__________________
Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay 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 19th April 2007, 10:15 PM   #30
steve s
Illuminator
 
steve s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
whenever they get on about witnesses and experts being paid off ask how much it would take to pay the truthers off (if in person whip out your checkbook)

give a price, they undercut their "noble truthseeker" image, if they say they cant be paid off even they realize its unfair to assume everyone can be

Originally Posted by CHF View Post
I agree with orphia nay - that's one of the best ones I've heard.
I agree, that's a good point. They think they're so morally superior. They'd never take a payoff but the rest of us evil shills would gladly sell our souls for a few bucks. And if all of these people were payed off, why are they still showing up for work? Why aren't they on a beach in St. Barts?

Steve S.
__________________
"Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken
steve s 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 19th April 2007, 10:35 PM   #31
GwionX
Thinker
 
GwionX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 163
One of my favorites: If the High Explosives were set-up in WTC 7 prior to the towers falling. How would the people that set the charges know where the fires and structural damage to WTC 7 would occur? Why wouldn't the debris damage or fires cause the explosives to either, go off prematurely, or damage the charge (wires, transmitter, thermate vessle) so as it wouldn't function at all?
GwionX 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 19th April 2007, 10:40 PM   #32
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,837
Some really do not know how fire can damage steel. They think building fires like in Madrid did little damage. Some times when they realize tons of the unprotected steel fell in just a few hours they seem to dissolve. Plus a few of the truther buildings were out right totaled, had to be removed, this slows some truthers down. "Where are those two buildings today?" It works a little.

But this has not been a big show stopper; but I think the 16 or 20 minute Payne Stewart intercept becoming 76 minutes is one of the best, once it sinks in, as already mentioned.
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 19th April 2007, 11:01 PM   #33
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,831
One of my favourites is:

Why did "they" make the second tower that was hit collapse first?
Pardalis 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 19th April 2007, 11:25 PM   #34
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,557
Originally Posted by Dr Adequate View Post
Why drag Afghanistan into it anyway? Do they have oil?
Why perform 9/11 just to justify an expensive invasion of Iraq in order to get access to its oil when putting just half that money into developing the tar sands in Alberta would ultimately result in more petroleum than Iraq can produce?
Corsair 115 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 19th April 2007, 11:50 PM   #35
Go_
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 34
For what conceivable reason would the 9/11 conspirators damage one potentially damning black box (the CVR) beyond usefulness but leave the other one (the FDR) that is definitely damning intact before planting both back at the Pentagon disaster site?
Go_ 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 20th April 2007, 12:05 AM   #36
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,429
Originally Posted by David Wong View Post
1. Why not just use bombs to bring down the buildings, and say it was the terrorists who planted the bombs? Why involve planes at all?
This brings up something that has often bothered me.

If it's possible for a building to collapse from the plane impact damage and resulting fires then why plant bombs at all?

If it's impossible for a building to collapse from the plane impact damage and resulting fires why fake a plane impact at all? Why not just pull another 1993 plot only bigger and better and bring the buildings down in one giant blast?

You would only fake something that's possible, faking the impossible is pointless.
Travis 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 20th April 2007, 12:08 AM   #37
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
This brings up something that has often bothered me.

If it's possible for a building to collapse from the plane impact damage and resulting fires then why plant bombs at all?

If it's impossible for a building to collapse from the plane impact damage and resulting fires why fake a plane impact at all? Why not just pull another 1993 plot only bigger and better and bring the buildings down in one giant blast?

You would only fake something that's possible, faking the impossible is pointless.
thats even assuming collapsing the towers was absolutely necessary, just crashing a plane into them would be the wrost terrorist attack ever
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe 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 20th April 2007, 12:12 AM   #38
qarnos
Cold-hearted skeptic
 
qarnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,987
1. Why would Silverstein admit, in an interview he knew would be broadcast to the public, that he "pulled" WTC7, when he is allegedly trying to commit insurance fraud over the attacks?

2. Let's assume you are right - and none of this really happened the way we're being told. Then what did happen?

3. Why did "they" make such a complicated plan, where so many people were involved and so many things could go wrong, when they could have gone with a much simpler approach, such as the 1993 attack?

4. Approximately how many people are in on this conspiracy?

5. How much money has Dylan made out of selling this conspiracy to you?

6. How is it that so many highly intelligent and smart people, some of who are experts and professionals in analyzing these kinds of events, have been fooled by this, but you, an obviously under-educated below-average intelligence specimen with severe reading and comprehension problems and absolutely no qualifications in the relevant fields or even a basic understanding of scientific method, have managed to stumble on to the truth?

OK, maybe not that last one.
__________________
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]" - Greenpeace press release.
qarnos 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 20th April 2007, 12:17 AM   #39
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 33,839
Hehehe, qarnos.


What was the point of "bombs in the basement prior to collapse" when the building was "demolished" from the top down?
__________________
Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Australasian Skeptics Forum.
Orphia Nay 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 20th April 2007, 12:22 AM   #40
MG1962
Penultimate Amazing
 
MG1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,416
"Lets Roll" Why include such an uplifting message to a populace you are trying to pin down.

Why did some of the WTC7 responders know about the building being blown up, and others didn't. How was the message broadcast, and what criteria was used to choose who knew and who didn't

Lastly, why was the Trinity Church tape faked?
MG1962 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 » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

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 05:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.