smart move.all they know how to do is lie and mix in some truths with their lies and propaganda,best thing to do is ignore them,they are just here to try and derail any 9/11 truth discussion and waste your time like their hanlders pay them to,dont take their bait.they wont address the majority of the facts you bring up.
as always,just like you do in ALL your discussions everywhere you go on this board,you cowardly run off without trying to debunk it when you are cornered and defeated.same old same old,just like all OCTA;S you wouldnt last one minute in a debating hall and would be laughed out of it within a minute by everyone.deal with it. this is all your left doing everytime you are cornered.
The claim that the collapse of the WTC towers violates the laws of physics has been repeated by the truth movement on this forum ad nauseam. Yet, no peer-reviewed scientific literature that corroborates this claim has ever been provided by the 'truther' community on this forum. Scores of papers detailing the failure and collapse of the WTC towers have been written by bonafide scientists and published in academic journals over the last decade. Not one paper that either explicitly or implicitly corroborates the truther position has been published in a reputable academic/scientific journal. On the contrary, all of the relevant scientific academic discourse that has been published implicitly if not explicitly refutes the 'truther' position. The last time I pointed this out to the members of this community I was told that the Gov't was manipulating the scientists and publications. Yet no evidence was provided that demonstrated the gov't manipulation of scientific discourse or the complicity of scientist and engineers in the 9/11 conspiracy. It should be noted that scientific publications written by foreign nationals (chinese and european) at foreign research institutions have been published that explicitly refute the 'truther' position. If truthers really believe that the collapse of WTC buildings 'violate the laws of physics' they should be able to 1) Provide peer reviewed scientific discourse that has been published in a bonafide/mainstream academic periodical that supports/corroborates their claims. or 2) Provide compelling and conclusive evidence that all of the engineers and scientists who have published scientific papers on the collapse of the WTC towers are a party to a vast 9/11 conspiracy. I'm really curious as to why I should ignore all of the published science on the collapse of the 9/11 towers.. Please explain and provide corroborating evidence....
their claims hold no water and just based on wild crazy theorists by extreme elements who are not taken serioulsy by any sane person in this country or foreign. You would think that these truthers could go to even China and provide such irrefutable evidence to them and have China expose the US? or could it be that the US also controls China? truther claims have been refuted over and over and over, using unsurmountable evidence... their claims have been rendered absurd, surreal and garbage
If anything, truthers are a bunch that warrant serious pschycological evalUation; they should be studied to see what makes them tick.. what makes them tick? and come of with all these insane theories? that 09/11 was an insie job, that man didn't land on the moon, that pearl harbor was self inflicted or never happened, princes diana murdered by royal family, jews movement for world domination, jfk assassination (about 20 different versions apparently backed up by evidence and contradciting each other) what makes these guys tick? 1. Hatred for the government (fueled by other nutcase conspiracy theorists) 2. Mentally unstable, dellusional - shizophrenia 3. Too much hollywood 4. Mental retardation any ideas? here's 10 characteristics of the typical conspiracy theorist:
That's the thing 9/11waij, no you aren't taking anyone to school. That information has been debunked a million times. There is no information there that is new in any way, shape or form. A&E for 9/11 has been a joke forever, no one believes anything they say. Just because YOU don't believe that the information has been debunked, and you don't understand when it has been debunked doesn't mean that you are right. That seems to be your impression, I can debunk each and every piece of information that you post in a heartbeat. I am not going to watch your videos though, I want you to commit to it in writing. Tell me the exact points that prove, to you, that 9/11 was in inside job. Pick your strongest evidence and type it here. No videos, cut the bull(*)(*)(*)(*), write it out.
The only thing that the petition circulated by AE911Truth proves is that there are 1600 people who claim to be architects, engineers and demolition experts who believe that there is evidence of a controlled demolition. Most assuredly, the petition circulated by A&E for 9/11 truth does not constitute peer reviewed scientific discourse. Scientific discourse furthers the progress of science by reporting new research devolped through the application of the scientific method that peer reviewed to ensure that any research submitted for publication meets quality standards and is scientifically valid. Scientific publications contain the methods and results of research- an essential part of the scientific method- that must contain enough details so that an independent researcher could repeat the experiment or calculation to verify the results. Each such journal article then becomes a part of the permanent scientific record. The American Society For Civil Engineers- the largest engineering society in the world with over 140,000 members worldwide- publishes 33 scientific journals. Not one scientific article published in an ASCE periodical explicitly or even implicitly supports the controlled demolition hypothesis. On the contrary, every single one of the scientific articles published in an ASCE journal explicitly or implicitly rejects the position of the A&E911 organization. In sum, the claims of 9/11 truthers regarding the collapse of the WTC buildings is not supported by the scientific record nor have their claims been subjected to the scientific method. On the contrary, the published scientific record very much contradicts the claims of the 9/11 truth movement. While the 9/11 truthers on this forum are very good at providing websites and youtube videos that they claim are 'proof' of a conspiracy they have failed to produce one peer reviewed scientific publication that supports their claims. Until the claims of 9/11 truthers can be corroborated through the scientific method it is really hard to take them seriously.
Requiring scientifically sound evidence of a claim is elitism? No wonder the truth movement has floundered as bad as it has.
How is subjecting a hypothesis based on empirical and measurable evidence to the scientific principles of reasoning elitism? Civil engineering is a scientific discipline thus the scientific method is integral to the field. The petition circulated by A&E911truth does not constitute scientific evidence of anything. Is anyone naive enough to actually believe that the AE911Truth petition is evidence or proof of anything? Whats more, if the 9/11 truth movement is going to hypohtesize that the collapse of the WTC buildings violates scientific laws they need to subject this hypothesis to the scientific method. Its ridiculous for people to claim that the collapse of the WTC buildings violates the laws of physics if they don't have any credible scientific evidence to support such a claim. If your gonna talk the talk you need to walk the walk.
Like clockwork,you evade the facts as always.you blatantly ignore the FACTS that just like in the JFK assassination, many witnesses who gave stories of hearing explosions going off ended up dying in mysterious deaths.you ignore the FACTS that the government is violating the constitution by firing teachers that have come out and said explosions brought the towers down,you ignore the FACTS that many witnesses including credible firefighters experienced in the sounds of explosives said explosives brought the towers down.you ignore the FACTS that they wont come out and give a peer review paper because they will get FIRED like many of those teachers have if they tell the truth and wont get future work from the government. you ignore the FACTS that many high ranking military officers dont accept the explanation on the pentagon of an airliner crashing into it as well as many expert pilots.you ignore all these facts and cowardly run away from that five minute video when challenged to address the inconsistencys in them so you keep coming back with this pathetic rambling of yours everytime. thanks for proving you run off and wont take the challenge to try and counter that video dismissing it as a youtubevideo.comedy gold. the logic of you official conspiracy theroy apologists makes me laugh and fall out of the chair everytime.according to the logic you guys all have,if lee harvey oswald is on a youtube video saying he did no shoot anybody,that he is just a patsy,its not true,its automatically wrong.hahahahahahahahaha. really you need to get that comedy club going.hee hee just like all official conspiracy theory apologists,the way you debate and change the subject avoiding all these facts all the time refusing to even TRY to counter the evidence which was illegally removed and destroyed by the way,like all octa's,you wouldnt last ONE MINUTE in a debating hall the way you debate here. see like i have thousands of times before,I addressed your pathetic post,YOU however keep cowardly running away from my facts everyime.like clockwork,never fails. yoh and you also dodged the FACT that many of the commission members themselves have said they dont believe the official story. you can dish it out,but you sure cant take it.I always answer your ramblings but you run away from my facts EVERYTIME.hee hee.you kill me.
*yawn* Do the things you say even make sense to you sometimes? Throughout that entire post you haven't said anything that is debatable. All your posts consists of is you talking about that ONE 5 minutes video that I'll debunk this weekend. You claim it's undebunkable, and that everyone here is getting our asses handed to us by the truthers. How old are you?
Don't accuse me of dodging and evading debate when you have totally failed to answer the questions I have posed to you: 1) provide scientific discourse from a credible scientific journal that explicitly supports the controlled demolition hypothesis I fully understand why you have failed to do this. There isn't any scientific discourse that supports the controlled demolition hypothesis. On the contrary, anybody who conducts a google scholar search on the collapse of the WTC tower will find peer reviewed article after peer reviewed article that contains empirical evidence subjected to the scientific method that leads to the conclusion that the impact of the aircraft and fire alone caused the buidings to collapse. 2) Provide evidence that engineers/ scientists are a party to the conspiracy and that the gov't is exerting influence over scientific publications. You claim that it is a 'FACT' that scientist will get fired if the publish scientific discourse that supports the controlled demolition hypothesis but you do not provide any evidence to support your claim. Additionally, its not just that there aren't any scientific papers that support the controlled demolition hypothesis its that there are dozens of scientific papers that explicitly refute the controlled demolition hypothesis. You have provided no evidence to support you explanation as to why all the published science contradicts your claims. In the above post you make numerous references to 'facts' yet you provide no evidence to support your claims. If you want to have an intellectually honest debate you need to start being intellectually honest. Provide some evidence or it is you who is going to get laughed out of this debate. I'd really like to see some proof that firing a teacher because they said that bombs brought down the towers. It is absolutely RETARDED to claim that firing a teacher for saying something stupid violates the constitution. I can assure you that firing a teacher because they promote a wacky conspiracy in the classroom does not violate the constitution. Your an idiot if you think those teachers firings does violate the constitution. I would be more than happy to address any evidence or points you would like to make. Go ahead and make your point and provide some evidence to support it and I'll go ahead and dismantle it. If you want to debate then lets debate. Bring it son
No i provide facts you just cowardly run away from them and keep bringing up this pathetic rant over and over again which is getting extremely tiresome having to repate the same (*)(*)(*)(*) thig over and over just to watch you cowardly run off and not address any of my facts I bring up being extremely cowardly that they illegally removed and destroyed the evidence and running off with your tail between your legs everytime I ask you to address the facts in that short five minute video.you WONT debate,you just cowardly keep doding my facts I bring up with this rant.AGAIN I alrready answered your pathetic rant,you wont answer ANY of my points which again,you would be laughed out of debating hall within one minute y with your pathetic one lines saying because its a youtube video its not true. i have troed to debate,you run off anytime I bring up points and go back to this rant everytimeI have brought it on son,you just keep running off refusing to address my points.until you stop acting cowardly and stop being afraid of the truth,i might as well add you to ignore as well. I give a video of one of the witnesses who said he heard explosions in the basement of bld 7 telling media members that day before they obviously murdered him later on,he said those explosions happened BEFORE the twin towers fell which proves that NIST was lying that the debris from bld 7 caused the building to collapse.bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission you official conspiracy theory apologists cant get around and evade the facts on everytime because of the fact that all thre buildings were all owned by jew larry siliverstein and they were the only ones that collapsed that day.you fail miserably in your COINCIDENCE Theorys that it was just a coincidence you want to believe that the only buildings that collapsed that day were all owned by silverstein and none of the others were. until you stop cowardly ignoring bld 7 and the testimony of that witness as well as actually TRY and debate and refuter my points instead of cowardly running off from that 5 minute video evading those facts,you have no credibility around here with truthers.hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaahhahahahahahaha obviousy to no surprise,your incapeable of addressing my points or that video so dont expect me to read this pathetic rambling of your you repeat over and over again since everytime i give you the answer you never remember anyways. NIST was caught lying in their report saying there was no molten metal found when SEVERAL firefighters reported seeign pools of molten metal and demoloition experts as well have said they were brought down by controlled demoltion,the fact that you ignore these demolition experts in what they say and worship the media and our corrupt government institutions who have a lonnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggg history going back decades of corruption going on,you really cant expect truthers to take your rants seriously around here. cant bring it on son when you keep cowardly running away from my video and my points and ignore my facts everytime i give you an answer to your rambling. try someone else,im done with you for now and forever since you can never remember answers given to you.
Still waiting for you to accept my debate request 9/11waij. Why do you keep running away like a scared girl? I am ready when you are.
From post #2011 Anything official is controlled so it can't be trusted. Look what this scientist says about science journals. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA (00:16 time mark) Start watching this at around the 30:00 time mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buosgl6J3Kw The scientist in the video says that there is a lot of science fraud going on in the US. Here's an example. Scientists at the RAND corporation say that depleted uranium is safe. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm There are loads of other scientist who say the opposite. http://www.google.es/search?q=depleted uranium&tbs=vid:1 It would be downright dangerous for a scientist to blow the whistle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU I don't think there are many people left who don't know the press is owned. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=Wi5h3vZl6uo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0 http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_page.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_control_propaganda/Media_Control.html Official confirmation of anything by any official organization means nothing and these experts are not to be sneezed at. http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth This issue isn't about whether the government did it anyway. It's about how the government did it. The Pentagon proof closes the whole case by itself. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/275987-few-debunking-links.html#post1061950663 Why am I having technical problems which make it difficult for me to post?
oh your forgetting,he wont read links that go against his version of events or watch a video cause its a you tube video.he has the logic since its on youtube,a witness never never heard an explosion coming from the basement even though he told an interviewer LIVE that day.hahahahahahahahahahaahahahaahahahahaha you cant reason with a bunch of people who only see what they want to see and cover their ears and close their eyes to facts that dont go along with their version of events so dont expect him to look at any of them. were obviously talking to people who slept through junior high school science classes who know nothing at all about the laws of physics.the way those buildings fell down and violated the laws of physics is something every junior high school kid learns at that age.they never learned cause they skipped those classes. or more than likely,this is what they do everyday. so you might as well be talking to a brick wall.hee hee.
Because PF's hosting service is in on the conspiracy too. The government asked them to singularly make it difficult for you to post. Because, you know, you're getting so close to the truth and all. Can't have you messing things up like that can we? Er, I mean, they. Hey, is that a black van parked across the street from your house? How long has that been there?
Don't insult potheads. Willy Nelson has been roasting the gonja for longer than you've been alive, and he isn't one millionth as mentally void as you are.
Here is a youtube video of a man who claims to have witnessed a bigfoot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RAytJ6i4Yk Do you believe that this video is compelling evidence that bigfoots exist? Do you believe that this video is more compelling evidence than any scientific publications that are pertinent to the matter? You continue to claim that the way the WTC buildings fell violates the laws of physics. I have repeatedly asked you to provide evidence to corroborate this claim but you have failed to back up you claims with anything more than you own rhetoric. There are dozens of scientific publications which refute the controlled demolition hypothesis. Do you honestly believe that a youtube video of someone who thinks they heard something that they think was an explosion is compelling evidence? Instead of just ranting about 'facts' why don't you go ahead and provide something more than your own rhetorical diatribes to support you position. As I have said before, I will address any evidence you care to post.
Anything official is controlled so it can't be trusted? Are you for real? What does that even mean? Dude, loosen up the tin foil hat and get some circulation to your dome son. You provided a link from a TV show where one person gives their opinion on scientific journals. Good Job!! DO you really think that disqualifies/ discredits all of the science being published today. If you actually took the time to read scientific journals you would see that the publications on the pre land bridge S American culture artifacts have actually been peer reviewed and published so there really isn't much basis for the opinion of the lady in that video. Again, if you actually took the time to read science journals instead of watching youtube videos you would realize that there is actually a legitimate scientific debate about the short and long term health consequences surrounding the use of the DU weapons. The Rand publication was not a scientific study. It was a literature review of previously published studies. Just because there is scientific debate on a topic doesn't mean that there are nefarious forces at work. Scientific debate is constantly in play across all disciplines. I wouldn't be to worried about blowing the whistle on 9/11 Scott. You and 9/11 was and inside job are still here. The youtube video makes a number of claims but thats about it. Even if that video is entirely accurate it is only weak circumstantial evidence at best. Your pentagon proof is retarded.
