For those who just credulously believe everything they see and hear, whether it be the official story, or a conspiracy theory. Here's a quick talk, just to put things in perspective. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/michael-shermer-the-believing-brain/
I accept your posting sincerity . But it really is the easiest thing in the world to start from a conclusion and then set up circumstances which seem to show how absurd the original proposition is . That's all you have done . The correct way is the obvious scientific approach which sets out the full and correct facts and then proceeds logically and honestly in a process of deduction and inference . This is what you clearly have not done . I am no bulk standard version of a so called Conspiracy advocate on any of the premises so far publicly declared . But there are other scenarios which show this incident probably was the greatest example of misdirection ever conceived and carried out . Such scenarios are outside the scope of this Topic .
So, like I ask of all other truthers, where is your evidence to back up this claim? You claim the correct way is to set out the full and correct facts, so surely you have some evidence that 9/11 was the greatest example of misdirection ever conceived and carried out. Oh, and don't forget perfectly covered up for over a decade. Or is this just you fantasizing about yet another anti-American scenario?
I am not a Truther , as you put it . And despite any perception to the contrary , I am never influenced by preconceptions or what you might term to be prejudices . It just so happens that the Mightiest Power on the planet has the greatest number of unfettered opportunities to do good and bad . And unfortunately the track record suggests that many things have gone badly wrong in the recent past and that it is therefore good that reasons for this are isolated ,wherever possible . Hardly unfair or controversial . Logically , being guilty of past and present indiscretions does not necessarily imply future guilt . So I try to adopt the same logical mind set , even though top profiling constantly forces you to gauge future probabilities from past results. Is there one overwhelming set of facts ? IMO , yes .Controlled explosions brought down the towers which the official report denies , ignoring forensic evidence and testimony by over one hundred different and unrelated people . From there , many different coincidences present themselves which run slap bang into the ever true advice , even axiom ---- There are never coincidences in Politics . Here is not the place to to look again at the whole saga , imo . But suffice to say that the area I have isolated unearths a flaw in the official explanation and complete avoidance of information , so that only one conclusion is reasonably possible . A cover up .Details and motives to be explored It then only becomes a gigantic cover up if you jump to the conclusion that it was Government inspired or even authorised . I deliberately refrain from taking that next step because what I have said does not in itself logically permit such a jump. But I contend that anybody not taking matters further is in denial or is working to a pre set agenda .Keeping the full truth hidden . I happen to believe that I probably know something close to the full reasons and the severe situation , if not extreme , facing the elite or System . But that is opinion , and , as I said previously , outside the scope of this Topic .
Let's start with your premise: What forensic evidence is being ignored that points to controlled demolition?
Your posts say otherwise. Like I said, your posts prove otherwise. In other words, you're trying not to judge based on prejudice, but you're going to anyway. Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). What forensic evidence? What testimony? Are you talking about people who were actually there or are you talking about people watching videos and then pretending their opinion is evidence? BTW, thanks for proving you are indeed a truther. The definition of a truther is one who ignores the evidence and lies about the available evidence in order to push an agenda. Start with bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and you will end with bull(*)(*)(*)(*). How's that for an axiom? BTW, the attack wasn't political in nature. In other words, you're not going to discuss it, but just pretend you have all this evidence I already asked you to provide and what have you provided? Absolutely nothing. Again with the bull(*)(*)(*)(*). If the government is trying so hard to cover up what happened, how does one NOT come to the conclusion the government wasn't behind the attacks? Truthers love to pretend everyone else is as ignorant and gullible as they are. I follow the evidence. So far all you've brought to the table is bull(*)(*)(*)(*). I'm suppose to follow your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) based on your good name and reputation alone? I don't think so. QUOTE=raymondo]I happen to believe that I probably know something close to the full reasons and the severe situation , if not extreme , facing the elite or System . But that is opinion , and , as I said previously , outside the scope of this Topic .[/QUOTE] Not to mention extremely egotistical and ignorant.
This sentence is in itself a preconception. If you think you are not bias you're mistaken. It is an unavoidable aspect of human cognition.
Of course you are right , logically . As individuals we widen our checking processes as far as possible and re-examine hypotheses constantly . But it us not enough to be certain of matters . So we run peer comparisons with independent experts . Brilliant , but still not certainty . Then we try to apply scientific method to obtain 100% proof . In this incident , my belief is that my suggested conclusion , re controlled explosions , is at least 95% acceptable -- the usual accepted criterion statistically , or so I believe ( going back considerable years ) . How is that" Conspiracy"? It simply rests on whether the presence of Nanothermite materials is prime evidence .And , for details critics , the idea that paint in the recorded temperatures broke down in such away as to produce Nanothermite imbued residue is wrong . So I gather . I rest my position , which is far from a burning issue in my personal, business or social lives . It's just like a Chess problem imo
(from post #25) Anti-establishment pundits can be threatened as they have children and grandchildren who can start to have "Accidents" if they don't play ball. http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/3761668/1/ Chomsky's no moron so he knows 9/11 was an inside job. http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144746 Some truthers think he's a sleeper agent which might turn out to be true but I think the most plausible scenario is that some government goons paid him a visit and made him an offer he couldn't refuse.
Then why do these rabid conspiracy sites still litter the Internet? Phil Jayhan at letsrollforums, Jim Fetzer at Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Richard Gage, David Griffin and the rest of them are about as easy to find as anyone. If everything is controlled by the government, why hasn't some "government goon" paid them a visit to "change their mind"? Why haven't their websites disappeared from the Internet?
What kind of babbling nonsense is this? You should have stopped at "Of course you are right." You don't re-examine a hypothesis. You test a hypothesis. The tests either validate or invalidate your hypothesis. From there you form a conclusion. You then re-examine your conclusion and allow others to re-examine your conclusion by attempting to repeat your results. What test did you apply to your hypothesis before you arbitrarily decided that it was 95% acceptable? You don't understand how "re controlled explosions" would require a conspirators to enact? You need to do more then just re-examine your conclusion... How would you test the the idea that thermitic materials were present in dust tested by Jones? I know I would try to initiate a thermite reaction in the materials. Did he ever actually try to get the materials to undergo a thermite reaction? Where's his observations of exactly how energetic his "explosive nanothermite" really is? Was the energy released greater then the energy released by burning the actual formulation of paint said to coat the steel in the towers?
There was no nanothermite to begin with. What Jones and Harrit were playing with was paint chips. We did a brain storming session on this over at the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF.) We came up with the hypothesis that what he had tested was LaClede primer from the floor trusses. We then engaged a forensic chemist who had access to some dust samples from the WTC area, gave him a guideline of what sorts of samples to test and what tests we felt we would need as a bare minimum and took up a collection to pay the expenses of testing. Testing was done by Doctor James Millette. It was paint.
I can see why people would believe. False flag operations have been going on in America since Spanish-American war. Then there was gulf of Tonkin as to Vietnam. So clearly government isn't above such a thing. Then you have the other building dropping. Which c'mon....really? But then there's the obvious other side of this particular scenario. If people planned this to go to war, they would have just planted a WMD in Iraq. A way easier task than 9/11. Also, the government handles every situation with such uselessness we leave every scenario wondering why on earth we have a government to begin with. I don't care if you're talking Waco or Katrina. But then you have the fact a simulation for the exact same scenario was planned for that day? I mean...what are the odds? They know the leader because they found his ID after it fell in perfect condition from a 200' fireball? I mean...really? Too much doesn't add up, but the government can make a situation feel like a conspiracy simply by the way they portray themselves as having stuff handled even when they don't. On a smaller scale, someone gets killed. Police can't find the killer, so they go grab anyone who fits the profile and can say he did it, too give the impression of in control. An inquisitive mind says it is a conspiracy, while the spoon fed masses cheer they caught the suspect. Really both are wrong. The only way to truly change such things is to eliminate the demographic of spoon fed types, or at least bring them down to the minority in size. Then and only then will the government have to truly produce, and when the government has to truly produce, any shady sort of undertaking will truly be a conspiracy and seen from miles away.
You are simply talking detail semantics when you try tub thumping about a Hypothesis being , tested , as opposed to re-examined .In layman terms they are regarded as interchangeable . Pedantry can be so boring . As far as I am concerned , if there are numerous ( over 100?) witness statements that they heard explosions, that is compelling . Equally , experts testified that the way the buildings collapsed could only have come from controlled explosives . Do you know differently ? And how do you know ? The Nanothermite case and evidence is public , as you know , and the research paper was peer reviewed before publication . Nobody has yet found cause to dispute the findings . Do you know differently ? How? Nothing you have said so far appears to change anything I wrote . If you know differently , please reply . But keep calm .
'Nanothermite' was not found at ground zero. A scam artist called some paint 'nanothermite', paid a journal to publish the lie and watched in glee as the ignorant and gullible bought it and spread it around.
Please read what I wrote again. My issue was not with the difference between a test and an examination. My issue was with the difference between a hypothesis and a conclusion. They are most certainly not interchangeable. You formed a hypothesis and then concluded that your hypothesis was 95% acceptable. What test did you perform to arrive at this conclusion? So can strained attempts to appear erudite. This compels what exactly? Have you ever heard the sound steel makes when it is torn? Have you ever heard the sound an elevator makes when it falls hundreds of feet and slams into concrete? Have you ever heard the sound a sealed lead acid battery makes when it is heated to boiling? Have you ever heard the sound of a fire extinguisher makes when it is ruptured by heat? Do these sounds also compel one to believe something? This is called appeal to authority fallacy. Not only do experts think the buildings collapsed due to buckling, they wrote many extensive reports on the subject. Have you read or found fault with any of them? Yes. I read many papers by MIT, Purdue, NIST, and others. These papers are much more compelling. They detail exactly how they arrived at their conclusions, using solid science. This is false on multiple levels. First, Bentham is not a peer reviewed publication. It's a pay to publish publication. This point was well established by a grad student who wrote an algorithm that generates nonsense text. In case you dispute this I'll even link you to a truther source http://www.911blogger.com/node/20378 which validates my claim. Second, Jones' paper was reviewed by Millette and found to be false, as Lefty points out. Here's the paper. Read it yourself. www.ae911truth.org/downloads/documents/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112web.pdf Maybe that's because you're suffering from some of those predispositions you said you didn't suffer from.
Don't worry about it - the 9/11 conspiracy "theories" are simply a reflection of human thought gone horribly wrong; you might as well be trying to decode secret meanings in the Beatles song I Am The Walrus.
Here's a post I made on another thread about thermite. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/246419-nanothermites-role-9-11-a-2.html#post1061186271
FYI for those still arguing about any and all flavours of thermite, there has been a follow up study which has conclusively shown that no thermitic substances were found in the dust, "Conclusions The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite." http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112webHiRes.pdf
Yeah this post of yours is too ignorant to be that of someone of a paid shill that has penetrated this site.we got about at least a half dozen in this forun right now so I dont they would send another,your just living in denial. Its obvious because you are clueless how the government operates. instead of asking all these questions,why dont you read the book DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING,AN ANSWER TO POPULAR MECHANICS AND OTHER DEFENDERS OF THE OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY.the evidence in that book is overwhelming that it was an inside job.nobody has ever debunked it.I know you wont read it though,people in denial only see what they want to see and NEVER take me up on that challenge so I know you wont be the first.all those questions are pretty much answered in that book but I'll add on a little to what he talked about. 1.Like he said,compartmentalization.Obviously these people pick only the most evil and corrupt people to do this.they get paid off so they are willing to keep their mouth shut.Either that or they kill them off once they do their assignment. 2.wrong,they actually have it now where you can set off demolitions without having to do any wiring in sophisticated operations like this. 3.He already answered that as well as I could so no need for me to comment on it. 4.thats a new one I havent heard of.what you should be wondering though is why did some of the highjackers who supposedly did it,turn up alive later on and why was there no passenger manifests of them boarding or any videotape footage of it either? lol 5.He pretty much answered that as well so I wont comment on it either. I have a much BETTER question for you though that your not going to be able to answer which is, 6-If the official version is true, how come nobody got prosecuted for destroying and removing evidence at a crime scene? the paid shills on here always avoid that little fact. 7.if it was just a matter of incompetence from the government which is the official explanation given to us,how come NOBODY lost their jobs or got fired for their imcompetence and got PROMOTED instead? 8.finally you cant get around bld 7.Nobody on here ever has been able to.Bld 7 was not hit by a plane and there were other buildings that were next door neighbors to the buildings MUCH closer to the towers that had far more extensive damage done to them and had fires that were far more severe than bld 7 did yet all those buildings remained standing.lol. ever occur to you they all remained standing because unlike the towers and bld 7,they were not owned by Larry Silverstein.wow what an amazing coincidence,the only three buildings in that area owned by Silverstein did not collapse that day.truely amazing.
