What Truthers Believe

Discussion in '9/11' started by Shinebox, May 4, 2018.

  1. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2012/11/16/what_do_9_11_truthers_believe.html

    link so as not to violate TOS ... pretty damn good summation of the irrational and lunatic fringe ... the impossibility of such a conspiracy evades the truther ...

    I enjoy my life without the paranoia that the gubmint is out to get me ... I still have my guns and have yet to see or experience any attempt to take them from me ... I'm retired now and took the penalty on my 401 but don't give a **** because most of my money was safe in government bonds and t bills ... Thanks Uncle Sam!!! ...

    ooh .. maybe I'm part of the big conspiracy ... :banana: ...

    like one here who likes to constantly spam a video and another who creates threads dedicated to the non field opinions of clueless gray beard academics, I inject common sense ...

    I would die for a troofer to even remotely address the silence ...
     
    Bowerbird and JakeStarkey like this.
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BTW, that emoji is also just your speed. The resemblance is uncanny.
     
  3. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
  4. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    But the NIST said this:

    https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation

    So you have to go back to 2012 to find something stupid?

    psik
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  5. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I didn't quote NIST ... just somebody with enough common sense to not believe in truther fairy tales ...
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2018
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The "pancake" collapse re-visited, now there's one guy with "enough common sense to not believe in fairy tales" and another who swears by it. Those "clueless gray beard academics" who actually do the research and publish peer reviewed technical papers viewed by hundreds of thousands of colleagues don't hold a candle to 2 anonymous dudes who still believe the towers "pancaked". You're right about one thing though, this does deserve its own thread because you never know, it could still be the pancake theory despite the evidence.

    Didn't you forget something? :banana:
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2018
  7. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The first quote is from the link you supplied.

    I searched for the NIST quote that I knew about to demonstrate that you were linking to BS. I thought that was obvious.
     
  8. help3434

    help3434 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2014
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    I have never seen the "controlled demolition" types explain how all the explosives were brought in and rigged without anybody noticing. It is utterly absurd.
     
    David Landbrecht likes this.
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The burden of proof always rests with the claimant. The US government has never scientifically/forensically/legitimately explained how 3 buildings were destroyed in the fashion they were destroyed on 9/11 by planes/damage/fire or a combination. Science has proven that the US government's official explanation (in the case of WTC7) and official non-explanation (in the case of the twin towers) is seriously scientifically/logically flawed and therefore impossible (in the case of WTC7) and simply non-existent (in the case of the twin towers). It is utterly absurd.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2018
  10. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    20,442
    Likes Received:
    7,473
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was unaware that trutherism is still a thing. OK, truthers' minds don't work well at all. And I will leave it at that.
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So conversely you're saying liarism is a "thing" and that only liars' minds "work well". Yeah I see that all over the place.
     
  12. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    How they EASILY Rigged the WTC Towers for Demolition (WATCH THIS)
     
  13. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    how many views does it take for you to get paid Scott? much have you made for the thousands of times you have flooded and spammed numerous forums with The New Pearl Harbor? ...

    I admire you Scott as an entrepreneur ... well done sir ...
     
  14. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I have never seen the "airplanes did it" types explain how the north tower came down in less than 30 seconds while taking the conservation of momentum into account. OH NO! That would mean knowing the distributions of steel and concrete.

    No, no not Physics!
     
  15. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    20,442
    Likes Received:
    7,473
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since almost all physicists say the truthers are full of nonsense, I will leave it at that.
     
  16. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So provide some links to these "all physicists". And they said what about the Conservation of Momentum?
     
  17. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    20,442
    Likes Received:
    7,473
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope, because not one of you truthers have offered anything that actual science supports. This belongs in the conspiracy thread forum.
     
  18. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yeah, people too dumb to comprehend the Conservation of Momentum can just throw around the words "truther" and "science" but can't find the physicists they claim denigrate "truthers".

    So blather on while saying nothing.
     
  19. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    20,442
    Likes Received:
    7,473
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can't find real physicists to support the truther conundrum.
     
  20. help3434

    help3434 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2014
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Exactly. If you claim it was a controlled demolition you need to show evidence and explain how demolitions could be installed in huge towers in the center of the largest city in the U.S.A. without anyone noticing.
     
    David Landbrecht likes this.
  21. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Last edited: May 11, 2018
  22. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48


    I have no idea what YOU regard as "real" in relation to physicists. Since you obviously have your cranium in your anal orifice I am not worried about it. What I do find interesting is that so many real physicists are saying NOTHING! I have yet to hear of any real physicists trying to refute David Chandler. So much silence is highly suspect about such a simple physics problem.
     
  23. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    20,442
    Likes Received:
    7,473
    Trophy Points:
    113
    David Chandler is a real physicist? Who knew?

    abgg2q.jpg.gif
     
  24. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,525
    Likes Received:
    2,303
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What truthers believe?

    A more accurate question would be "what do truthers NOT believe?"

    Simple answer: they do not believe the official story because they know it cannot be true.
     
    jack4freedom likes this.
  25. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not about the above although it may be part of it. If the claim is that it was a controlled demolition, proof is required by the claimant, period.

    Again, the official claim is that planes/damage/fire or a combination, rendered with with some specificity, destroyed 3 towers on 9/11 in the manner seen by eyewitnesses and video. However, no official proof has ever been given that makes any sense on a legitimate scientific/forensic/logical basis. The ONLY mechanism known and proven to be able to cause such an event is controlled demolition. So if it wasn't a controlled demolition, proof is absolutely required for any other claimed possible cause.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.

Share This Page