ThePentaCON releases trailer

Lyte Trip said:
Steve Riskis?

What about him?

He was either fooled like virtually everyone else or he is a liar.

I believe he was fooled.
Click to expand...
So the pictures are fake? I thought you considered eyewitness testimony to be the be all end all of proof. Now are you turning into a brain dead fundamentalist and claiming his eyewitness testimony is wrong because it doesn't fit your bs video?
 
Pardalis said:
How was he fooled?

And what about your eyewitnesses? Could they have been fooled?
Click to expand...
C'mon Pardalis...remember the Bermas law of inverse truth regarding 9/11 witnesses says that eyewitness testimony that conflicts with known woowoo video is either fakery or lies.
 
~enigma~ said:
C'mon Pardalis...remember the Bermas law of inverse truth regarding 9/11 witnesses says that eyewitness testimony that conflicts with known woowoo video is either fakery or lies.
Click to expand...

... until such point that said witness is embarrassingly debunked, and then they are determined to be a disinfo agent.
 
~enigma~ said:
So the pictures are fake? I thought you considered eyewitness testimony to be the be all end all of proof. Now are you turning into a brain dead fundamentalist and claiming his eyewitness testimony is wrong because it doesn't fit your bs video?
Click to expand...

Fake pictures?

I never said that!

He took the best pre-collapse photos that exist next to Jason Ingersol.
 
Totovader said:
... until such point that said witness is embarrassingly debunked, and then they are determined to be a disinfo agent.
Click to expand...
Shhh...one more slip and I revoke your NWO membership and that means you must return your decoder ring :)
 
Totovader said:
How predictably... NOT AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION
Click to expand...

No matter how much you try to make it one.......this is not a "debate".

This is about truth and justice.

If you are a true critical thinker in an honest quest for truth the testimony we present will shake the very foundations of your beliefs.
 
Let's try this again...

Lyte Trip said:
But you are incorrect in your assumption that we won't post our information here.

1. We won't need to as the members here will post a link to it the very moment it is released. ("Smoking Gun Version" will be DEFINITELY released next week. I promise!)

2. I will most certainly return here for discussions/debate as I firmly believe there are SOME honest members here who will admit that this testimony has convinced them that the plane flew on the north side of the station.
Click to expand...

Totovader said:
This does not address my criticism on your lack of an argument- it merely shows that you are intentionally withholding your argument, which is something I've already stated.

I sincerely doubt that 2 will occur. If it does, I will be thoroughly surprised. If you had such evidence, you would post it now. In addition, you may hang around for a few laughs- but you won't be willing to support your position after a few minutes. I am confident it will be debunked, and your "evidence" easily countered, but I can guarantee I will still be here.

I'm not just basing that prediction on what people of your ideological position always do, I'm also basing it on personal experience: you abandoned a very critical discussion some time ago, and left your buddy flapping in the wind. It wasn't too much longer before he disappeared as well. Fact of the matter is- you had to. Faced with a real contradiction of your evidence, you will run away.

Allow me to prove it to you:

What evidence would contradict your fly-over theory? Would scientific data convince you that your theory was wrong?
Click to expand...

Lyte Trip said:
How predictably tiresome.

Poppers law of falsifiability!
:rolleyes:

The testimony will cause the jury to rule decisively.
Click to expand...


Your lack of an answer here really is telling. Do you want to try again?
 
Pardalis said:
Hold on, let's be clear: your eyewitnesses say that?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Just as emphatically as they say the plane was on the north of the station.

Believe me....there is no way you will be able demonize these witnesses.

They have zero motive to lie because they do not believe in a conspiracy.
 
Lyte Trip said:
Fake pictures?

I never said that!

He took the best pre-collapse photos that exist next to Jason Ingersol.
Click to expand...
No you didn't say that but you strangely avoided saying anything about the pictures. However you said he was fooled and that means he never took pictures within one minute of the collapse nor did he see flight 77. Stop being an ignoranus.

Ask nicely and I will tell you what an ignoranus is but I'm not sure it could penetrate your bozone layer.
 
Lyte Trip said:
No matter how much you try to make it one.......this is not a "debate".

This is about truth and justice.

If you are a true critical thinker in an honest quest for truth the testimony we present will shake the very foundations of your beliefs.
Click to expand...

Pretty simple concept, here Lyte: in order to shake the foundations of MY beliefs, it would need to be scientifically proven. It would need evidence. I am absolutely a critical thinker- so to then turn around and claim that this is about "truth and justice" and not a debate is immediately contradictory.

If you are incapable of debating it, I can understand- but it's not that difficult of a question. And to use your words- if you are a true critical thinker in an honest quest for truth, you would already have an answer to my question, wouldn't you?

Either answer the question or come up with a logical reason to deny logic...
 
Lyte Trip said:
Yes.

Just as emphatically as they say the plane was on the north of the station.

Believe me....there is no way you will be able demonize these witnesses.

They have zero motive to lie because they do not believe in a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

So Lyte, do you think the C-130 remote piloted the airliner toward the pentagon, and somehow it went off course north of the citgo, but the show had to go on and they hoped no one would notice?
 
Lyte Trip said:
Not only could......they most certainly WERE fooled.

They believe the plane hit the building.
Click to expand...

Pardalis said:
Hold on, let's be clear: your eyewitnesses say that?
Click to expand...

Lyte Trip said:
Yes.

Just as emphatically as they say the plane was on the north of the station.
Click to expand...

:eek: Woah!

OK, let's recap.

You say you have eyewitness testimony that prove that flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon, but these very same eyewitnesses say that they saw the plane hit the building?

So basically, you just pick and choose whatever is in their testimony that fits your theory, and leave out the rest and say "they were fooled".

Come on man, either they were fooled, or they weren't.

Now which is it?
 
Lyte Trip said:
Nope.

If you feel the need to ask me that question again after you see the testimony then I will answer you.
Click to expand...

Seeing it would not make a difference. In fact- the resistance you're providing would indicate that you are aware of your bias, and are unable to comprehend any sort of an answer without contradicting yourself, or just running away.

I really hate to hound you here- because I'm quite sure you're going to be unable to answer. But you cannot claim- on the one hand- that you're interested in truth and justice et al, and at the same time reject logic and reason- the very tools you have to find truth and justice.

It's self-defeating, Lyte. You know this because we've been through this before. What was your response previously? Oh yeah, to run away.

Don't run away this time- answer the question to the best of your ability.
 
Totovader said:
Pretty simple concept, here Lyte: in order to shake the foundations of MY beliefs, it would need to be scientifically proven. It would need evidence. I am absolutely a critical thinker- so to then turn around and claim that this is about "truth and justice" and not a debate is immediately contradictory.

If you are incapable of debating it, I can understand- but it's not that difficult of a question. And to use your words- if you are a true critical thinker in an honest quest for truth, you would already have an answer to my question, wouldn't you?

Either answer the question or come up with a logical reason to deny logic...
Click to expand...

I am not interested in debating a poodle.

I am interested in truth.

I called every previously published witness I could find numbers for and knocked on the doors of everyone in the neighborhood of the flight path in a quest for this truth.

I found it.

If you don't believe me that's fine but the least you could do is respect my efforts and agree to view the testimony before pulling out all of your textbook debate tactics.

Fair enough?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom