What is a conspiracy theorist?

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I do have tons of evidence that the terrorist did 9/11, it fills books; it is you that has a problem with understanding evidence. You believe lies and fraud. You have not posted one fact but you say 9/11 terrorist did not exist, and you do it without proof or knowing you just said it.

You are challenged on research because you can not state one fact to support the ideas you have not even spelled out. When will you find one fact or tell anyone what you thing happened.

You are the living conspiracy theorist, and you have no facts. When will you tell us what you have.

You may have read Webster Tarpley's book of woo, where he presents no facts and you believe it. Why can an idiot writer make up stuff and you believe and the evidence for 9/11 is just sitting if front of you and you ignore it? (why are you unable to realize WT's book is junk, it is not based on fact, just talk you like to hear)

You must be upset you spent money on Webster's book and it is just junk! When will you realize you have been taken?

Another crock of crap, NUT.

So, you've read Tarpley's book, too, then? You wasted your money on it too? You haven't read it. Yet you critique it. Come on.

I see you're a forum donor. Which means that you have paid more into the 9/11 cottage industry than I have!

 

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I do have tons of evidence that the terrorist did 9/11, it fills books; it is you that has a problem with understanding evidence. You believe lies and fraud. You have not posted one fact but you say 9/11 terrorist did not exist, and you do it without proof or knowing you just said it.

Of course "terrorists" did 9/11!!! The question is, which ones.

 

[A W Smith]

The Massouie trial. Yipes. Sorry, I still have reasonable doubt.

Even though he plead guilty. Provide evidence of his innocence.

 

[fuelair]

Even though he plead guilty. Provide evidence of his innocence.

Keep in mind the basic Law of Proctology: When you deal with anal orifices you just get feces on your hands.

 

[Rawkarma]

I see you're a forum donor. Which means that you have paid more into the 9/11 cottage industry than I have!

Cottage industry? Cute.

Beachnut and the rest of us forum donors' have contributed money which will go toward all the forums, not just the the ones catering for conspiracy theories of 9/11. So, please explain how donating here equates to having: "paid more into the 9/11 cottage industry"?

Before you go criticizing the people that have donated here, how about you put your money (or your parents money) where your mouth is and contribute something?

If not, quit your whining.

 

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Cottage industry? Cute.

Beachnut and the rest of us forum donors' have contributed money which will go toward all the forums, not just the the ones catering for conspiracy theories of 9/11. So, please explain how donating here equates to having: "paid more into the 9/11 cottage industry"?

Before you go criticizing the people that have donated here, how about you put your money (or your parents money) where your mouth is and contribute something?

If not, quit your whining.

Well, I see that you occasionally post to other topics besides conspiracy theories. Beachnut has not, for a long time, if at all.

 

[Rawkarma]

Well, I see that you occasionally post to other topics besides conspiracy theories. Beachnut has not, for a long time, if at all.

You are as confused with the motivation to donate as you are about 9/11 it would seem.

The act of donating is one of selflessness; those that have chosen to donate here have done so for the good of the community.

We all have different tastes and this will logically mean more activity in some forums than in others.

Beachnut has donated, as have I and many others here, and the money will be used for the good of the community as a whole.

 

[JimBenArm]

No, Mr Irony; you're making fun of somebody else, who wants ALL the facts on the table. In your ironic little signature.

Well, it still is rather ironic, don't you think, that the ones who claim to want all the facts on the table dismiss the ones who actually have the facts, try to pass mythology and wishful thinking off as fact, and think that lies and distortions are the same as fact?

Of course, if there are facts that you have that are off the table, well, put them up here! Let's see them! Or are you just pontificating again?

You still look so cute when you're mad!

 

[Gravy]

Without Rights, wait until you get the "what people described as explosions were really bodies hitting the pavement" response. I actually got that here a couple months ago, from a well-respected member here.

No, you got links to explanations of a whole variety of explosive sounds that the first responders heard and described. Why didn't you mention that, scg?

Please respond. I'm very curious to know how you justify your statement.

 

[The Almond]

Of course you can.

Perhaps you could point to a logical textbook that claims you can prove a negative. Failing that, perhaps you could prove that the spirits of Hopi Indians were not the cause of the WTC towers collapse.

A extremely simple way would be to blow up a building with explosives and time how long it takes to collapse.

And what negative would that prove?

If it is close to freefall speed, which it obviously would be since all the supports get blown out and leave the building suspended in air, then the negative can be answered.

This statement astounds me. Please take the time to educate yourself on logic before continuing to make such remarks.

I don't think this is even a issue worth arguing. Are you actually saying that it is unlikely for a imploded building to fall at freefall speed.

Straw man.

I mean I would do a search and find videos of demolitions and time the collapse then firgure out what freefall should of been using the laws of gravity., then compare the two actions but that would be a waste of time since common sense would tell you that a imploded building will fall at freefall speed.

To quote my old buddy Belz, "Common sense, you mean that thing that gave us space shuttles and antibiotics?"

This is a nickpicking argument where people are trying to make me prove something that is so obvious that it makes my head hurt that people would still argue against it. Is this what skepticism is?

Yes. The onus is on you to prove each one of your statements with facts, logic and reasoning. You also will have to learn to produce an argument without resorting to the same logical fallacies most teenagers can recognize.

 

[Without Rights]

I would like you to show me 3 more unique building in the world first.

I want you to show me a building that has not failed in fire when it is not fought. Please include 10,000 gallons of jet fuel as the fire starter. And throw in a blast or impact equal to 1300 to 2200 pounds of TNT.

WTC7 had fuel in it and heavy generators in it. How much fuel?

Fires not fought as in WTC1, 2, and 7, will have the building fail.

Countless examples are out there of fire destroying buildings. If the WTC 7 had a concrete core it may have stood. WTC 1 and 2 if they had concrete cores they may have stood. Sorry that steel fails in fire but the examples of steel failure in fire are understood all over the world except for the fact challenged truth movement.

Building 7 was not a tube within a tube like the towers. It was a traditional steel framed building. The only difference was the Con-Edison substation powerplant and fuel tanks you mention. However Fema said 20,000 gallons had been recovered from the 2 tanks which hold 11,500 gallons each.

 

[Without Rights]

Wrong again. We have 19 terrorist who did pilot 4 planes into the US with intent to bring terrorism to us. 3 of 4 made their targets but the passengers of 93 beat them, and saved further insult.

Terrrorist 75 percent, we were 100 percent when we knew the rules.

You are a zero fact CTer. You present zero facts and cannot even read to understand the real evidence. Who piloted the planes? You can not answer because as you have shown you can not comprehend simple facts on the WTC, how can you take evidence and make a conclusion. Go over to the LCF where you may be praised for you insight.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?act=idx

Or the even dumber pilots for truth, you will be a god on 9/11 junk!

http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Truth/index.php?act=idx

Both web sites reward the terminally stupid with high praise.

The 19 terrorist are not a CT, they were the conspiracy! You are having great problems with facts and evidence vs fraud and lies.

So what is the evidence that directly points to a specific group that makes the 19 Arab theory fact?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Building 7 was not a tube within a tube like the towers. It was a traditional steel framed building. The only difference was the Con-Edison substation powerplant and fuel tanks you mention. However Fema said 20,000 gallons had been recovered from the 2 tanks which hold 11,500 gallons each.

Building 7 had a core of 24 steel columns and an outer frame of 57 steel columns, with uninterrupted floor spaces between them, very similar to the towers and not at all like a traditional steel framed building. Check the plans in the thread on it. There were five large tanks (two of 12,000 gallons and three of 6,000 gallons) and two of the 6,000 gallon tanks were found to be empty. But you scored one "right" about the ConEdison substation, so you didn't quite live up to your screen name.

Dave

 

[Dave Rogers]

So what is the evidence that directly points to a specific group that makes the 19 Arab theory fact?

Separate facts. Evidence from skyphone calls from the planes, given by eyewitnesses, identifies the specific hijackers. Documentary evidence from the passenger manifests (for some reason the investigators didn't work from a victims list) gives names. DNA evidence establishes prior movements and is connected to prior eyewitness accounts of the suspects. 19 Arabs are proven by all that. Determining the organisation they worked for is a separate matter.

Dave

 

[Pardalis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu6pZ6BPSuo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBa252lC4uA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ighjUx7H03I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfuZFU39XKI

 

[Pardalis]

I can prove that a building CAN be brought down in the same manner seen on 9/11 with explosives.

Still waiting.

 

[Without Rights]

What "concrete supports"?

Web joists 80 cm tall connected the core to the perimeter at each story. Concrete slabs were poured over these joists to form the floors. The concrete had steel running through it, bombs could be used to blast this concrete away from the steel joists.

Explain how thermite/ate can cut horizontally.

Title: [SIZE=+1]Thermite charge[/SIZE] Document Type and Number: United States Application 20060266204 Link to this Page: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20060266204.html Abstract: The present invention provides for cutting operations using linear thermite charges; the charges cut one dimensional or two dimensional geometric shapes; the invention is useful for structure entry or demolition.
Linear = Horizontal

Can you present a single firefighter who was there that day who believes the buildings were demolished? Because a 110 story building undergoing a catastrophic collapse will certainly go "boom, boom, boom" without any explosives whatsoever.

auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr, “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too,”
he also says;
"emergency radios were buzzing with information about bombs being detonated inside the World Trade Center towers."
He also says;
“It’s amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs,” said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9-11."
Story here; http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html

NY Fireman Lou Cacchioli who says the 9/11 Commission twisted his words. "I finally walked out. They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn't let me do that, I walked out."

 

[Without Rights]

Separate facts. Evidence from skyphone calls from the planes, given by eyewitnesses, identifies the specific hijackers. Documentary evidence from the passenger manifests (for some reason the investigators didn't work from a victims list) gives names. DNA evidence establishes prior movements and is connected to prior eyewitness accounts of the suspects. 19 Arabs are proven by all that. Determining the organisation they worked for is a separate matter.

Dave

I am having trouble finding this. Can you source tyou info please?

 

[rwguinn]

Web joists 80 cm tall connected the core to the perimeter at each story. Concrete slabs were poured over these joists to form the floors. The concrete had steel running through it, bombs could be used to blast this concrete away from the steel joists.

"could be Used"
You know, we could have soume soup, if we had a pot. And if anybody has some water. And if somebody could come up with some ingredients.

Title: [SIZE=+1]Thermite charge[/SIZE] Document Type and Number: United States Application 20060266204 Link to this Page: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20060266204.html Abstract: The present invention provides for cutting operations using linear thermite charges; the charges cut one dimensional or two dimensional geometric shapes; the invention is useful for structure entry or demolition.

already debunked-use the search function

Linear = Horizontal

Sorry, but "linear"= first order equation--a straight line.
It doesn't have to be horizontal, and frequently isn't
submitted for "Stundie"

auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr, “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too,”
he also says;
"emergency radios were buzzing with information about bombs being detonated inside the World Trade Center towers."
He also says;
“It’s amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs,” said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9-11."
Story here; http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.html

NY Fireman Lou Cacchioli who says the 9/11 Commission twisted his words. "I finally walked out. They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn't let me do that, I walked out."

Link to a non-nazi, less biased "source" please?
If the above are indeed true, they will appear in more than 1 place

 

[Dave Rogers]

I am having trouble finding this. Can you source tyou info please?

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

Chapter 1 and references therein.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2808599.stm

describes the DNA analysis. I don't have a direct link to a primary source.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/OG00010.html

gives the flight manifests.

Dave