Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you take them one at a time, you can do it.

It's not my fault, you're the only one to blame for letting these very pertinent and interesting unfinished discussions accumulate.

You want to get to the truth about 9/11 don't you?
 
Here, I'll even help you out.

Let's start with the first one:
What kind of evidence would satisfy you?
Click to expand...
Remember, we were talking about the DNA evidence at the Pentagon.
 
Pardalis said:
If you take them one at a time, you can do it.

It's not my fault, you're the only one to blame for letting these very pertinent and interesting unfinished discussions accumulate.

You want to get to the truth about 9/11 don't you?
Click to expand...

I'm to blame for people asking me the same leading questions over and over again and then bumping threads with large blocks of text?

Is this what you guys call debunking?
 
Start with the first one.

This is a discussion forum. Discuss.

ETA: we'll walk through them at your speed, promise. But you have to answer. That's the only condition.
 
Last edited:
You know I like you, Red. You are intelligent, and polite, I wouldn't spend so much time on any other truther. You have the capacity to see beyond your denial. I genuinely want to help you understand.
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
You know I like you, Red. You are intelligent, and polite, I wouldn't spend so much time on any other truther. You have the capacity to see beyond your denial. I genuinely want to help you understand.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your sincerity, but that's a bit presumptuous. You're assuming that you have, dare I say it, the twoof!

Perhaps what you find likeable is that I don't pretend to know the truth and have the same curiosity and interest in history and investigative journalism that you have, and that I imagine many people on this forum have.
 
RedIbis said:
I appreciate your sincerity, but that's a bit presumptuous. You're assuming that you have, dare I say it, the twoof!
Click to expand...

The points and questions asked in this thread that you avoid are pretty easy to answer if you are honest with yourself. Even though this will sound harsh, I mean this without malice, but to anyone your refusal to answer these very simple questions about logic and your own criteria for proof shows that you are in denial about your own views, you have a cognitive dissonance between what you want to believe, and what is reality. You cannot admit to yourself that you can't even meet your own standard for evidence.

Like that Columbia shuttle analogy we were asking you about a few months ago, the analogy is pertinent, and yet you handwaved it away and never acknowledged it. That habit of yours can be irritating at times

I know I can be sometimes impatient with you, but it's because I know you can do better than this. If you only were willing to answer our questions, face you own contradictions, instead of always running away, we might get somewhere.

ETA: also, I should add, that one of the things that are irritating about your posting, is that you are willing to endorse the most profoundly distasteful propositions without actually doing it. Like for example the DNA thing. What you are suggesting is that the DNA was faked, planted or tampered with. Of course, you will say that you never said that. You would be right, you didn't say that in those words, but what you are implying inevitably comes to that conclusion. If we follow your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, that is precisely what you are saying, and yet, you are unwilling to admit it (all of this, mind you, without a shred of evidence to back it up, just your unwillingness to support anything about the official story). Do you understand why this is infuriating sometimes?

What you call "leading questions", are in fact really what this discussion should be about. Not bickering over details of how hot the steel was or how column 79 was never found (none of us are engineers), what we should be discussing as laypeople is if our arguments can follow through, if our reasoning itself is valid and logical. That is all the questions I quoted and keep bumping are about, trying to figure out if your reasoning can make sense on its own. What we're killing ourselves trying to show you is that it doesn't.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
I appreciate your sincerity, but that's a bit presumptuous. You're assuming that you have, dare I say it, the twoof!

Perhaps what you find likeable is that I don't pretend to know the truth and have the same curiosity and interest in history and investigative journalism that you have, and that I imagine many people on this forum have.
Click to expand...

Wow,

You know, I am still a semi-noob here. However, I have come to the conclusion in my rather short tenure here, that you are totally, and completely, full of it. Never assume to know what other people find "likeable", especially when it comes to what you think people "like", about you.

L.
 
Last edited:
CompusMentus said:
Bill, I took the time to have a look at the MyFox New York website. It took me about 30 seconds to google it.

Being the charitable guy I am, I'll help you out. On THIS PAGE I found something you may be interested in.

Wind it forward to near the end Bill (to about 14:50) oh my.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/344914ac00403c0704.jpg[/qimg]


It's the Chopper 5 video Bill, right there for all the world to see. Do you see it Bill? Fox haven't "replaced" anything.

Who is "purging" what? Who is hiding the "penetration"? Not Fox.

Do you understand now why I didn't want to "evaluate" what you stated? You are wrong Bill.


Compus
Click to expand...

Quoted for Bill, who has yet to address it.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm to blame for people asking me the same leading questions over and over again and then bumping threads with large blocks of text?

Is this what you guys call debunking?
Click to expand...

Is this what YOU GUYS call proving 9/11 was an inside job? I know that's what you would like it to sound like. But in reality, it just sounds like more truther crybaby excuses. Do you ever actually articulate any real facts? Do you ever actually answer anyone's legitimate question with something other than a dodge and an overused, sarcastic excuse? How in the heck do you ever expect to bring the perpetrators to justice in a court of law with these lame responses? I'm only asking questions.

L.

P.S. I suppose you are going to tell us that none of these points are valid because "you are not a truther", right?
 
Last edited:
Lupie said:
Is this what YOU GUYS call proving 9/11 was an inside job? I know that's what you would like it to sound like. But in reality, it just sounds like more truther crybaby excuses. Do you ever actually articulate any real facts? Do you ever actually answer anyone's legitimate question with something other than a dodge and an overused, sarcastic excuse? How in the heck do you ever expect to bring the perpetrators to justice in a court of law with these lame responses? I'm only asking questions.

L.

P.S. I suppose you are going to tell us that none of these points are valid because "you are not a truther", right?
Click to expand...

What's a truther?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom