Conspiracy Theories are a Conspiracy!

[Sabretooth]

When you think of anyone believing a conspiracy theory you may as well think that they are a weirdo.

But people that spend endless amount of time debunking the weirdo are actually the weirdest of them all. Do y'all really have nothing better to do? I would say get a job but I'm starting to believe that debunking 9/11 conspiracy is some people's job here at jref.

Being obsessed with conspiracy is one thing. Being obsessed with debunking weirdos is... to put it mildly... completely insane.

I look at "debunking" as a public service.

CTer's go out of their way to nitpick some half-hearted piece of crap to further a need to believe that the Guberment/NWO/NATO is out to get them.

Debunkers go out of their way to find facts and evidence that supports the science, math, and physics.

In the event that some lurker does happen to drive by the JREF looking for facts, it's better to show them that they can get info from real sources and not only the tin-foilers...

 

[Sabretooth]

but if you don't have the skill set to debunk engineering arguments why bother. that's where 9/11 conspiracy is heading - all engineering talk.

If you're suggesting Dick Gage and his group of leg-huggers has more than a snowball's chance in hell opposing real-life engineering...then the truthers need prepare themselves for many, many, many more years of fail.

 

[riptowtan]

but if you don't have the skill set to debunk engineering arguments why bother. that's where 9/11 conspiracy is heading - all engineering talk.

Most of the mistakes the truthers make come down to logical fallacies and erroneous claims. These can be understood by any lay person. Sure there are some technical issues that experts in engineering can debate, but one could debunk 9/11 conspiracies with just logic alone.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

most of the mistake that debunkers make is accepting that controlled demolition isn't at all possible

 

[carlitos]

Hi Patriots4Truth, and welcome to the forum.

Do you have a hypothesis about how controlled demolition could have brought down one more more of the towers, given the observed events that day? Including video, seismic record, sound, etc.

Thanks!

 

[Patriots4Truth]

can you entirely rule out controlled demolition?

Thanks!

ps. this is a yes or no question.

 

[carlitos]

Answering a question with a question? Even a yes / no question? This is annoying.

My answer to your question is "yes." What's your answer to my question?

ETA - If the answer is "yes," and you do have a hypothesis, here is the thread to post it.

 

[BigAl]

can you entirely rule out controlled demolition?

Thanks!

ps. this is a yes or no question.

yes

 

[Patriots4Truth]

incorrect, try again

 

[Patriots4Truth]

you guys would have to be pretty biased to the original story if you can entirely rule out controlled demolition because it is just not possible

 

[carlitos]

I think that my fuse is shorter than it used to be. If Patriots4Truth wants to stop trolling, he / she is welcome to do so.

 

[TexasJack]

you guys would have to be pretty biased to the original story if you can entirely rule out controlled demolition

I guess there's a chance Elvis is still alive too, but to prove it, you would have to provide evidence. Show us why a CD can't be ruled out. Let's hear your hypothesis and support it with evidence.

 

[T.A.M.]

most of the mistake that debunkers make is accepting that controlled demolition isn't at all possible

1. Stop the "I have only been at this a week" crap. Your experience as a truther is showing...you are no newb...just confess so we can get it out of the way.

2. I for one have never said it "isn't at all" possible. Just like I have never said that it "isn't at all" possible we have been visited by aliens. What I have said is that no one, NO ONE, has ever shown me a single piece of credible evidence that CD occurred.

TAM

 

[riptowtan]

incorrect, try again

Lol. You asked for a yes or no question, but then rejected the answer. I would agree that you can rule out controlled demolition on 9/11 in this observable universe. Maybe in some fantasy world. There is simply no evidence or even a plausible scenario in which a controlled demolition occurred on 9/11. It takes some time and explanation to understand why it didn't happen, but you asked for a yes or no answer. There are plenty of internet resources and books you can read about 9/11, and plenty of knowledgeable people here. What you are arguing is old and still baseless.
Yes we can rule out controlled demolition.

 

[T.A.M.]

can you entirely rule out controlled demolition?

Thanks!

ps. this is a yes or no question.

Can you rule out unicorns did it? Can you rule out aliens did it? Can you rule out the russians did it? Can you rule out that this life we live is not entirely a dream?

Please...this is the WEAKEST form of argument.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

you guys would have to be pretty biased to the original story if you can entirely rule out controlled demolition because it is just not possible

can you calculate the exact value of Pi?
is there a finite number of pieces a pie can be cut into?

stop your silly argument.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Here is what you can do, as others have pointed out...

You can rule it so improbable, that for sane, logical, reasonable people, you have effectively ruled it out...this is the case with CD and the towers.

TAM

 

[Chuck Guiteau]

but if you don't have the skill set to debunk engineering arguments why bother. that's where 9/11 conspiracy is heading - all engineering talk.

That's where you're wrong,P4T. Debates of engineering in regards to a criminal conspiracy are only relevant after you establish that a conspiracy took place to begin with, or at least provide the necessary elements to establish a prima facie case.
Otherwise, you might as well be arguing over the ballistic path of a fatal rifle bullet before you've even established that a homicide occured. It is exactly the same as debating the mechanics of warp drive; an interesting exercise in mental masturbation, but not applicable to the real world.

And establishing a theory that transcends the officially recognized explanation is a skill set I do not believe you possess.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

actually I have signed onto a "conspiracy theory".
the one posted here: WTC 7's compartmented demolition collapse sequence reveals human intervention.

Several posts long. I doubt that debunkers will read all of LaBTop's posts and references. Their loss.

 

[Patriots4Truth]

That's where you're wrong,P4T. Debates of engineering in regards to a criminal conspiracy are only relevant after you establish that a conspiracy took place to begin with, or at least provide the necessary elements to establish a prima facie case.
Otherwise, you might as well be arguing over the ballistic path of a fatal rifle bullet before you've even established that a homicide occured. It is exactly the same as debating the mechanics of warp drive; an interesting exercise in mental masturbation, but not applicable to the real world.

And establishing a theory that transcends the officially recognized explanation is a skill set I do not believe you possess.

the engineering debates can determine whether NIST's final report has errors or is omitting very important information. it could determine whether a criminal investigation into 9/11 is necessary. <that in itself is why it is the most important thing to debate