Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[The Platypus]

There should be an emoticon of a laughing dog actually dying of laughter. Are these twoofers allowed out on their own?

There should be such an emoticon, I had to take a few deep breaths after laughing that one off...

Not letting them out on their own would surely be a step forward. They seem to always forget the fact that noone is going up to them, they are the ones trying to push their crap on everyone else.

They are the ones that come here, and they are the ones obsessively trolling the internet, even standing on street corners yelling and giving out pamphlets to relentlessly try to recruit any vulnerable mind they can.

They pop up here and there acting and talking crazy, using juvenile ploys, like this old "wooo you're scared" and "we are so great they are out to get us" crap.

It's all apart of the standard dichotomy that cults all play. They and they alone are special because they have "the truth" that noone in reality can see but them. Which usually involves some evil and powerful boogieman out to get us all. If your in the cult, you're infallible and superior, your saved, you defeat the boogieman. But if you aren't in the cult and don't play along then your demonized, lost and you will suffer. If you think that's crazy, it's because it's the boogieman has you fooled because he is out to stop "the truth" from being known... Standard stuff that is the basis of most religions and cults...

 

[NoahFence]

If not, then we must add all the people working at the secret airfield where a remote-controlled 757 took off empty

..and the people who witnessed it. Those things aren't small. AFAIK, the only airports capable of supporting them are in large population centers?

 

[tmd2_1]

I will address you, because I believe you are intelligent, and perhaps open minded. Above all you have been more respectful then 90% of the posters here. So I appreciate that. Look at these previous posts, simply just trying paint an impossible picture, none of it's worth addressing. Whoever wishes can read through the posts and see what I said about who could be or not be involved. I will answer jayheedness on his one question, because I believe it to be a decent question, and will respond when ready.

Anyway getting to your point. I never said any such thing about you. Only you know what your real views are. My point about, against the mainstream...is that it is difficult for someone (anyone) to do so. I had a very hard time with it. There has been a very concerted effort to create an atmosphere that everyone believes the official story in 9/11. To question it in unpatriotic, disrespectful to the victims families. I believe it is the exact opposite of this. It is the truest sense of patriotism, our founding fathers made it quite clear they wanted the citizens to rise up against tyrannical governments/leaders. I believe we have a duty to find out exactly what happened that day. In terms of disrespecting the victims, again I believe it to be the exact opposite. If what happened on that was not as presented, again we have a duty to find out who did it. What family member would be angry about wanting to make sure we know everything that happened that day? Even if the official story turned out to be true.

There has also been an effort to paint all conspiracy theorists as "loons" You know tin foil hat wearing cult fanatics. They haven't gotten anything published in a respectable journal. How they can possibly be right? There has been a very concentrated effort with this.

They have an agenda of painting this very large and impossible conspiracy. A clear example...is saying the FBI has been implicated. When even if one thinks some at the FBI had something to do with it (I personally believe the FBI had next to nothing to do with it) they make it sound like you are saying the whole FBI was in on it.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, it is very hard for an individual to make that mental leap. They don't want to think about if the official story is not true, what does that mean? It is a very scary thought. It is more comforting to believe the official story of 9/11.

Look through this thread, and other threads you will see examples of all this. This is what I mean about pressure to go against mainstream.

Look at my words, and look at the proceeding posts. I write exactly what they are going to do and they do it anyway. They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works. You first need to find out exactly what happened and then work backwards. With 9/11 I don't believe that has been done. It will be very difficult to do now as most of the evidence is gone. But some of us try. Watch the replies to do this..it will be something like we know exactly what happened only kooks don't.

 

[DGM]

tmd2_1 :

Want to try something fun? Let's make this a little more realistic, You present your case for the prosecution and we will cast "reasonable doubt".

This is more realistic because most of your "evidence" does not actually pertain to any of the players in the "official story".


tmd2_1, DO YOU HAVE A CASE?

 

[DC]

Look at my words, and look at the proceeding posts. I write exactly what they are going to do and they do it anyway. They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works. You first need to find out exactly what happened and then work backwards. With 9/11 I don't believe that has been done. It will be very difficult to do now as most of the evidence is gone. But some of us try. Watch the replies to do this..it will be something like we know exactly what happened only kooks don't.

we know exactly what happened only kooks don't.

 

[The Platypus]

Look at my words, and look at the proceeding posts. I write exactly what they are going to do and they do it anyway.

The devil made me do it... Get it...



I doubt you are going to fool many but the most mentally vulnerable with this BS. But then it's the mentally vulnerable you are hoping to find and convert.

What you wrote was a classic mechanism, told you by the cult to counteract the fact that most people can see your nonsense for what it is. So that when you go out and spew delusions and act crazy, as you have done, you won't be influenced by people who say your spewing delusions and acting crazy. Lest you begin to doubt as the biggest enemy of every cult is doubt.

Just look at you, you came here... You go to a skeptics forum, of all places, and act like you are at war with the forum, vilifying anyone who doubts your cult and resists your attempts to convert.

Gee

 

[Craig4]

Look at my words, and look at the proceeding posts. I write exactly what they are going to do and they do it anyway. They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works. You first need to find out exactly what happened and then work backwards. With 9/11 I don't believe that has been done. It will be very difficult to do now as most of the evidence is gone. But some of us try. Watch the replies to do this..it will be something like we know exactly what happened only kooks don't.

The FBI did that. They started with the planes flying into the buildings and worked backwards from there. That's how they found the hijackers.

 

[Edx]

@tmd2_1

I used to be a truther, I even argued with people on this forum. I even defended Dylan Avery and Alex Jones to some extent. You can search for my early posts on here.

So I already had the "mental ability" to question the "official story". The reason I stopped believing in conspiracies is because it soon became apparent that every single one of the claims truthers make were either flat out lies, misrepresentations, quote-mines and atrocious logic made by the most uncredible people possible that refuse to correct their errors.

You're on that side, the side of liars and incompetents and lunatics.

One of the big things that pisses me off about truthers is that they have the ability to implicate hundreds, thousands and even tens of thousands people into a conspiracy so casually they don't even know they are doing it. For one example, if the BBC are in on it because they thought WTC7 was going to collapse then the firefighters HAVE to be involved as well without question, but most truthers refuse to admit that all the firefighters have to be liars in order for their theory to work.

 

[WildCat]

They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works. You first need to find out exactly what happened and then work backwards.

How do you find out "exactly what happened" tmd2_1?

And shall I leave Boeing on the list of conspirators?

 

[DC]

@tmd2_1

I used to be a truther, I even argued with people on this forum. I even defended Dylan Avery and Alex Jones to some extent. You can search for my early posts on here.

So I already had the "mental ability" to question the "official story". The reason I stopped believing in conspiracies is because it soon became apparent that every single one of the claims truthers make were either flat out lies, misrepresentations, quote-mines and atrocious logic made by the most uncredible people possible that refuse to correct their errors.

You're on that side, the side of liars and incompetents and lunatics.

One of the big things that pisses me off about truthers is that they have the ability to implicate hundreds, thousands and even tens of thousands people into a conspiracy so casually they don't even know they are doing it. For one example, if the BBC are in on it because they thought WTC7 was going to collapse then the firefighters HAVE to be involved as well without question, but most truthers refuse to admit that all the firefighters have to be liars in order for their theory to work.

very similar here

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Anyway getting to your point. I never said any such thing about you. Only you know what your real views are. My point about, against the mainstream...is that it is difficult for someone (anyone) to do so. I had a very hard time with it. There has been a very concerted effort to create an atmosphere that everyone believes the official story in 9/11. To question it in unpatriotic, disrespectful to the victims families. I believe it is the exact opposite of this. It is the truest sense of patriotism, our founding fathers made it quite clear they wanted the citizens to rise up against tyrannical governments/leaders. I believe we have a duty to find out exactly what happened that day. In terms of disrespecting the victims, again I believe it to be the exact opposite. If what happened on that was not as presented, again we have a duty to find out who did it. What family member would be angry about wanting to make sure we know everything that happened that day? Even if the official story turned out to be true.

The reason I brought up the question is because I find the notion of professionals not speaking out because of simple pressure to be extremely dubious. I'll call Gage a nut without hesitation because I've seen his competence in his field of study; it's horrible, maybe his buildings are okay, I'm not familiar with them. His claims specific to steel behavior in fire on the other hand are nothing short of unprofessional. Despite that he's been able to continue his trips, speeches, and whatever without much other consequences. In a country like Venezuela or North Korea which match more closely to the situation you describe, his actions would get him arrested. Here, in the last few years, he's had almost no repercussions. The government has so many means to "silence" dissent if it truly wanted to, both legal means, and otherwise, yet they have not made an example of Gage or his organization. If Gage's claims are as convincing as you believe they are, then there's a good chance that he'd get it; he's got a pool of more than 300,000 registered professionals to recruit, he's only done the maarketing to succeed for 1500.

There has also been an effort to paint all conspiracy theorists as "loons" You know tin foil hat wearing cult fanatics. They haven't gotten anything published in a respectable journal. How they can possibly be right? There has been a very concentrated effort with this.

I can't speak for other people but in the truth movement my definition of "crazy is someone who makes wildly incompetent engineering claims that are fundamentally wrong, and those who believe in DEW or no planes. For example, Gage questions the idea that a building can collapse completely due to fire because nothing of similar size has before then. Well, I really don't care if it's the first time. Knowing what fire does to steel and what damage does to structure he should be more than capable of showing it whether by modeling or otherwise. Had Gage done that in the first place, even if he were wrong I'd have a little more respect for him. It's not like he couldn't have outsourced some of the engineering work to do the calcs.

Lastly and perhaps most importantly, it is very hard for an individual to make that mental leap. They don't want to think about if the official story is not true, what does that mean? It is a very scary thought. It is more comforting to believe the official story of 9/11.

Engineering isn't nearly so blurry as politics. When you get an answer and it's correct, then that's it; there's no mental leap. On the same token if you get it wrong, it hits hard. The very fact that the 911 conspiracies implicitly suggest some form of demolition involves an element or series of elements that have nothing to do with political world views. It's an entirely different form of crazy than being a political radical.

 

[jaydeehess]

Look at my words, and look at the proceeding posts. I write exactly what they are going to do and they do it anyway. They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works.

Granted you were asked who was in on it and have so far named but a few.

So, ok put that aside and address the 'evidence' you have compiled as to what happened. This is what you have been doing all along is it not?

You have shown us quotes from people who said they saw molten steel. No pictures exist of this, no test data on the material in question and no technical assessment or test to determine the make up of this flowing material. We do not even have an assessment of the quantity of said molten material.
Your claim then that the molten material in the underground fire area is steel is a non sequitor.


You have the video of molten material flowing out of one corner of one floor of one tower and its orange, white and yellow. You tell us it cannot be aluminum because pure samples of aluminum pour out and cool in silver colour.
We do not have a technical test on this material to determine its make up. Whatever it is is not a pure material let alone pure aluminum and it will contain contaminants and a slag. We also know for certain that there was a large quantity of aliminum alloy present in that location and likely several other materials that can melt and flow at those temperatures. Thus your claim that this too must be liquid steel is a non sequitor.

Watch the replies to do this..it will be something like we know exactly what happened only kooks don't.

Problem here is that you have started your search with a conclusion, that destruction was caused by something other than the obvious, the crash of a large, fast, fuel laden jet passenger aircraft and have twisted details or simply made stuff up in order to support your original premise.

You are likely to say I did the same with my collapse scenario. However I started with the quite obvious initial condition that at collapse initiation , for whatever reason that occurs, the column sections of the upper portion of the structure and the column sections of the lower portion of the structure cannot possibly be aligned.
I did not have to make that up.
I used basic physics to make a first approximation that the load on the floor pan would be 10X or more than the normal load expected to be carried by a floor pan/trusses/truss seats.
I did not have to make that up.
In a second approximation I stated that the column section of the upper part would make first contact with the lower section floor pans, driven by the entire mass of the upper section, rather than have the entire upper section mass contact the lower section floor pan all at once and evenly. This meant that more widespread impact to that lower section floor pan would come as the upper section floor pan came down to the lower section pan at which point both pans are all but assuredly no longer capable of transfering any load to the columns nor of supplying lateral bracing between core and perimeter. The only reduction in acelleration of the roofline or perimeter would come from the use of energy to punch through, then destroy the floor pans which is minimal compared to the forces involved and the energy in the moving upper section.
This was derived simply by knowing the basics of how the building was constructed, which I did not have to make up.

At no time did I have to invoke the presence of an unknown material or device. I did not have to make up the presence of materials or devices that have properties that I determine they have to have for various and sundry instances throughout the collapse (thermite is an incindiary in some cases and an explosive in others, burns quickly enough to instantly sever heavy columns, or throw debris hundreds of feet but long enough to supply heat for weeks on end)

 

[Sabretooth]

Has tmd figured out Occam's Razor yet?

 

[jaydeehess]

So I thought what if we put Bin Laden/al qaeda on trial. With a truly impartial, judge, jury...etc. So in a far away land where no one knows anything about 9/11.

.................Lloyd England...Aziz El Hallan...........John Gross.......... insider trading..........Israelis.........

They are preoccupied with naming suspects and developing theories, when that is not how a crime scene investigation works. You first need to find out exactly what happened and then work backwards.

You named suspects in the OP.
Are we no longer doing that?

 

[Animal]

Has tmd figured out Occam's Razor yet?

He thinks it is a knock off version of a Gillette

 

[GlennB]

@tmd2_1

I used to be a truther, I even argued with people on this forum.

So I already had the "mental ability" to question the "official story".

Me too. The ability I didn't have was the one where you hand-wave facts and science to one side as if they are mere trivialities.

 

[jaydeehess]

tmd appears to believe that simply coming up with other scenarios would constitute 'reasonable doubt' as to whether OBL and his group were responsible to 911.

Not true of course as every person who pleads 'not guilty' has in effect put forth a scenario that differs from that of the prosecution.
Saying "I could not have done it because I was alseep at home alone when it occured " does not constitute reasonable doubt.
Showing that there were other people within striking distance of the victim besides you, does not constitute reasonable doubt.
Claiming the existance of an unseen and unknown device with capabilities that would allow it to mimic you having carried out the crime does not constitute reasonable doubt.





back to work, lunch is over

 

[beachnut]

... There has been a very concerted effort to create an atmosphere that everyone believes the official story in 9/11. To question it in unpatriotic, disrespectful to the victims families. I believe it is the exact opposite of this. It is the truest sense of patriotism, our founding fathers made it quite clear they wanted the citizens to rise up against tyrannical governments/leaders. I believe we have a duty to find out exactly what happened that day. In terms of disrespecting the victims, again I believe it to be the exact opposite. If what happened on that was not as presented, again we have a duty to find out who did it. What family member would be angry about wanting to make sure we know everything that happened that day? Even if the official story turned out to be true.

...

You are not questioning the official story, you are spreading lies without checking them out. You make up doubt out of ignorance of the event, physics, chemistry, math, and engineering. To question the official story requires work, lot of reading, and you have taken the shortcut to 911 knowlege, using 911 truth junk that sounds good to you, it fooled others, it has fooled you. You are not being skeptical, we are all skeptical of what the government say, and they did not make up 19 terrorists, the evidence shows it. From the last words of Flight Crews explain who did what, to the DNA on Flight 93 and 77, we have a clear picture of who did it, and how.

Have you ever wonder why Watergate was exposed and a Pulitzer Prize was earned in less than 2 years? Why has 911 truth will all their "experts" not been able to do what some reporters did? Because 911 truth has no valid, no real evidence. No reality based evidence used by 911 truth, they use opinions based on ignorance, your doubt is evidence free claptrap.

WHAT? You are now saying being patriotic is supporting lies? I would report liars and all the 911 bad guy activity, and stop it. I was on active duty on 911, if I saw evidence of a stand-down, I would report it, stop it, and take action. You repeat lies and do nothing to expose the truth, you have bypassed the truth to spread lies.

To be patriotic requires vigilance against the lies you spread, and if you were right, against the stuff you are claiming. I don't believe in the "official story" because it is the patriotic thing to do, I believe 19 terrorists did 911 because they did it, it is in the evidence.

I already knew what happen on 911, and I did not figure it out using what I was told, I figured it out based on what I know using evidence. Being a pilot for 38 years helps identify the lies on flying issues, and does not hurt to have a masters in engineering. But all we need is a grade school education to figure out 911 truth is bogus. All the tools for critical thinking were covered in grade school, dust them off and use them to as a ladder out of the pit.


911 truth grows only when you lack knowledge and let the false claims take hold. Not sure why you don't have the time to break out of spreading really stupid ideas, but if you are intelligent, this will pass and you can live up to your potential. Right now you are lost in ignorance, spreading false junk.

The terrorists died on impact. How can they be alive. Please start retracting the super stupid claims first, and climb slowly out of the pit of ignorance knows as 911 truth.

 

[jaydeehess]

A quick post;
I am unsure how i could be made out to be an unpatriotic American given that I am not a citizen, nor a resident of the USA.

 

[tmd2_1]

The reason I brought up the question is because I find the notion of professionals not speaking out because of simple pressure to be extremely dubious. I'll call Gage a nut without hesitation because I've seen his competence in his field of study; it's horrible, maybe his buildings are okay, I'm not familiar with them. His claims specific to steel behavior in fire on the other hand are nothing short of unprofessional. Despite that he's been able to continue his trips, speeches, and whatever without much other consequences. In a country like Venezuela or North Korea which match more closely to the situation you describe, his actions would get him arrested. Here, in the last few years, he's had almost no repercussions. The government has so many means to "silence" dissent if it truly wanted to, both legal means, and otherwise, yet they have not made an example of Gage or his organization. If Gage's claims are as convincing as you believe they are, then there's a good chance that he'd get it; he's got a pool of more than 300,000 registered professionals to recruit, he's only done the maarketing to succeed for 1500.


I can't speak for other people but in the truth movement my definition of "crazy is someone who makes wildly incompetent engineering claims that are fundamentally wrong, and those who believe in DEW or no planes. For example, Gage questions the idea that a building can collapse completely due to fire because nothing of similar size has before then. Well, I really don't care if it's the first time. Knowing what fire does to steel and what damage does to structure he should be more than capable of showing it whether by modeling or otherwise. Had Gage done that in the first place, even if he were wrong I'd have a little more respect for him. It's not like he couldn't have outsourced some of the engineering work to do the calcs.



Engineering isn't nearly so blurry as politics. When you get an answer and it's correct, then that's it; there's no mental leap. On the same token if you get it wrong, it hits hard. The very fact that the 911 conspiracies implicitly suggest some form of demolition involves an element or series of elements that have nothing to do with political world views. It's an entirely different form of crazy than being a political radical.

You want to talk about bad engineering? Look at NIST. NIST admitted Building 7 was free fall. It's completley impossible to have freefall without CD. This isn't even high school physics. In fact watch these 3 videos, you don't have to need to know anything about physics. NIST issues a final draft gets asked about free fall says it's impossible. Final report comes out and they admit free fall. This is good engineering? That's crazy, how can anyone believe this? They won't release how they got their numbers. This is not science. Science welcomes the opportunity for all to view and comment, and expand upon. Their model collapse time is 5.4 seconds the observed collapse time is 5.4 seconds (which isn't even right) I mean they nailed it right on the head...how many times do you think that happens. These are your great engineers? These are the guys you look to for answers?
But I know Chandler is the quack. I mean being a good engineer is saying something is impossible and then issuing a report saying that very same thing happened right? It's a joke that's what it is. Also in this video chanler points out several other fundamental things they got wrong.

But I know I'm not understanding things correctly, there is some reason for this. Always some excuse, I can be sure of that right?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw