"24 hard facts about 9/11 that cannot be debunked"

ArchStanton

New Blood
A
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
16
This list is being spammed all over social media, with the claim that their 24 "hard facts" can't be debunked.

The very first fact is an instant fail (Jones' paper has never been accepted in a peer-reviewed journal, as far as I'm aware Benthams is a vanity publisher that prints in exchange for payment), as is the second.

How many more of these "hard facts that cannot be debunked" can you debunk? ;)



24 Hard Facts About 9/11 That Cannot Be Debunked
January 18, 2013 by Joe Martino
Breach of rule 4 removed. Do not copy and paste material from elsewhere.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#7 - OBL was already wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya.

There was no need for the FBI to include the 9/11 charges prior to OBL's capture and/or death.
 
ArchStanton said:
18) The 911 commission was given extremely limited funds. $15 million was given to investigate 9/11. (Over $60 Million was spent investigating Clintons’ affairs with Monica).
Click to expand...

This is a lie by omission. The "9/11 Commission" was only one small part of the investigation. "Truthers" really don't like truth.

The total investigation cost over shadows the "BJ" investigation by orders of magnitude.
 
The list should be titled:
"Here's 24 things about 9/11 that we're going to pretend haven't already been addressed."
 
Holy flashbacks. I swear it's 2006 again. This has been a banner year for complete rehashings of nonsense that was already debunked.
 
Number 2 is not a fact about 9/11, it is a fact about people who have a strong opinion about 9/11.

Their opinion is also number 2.
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
2) 1700+ Engineers and Architects support a real independent 9/11 investigation. Richard Gage, Founder. ‘Explosive Evidence’, ‘Blueprint for Truth’, ‘AE911′, ‘Toronto Hearings’, ‘Kevin Ryan’.
Click to expand...

This claim would be improved if it specified "real Engineers and Architects" instead of "real independent 9/11 investigation".
 
As you noted, the first one's an instant fail, and for many more reasons than just painfully poor peer review. Just look up Sunstealer's posts and you'll have all the stuff you'll need. Heck, just look up R.Mackey's posts, and all that by itself will give you all that you need, even before 9/10ths of the other posts on the topic here - from Oystein, from The Almond, from many others, including some by myself, etc., - are thrown in, many of which have info of excellent value (Chris Mohr's posts, for example).

The second is sort of an obvious statement: There are fools in the world who'll believe anything, and some of them have professional credentials. I guess you can go through and critique the list by pointing out the lack of relevant expertise, the inflated numbers, and so on, but really, that's one I wouldn't even address. When you establish that the party line is chock full of wrong, you then don't even have to address any list of believers. You've already addressed their argument. And that's all that matters.

The rest of the list has stuff that's been on sites like 911Myths, Debunking 9/11, Gravy's site, etc. since 2006. That "set up to fail" quote is one I've personally refuted in the past; just look up my old posts in conjunction with Hamilton and Keane's names. Ditto for the FBI vidoes; we've discussed that ad nauseum in this forum.

Yeah, this is nothing more than just old claims packaged in a nice, simple list. All of which have been addressed (my God, I can't believe the resurrected the "Put Options", the incorrect "free fall" time, etc., all of which again has been addressed.

Evangelization. Not information. Par for the course.
 
Time to first lie:
#1 - nanothermite in the dust has been debunked. Those making the declaration that it is thermitic failed to show the basic property of such materials, that they are self oxidizing and can thus burn in a no oxygen environment.

In fact each of these 24 points either is not a hard fact and has been debunked already, or has little actual relevance to the subject in the first place.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Time to first lie:
#1 - nanothermite in the dust has been debunked. Those making the declaration that it is thermitic failed to show the basic property of such materials, that they are self oxidizing and can thus burn in a no oxygen environment.
Click to expand...

But what if it was super-duper nanothermite?

When I first saw thermite promoted as a controlled demo agent I laughed, I couldn't believe anyone would be that stupid, but I overestimated thruther collective intelligence.
 
Last edited:
Correction: "24 delusions about 911 that make 911 truth followers dumber than dirt"

ArchStanton said:
...

WTC 7 (The Smoking Gun)

Building 7 was a 47-story skyscraper and was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, it would have been the tallest high-rise in 33 states in the United States. It collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2001 in 6.5 Seconds at free fall acceleration. It was not hit by an airplane and suffered minimal damage compared to other buildings much closer to the Twin Towers.
Click to expand...

For 911 truth followers who can't count, or work a watch, proof of gullibility.

Self debunking


ArchStanton said:
... How many more of these "hard facts that cannot be debunked" can you debunk? ;)
...
Click to expand...
Only 911 truth followers can't debunk these insane claims. Love the ACARS one, a lie spread by idiots at p4t, Balsamo's club for failed pilots.
 
Last edited:
ArchStanton said:
Building 7 was a 47-story skyscraper and was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, it would have been the tallest high-rise in 33 states in the United States.
Click to expand...

Yes...as everyone knows, the taller you build something, the more stable it becomes.
 
The lie that stands out the most for me is that 7WTC collapsed in 6.5 seconds. Its as if the internal collapse, illustrated only after it had begun by the in falling of the rooftop structures, is not part of the collapse. Its a most dishonest piece of sophistry. Then there are the details left out that are inconvenient to the TM, such as greater than free fall acceleration noted of 7WTC.
 
BStrong said:
But what if it was super-duper nanothermite?

When I first saw thermite promoted as a controlled demo agent I laughed, I couldn't believe anyone woul;d be that stupid, but I overestimated thruther collective intelligence.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
I have yet to see any detailed scenario in which it is explained how ?therm?te was utilized. If the idea was to drop these structures in such a fashion as to limit collateral damage to neighboring complexes, then how was a ?therm?the demolition timed?

Of course super-secret-duper nanothermite was only ever invoked because no where on any recording is there the sound of explosives large enough to sever large columns. Supposedly ssd-nanothermite not only severs columns as quickly as rdx cutters, it does so without causing the huge bang conventional cutting charges make. Yet there was enough 'leftover' of this substance, to heat the rubble underground (while never flaring up at the surfsce) and keep it hot enough to have liquid stage steel around for weeks and that is the only way molten steel coukd develop and remain. Pie in the sky, unsubstantiated, bald assertion put forth as if it were fact.
 
Last edited:
This list is being spammed all over social media, with the claim that their 24 "hard facts" can't be debunked.
Click to expand...
This is 911 truth only action - they read, believe blindly and spam it all over.
The portland woo from April 2013 post if freely. Is this reflective of the IQ of the readers?
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/422646.shtml

Source of the plagarized 24 nut case claims...
by Joe Martino, January 18, 2013.
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/01/18/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/
Proud to spread woo, he does it to promote peace and love, by spreading lies based on nonsese.

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2013/04/04/222966-24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/ Veterans news now gives a bad name to veterans. What an idiotic publication.

Spammed all over, albeit slowly. No Pulitzer for recycled failure?

Is the level of woo reflective of the readers of
http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2013/04/04/222966-24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/422646.shtml

http://beforeitsnews.com/9-11-and-g...bout-911-that-cannot-be-debunked-2439522.html
Feb 2013


http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/01/18/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/

Joe Martino
I created CE 4 years ago and have been heavily at it since. I love inspiring others to find joy and make changes in their lives. Hands down the only other thing I am this passionate about is baseball. Feel free to email me at http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/01/18/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/
Click to expand...
He loves to spread lies so we can find joy, and ... WHAT?
Ignorance personified on 911. 12 years of ignonrace on 911, an unknowing puppet in Gage's propaganda wing of woo.

Don't forget, "Feel free to email me (him) at http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/01/18/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/. Dear Joe, ...
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Indeed.
I have yet to see any detailed scenario in which it is explained how ?therm?te was utilized. If the idea was to drop these structures in such a fashion as to limit collateral damage to neighboring complexes, then how was a ?therm?the demolition timed?

Of course super-secret-duper nanothermite was only ever invoked because no where on any recording is there the sound of explosives large enough to sever large columns. Supposedly ssd-nanothermite not only severs columns as quickly as rdx cutters, it does so without causing the huge bang conventional cutting charges make. Yet there was enough 'leftover' of this substance, to heat the rubble underground (while never flaring up at the surfsce) and keep it hot enough to have liquid stage steel around for weeks and that is the only way molten steel coukd develop and remain. Pie in the sky, unsubstantiated, bald assertion put forth as if it were fact.
Click to expand...

What thermite pushers didn't know from the begining that they should have known is that thermite goes molten after ignition, and trying to hold thermite on a surface (as you would using thermite as a welding tool) is almost impossible absent some structure to hold the reaction - and no such structures were discovered post-collapse.

I went to Joe Martino's website - he's seriously into the realm of 9/11 Hollywood fantasy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom