Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[WTC Dust]

Say, WTC Dust, in your fairytale, one baddie presses a button to destroy the towers and then another baddie shoots them to hush them up. Why didn't the baddie with the gun just push the button himself? Or why not his evil boss - why didn't he or she push the button.

Since your "explanation" simply consists of asserting that someone somewhere pressed a button and the buildings magically fell down, why do you need multiple baddies at all? Wouldn't just one Dr Evil style villain do?

Obviously the buttons sent signals to the advanced weaponry. Pressing any old buttons wouldn't have done the job.

 

[WTC Dust]

Where was the weapon?

You can't postulate such a weapon without first showing it can at least theoretically exist and function in some way, and that includes finding at least one possible site from where it was fired.

That's not how it works. You have to start with the forensic evidence and work from there. My story is incomplete, but it starts with the forensic evidence and it doesn't discount any of it.

Hearsay evidence? My theory doesn't account for it.

 

[WTC Dust]

So... the beams turned steel into dust but just warped the sphere?

Yes, that is what the evidence shows.

 

[WTC Dust]

Might I recommend everyone just ignoring WTC Dust? She wants attention. That's why she's essentially reposting the same thread time and time again. I say, don't give it to her. There's no risk anyone's ever going to take her seriously, so there's no need for us to present "the other side".

The Sphere is a different subject than the Deutsche Bank which is a different subject from Judy Wood which is a different subject than the lack of evidence of a wake at 9:03AM.

I've got a lot to say about 9/11 that you won't hear from anyone else. You want to silence me?

 

[Bell]

Obviously the buttons sent signals to the advanced weaponry. Pressing any old buttons wouldn't have done the job.

Which doesn't answer the question at all.

 

[WTC Dust]

I can't promise to answer every question to your satisfaction. It's not my purpose in coming to JREF. I want my theories debunked.

 

[Dash80]

Obviously the buttons sent signals to the advanced weaponry. Pressing any old buttons wouldn't have done the job.

Troll science is a wonderful thing.

 

[WTC Dust]

Ok, one step back... I might have missed it while facepalming...

How exactly is this related to 9/11? Did Judy's space beam somehow create those fumes years later?

Dr. Wood doesn't mention space beams. The smell was the same in 2009 as it was in 2001.

 

[Dash80]

I can't promise to answer every question to your satisfaction. It's not my purpose in coming to JREF. I want my theories debunked.

They already have been, little miss demanding.

 

[Macgyver1968]

Obviously the buttons sent signals to the advanced weaponry. Pressing any old buttons wouldn't have done the job.

Unfortunately, the "Activate Death Ray" button was right next to the "Order Pizza" button. The perps really didn't want to destroy the towers...they just wanted a large pepperoni with extra cheese. Oooopsie...

 

[Bell]

I can't promise to answer every question to your satisfaction. It's not my purpose in coming to JREF. I want my theories debunked.

The question is quit simple. Why does the evil plan needs a guy to push the button and another guy to kill the guy that pushed the button?

Why not have the latter push the button and do without the killing?

 

[pgimeno]

I'd dump my hypothesis in a minute, if you'd just help me. I'd need to see evidence of an impact at the south face of WTC 2. Really, if I had that, I could dump the no plane theory.

What? The projection technology can project a plane but not an impact????

How did you expect the impact to look like? An impact of a bullet is similar. Maybe just your expectation on how it should look like is wrong.

Why do you ignore the rest of evidence, namely numerous plane parts, passenger DNA, radar data, communication to ATC, phone calls... which doesn't fit in your pet hypothesis? You claim it's a very small conspiracy but you have to discard basically all the rest of the evidence in order to make it work. That's not based on reality. That's a delusion.

 

[WTC Dust]

Have you ever stopped and thought why this may be? When only you and a handful of other loons are saying anything like it?

Nobody is talking about the Deutsche Bank, except me.
Nobody is talking about The Sphere, except me.
Nobody is mentioning the multiple types of metallic foam, except me.
Nobody is talking about the lack of a wake at 9:03AM, except me.
Nobody is talking about the smell of the WTC fumes and the duration of these fumes, except me.
Nobody is talking about the rain days in NYC, except me.

Dr. Wood is talking about some of the same things that I talk about, but she focuses on different things, like the magnetosphere.

 

[Dash80]

Unfortunately, the "Activate Death Ray" button was right next to the "Order Pizza" button. The perps really didn't want to destroy the towers...they just wanted a large pepperoni with extra cheese. Oooopsie...

Dammit I hate when that happens! I almost took out the Sears Tower trying to order a Chicago style deep-pan. What a butterfingers!

 

[WTC Dust]

The question is quit simple. Why does the evil plan needs a guy to push the button and another guy to kill the guy that pushed the button?

Why not have the latter push the button and do without the killing?

Could be, but I tend to think about how things are actually accomplished in a team setting and presume that the attacks were a team effort. People have supervisors, ya know?

 

[WTC Dust]

What? The projection technology can project a plane but not an impact????

How did you expect the impact to look like? An impact of a bullet is similar. Maybe just your expectation on how it should look like is wrong.

Why do you ignore the rest of evidence, namely numerous plane parts, passenger DNA, radar data, communication to ATC, phone calls... which doesn't fit in your pet hypothesis? You claim it's a very small conspiracy but you have to discard basically all the rest of the evidence in order to make it work. That's not based on reality. That's a delusion.

Hearsay evidence, or evidence that I cannot independently verify, does not make it into my theory proper. I can consider it, but there is a strict wall that I put up. Nothing that isn't independently verifiable makes the grade.

 

[Dash80]

Nobody is talking about the Deutsche Bank, except me.
Nobody is talking about The Sphere, except me.
Nobody is mentioning the multiple types of metallic foam, except me.
Nobody is talking about the lack of a wake at 9:03AM, except me.
Nobody is talking about the smell of the WTC fumes and the duration of these fumes, except me.
Nobody is talking about the rain days in NYC, except me.

Dr. Wood is talking about some of the same things that I talk about, but she focuses on different things, like the magnetosphere.

And she's nuttier than a brazil nut eating almonds in a peanut factory!

 

[JohnG]

Holographic airplanes is just a guess.

Yes, in the same way that demonic possession as an explanation for grand mal seizures is "just a guess".

I'm not wedded to the theory. Debunk at will, but you have to do a better job than asserting that we don't have the technology or that it would violate the laws of physics without specifying which ones. That is the level of debunking I've gotten so far.

How does a scientist not understand the burden of proof? Did you ever study critical thinking amongst all the other disciplines you claimed to have mastered? If I claimed that cigarettes are actually the cure for lung cancer, not the cause, would the medical community be immediately obligated to drop everything and "debunk" me? Or should I first be expected to provide evidence for my claim?

Watching the "Made It Happen On Purpose Via Therm*te" and "Made It Happen On Purpose Via Directed-Energy Weapons" camps sneer at each other sort of reminds me of two groups of children fighting over how the "rabbit out of a hat" magic trick is achieved. One group claims that it involves a rip in the fabric of space while the other group insists that Star Trek-style transporters are the key to the mystery. Both sides are so intent on calling each other names that they don't think to consult the experts (in this case a magician) to ask if there's a more prosaic explanation. An explanation that doesn't require imaginary technology to explain the phenomenon in question.

You seem reasonably bright, perhaps someday you'll realize just how perversely, breathtakingly wrong you are regarding 9/11. The question is, will it take you a month? A year? A decade? And when you do realize that you're wrong will you admit it?

 

[Craig4]

Hearsay evidence, or evidence that I cannot independently verify, does not make it into my theory proper. I can consider it, but there is a strict wall that I put up. Nothing that isn't independently verifiable makes the grade.

But you say that no planes hit the WTC. This is not consistent with the above statement.

 

[Bell]

Could be, but I tend to think about how things are actually accomplished in a team setting and presume that the attacks were a team effort. People have supervisors, ya know?

It's just ONE push on a button. Sjeez... how much supervision does that need?