It will depend on the credibility of the witnesses' testimonies.
It is 5 years later...
It will depend on the nature of the witnesses's testimonies, which you still haven't provided.
Happy now?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
[Moderated] So What Would You Think If This Were True?
- Thread starter Skeptic4Sure
- Start date
It will depend on the credibility of the witnesses' testimonies.
It is 5 years later...
It will depend on the nature of the witnesses's testimonies, which you still haven't provided.
Happy now?
So, anyways...
Back to the discussion at hand.
So if the Citgo witness and the North Side flight path is corroborated by other credible witnesses this would qualify as a smoking gun would it not???
This would explain the anomalous damage and lack of large recognizeable debris we see at the Pentagon that so many people question and many find to be "counter-intuitive" would it not???
Just answer the questions.
Why should we answer the questions?
You are speculating without producing evidence.
Come back with the evidence and you'll get a response.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
OK, now we're getting somewhere.
So...if the witness' testimony and the witness themselves come off as credible, and all their accounts along the flight path even match up with the north side of the gas station. And they are adamant about this and it is accepted as a reality that the plane was on the North Side of the Gas Station, WILL YOU ACCEPT 9/11 AS SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD?
So...if the witness' testimony and the witness themselves come off as credible, and all their accounts along the flight path even match up with the north side of the gas station. And they are adamant about this and it is accepted as a reality that the plane was on the North Side of the Gas Station, WILL YOU ACCEPT 9/11 AS SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD?
That would interest us and be worthy of further exploration.So, anyways...
Back to the discussion at hand.
So if the Citgo witness and the North Side flight path is corroborated by other credible witnesses this would qualify as a smoking gun would it not???
I can't answer your second question. I don't see any anomalous damage, and the debris pattern is precisely what is expected. The fact that it's "counter intuitive" has nothing to do with the evidence and everything to do with the background of people who don't understand it.This would explain the anomalous damage and lack of large recognizeable debris we see at the Pentagon that so many people question and many find to be "counter-intuitive" would it not???
Just answer the questions.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
Why should we answer the questions?
You are speculating without producing evidence.
Come back with the evidence and you'll get a response.
I am not speculating. I know what I know.
It's hypothetically speaking-if it were proven to you people.
Just answer the questions,
OK, now we're getting somewhere.
So...if the witness' testimony and the witness themselves come off as credible, and all their accounts along the flight path even match up with the north side of the gas station. And they are adamant about this and it is accepted as a reality that the plane was on the North Side of the Gas Station, WILL YOU ACCEPT 9/11 AS SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD?
Answer: if I am covinced I will be convinced.
That's how stupid your qustion is.
Without seeing the evidence I don't know if I'll be convinced by it or not.
Why haven't you produced it yet?
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
That would interest us and be worthy of further exploration.
Good.
I can't answer your second question. I don't see any anomalous damage, and the debris pattern is precisely what is expected. The fact that it's "counter intuitive" has nothing to do with the evidence and everything to do with the background of people who don't understand it.
Oh god. Give it up Mackey. Everyone has commented on this. You are truly in denial if you don't think there is anything wrong with that picture. I know professional pilots and mechanics lining up around the block disgusted with this elephant in the living room. What, now you're going to bring up the F4 experiment as if it is similar in anyway?
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
I am not speculating. I know what I know.
It's hypothetically speaking-if it were proven to you people.
Just answer the questions,
Skeptic4Sure,
Present your evidence supporting your "blue line" claim, or stop this mental masturbation.
Oh god. Give it up Mackey. Everyone has commented on this. You are truly in denial if you don't think there is anything wrong with that picture. I know professional pilots and mechanics lining up around the block disgusted with this elephant in the living room. What, now you're going to bring up the F4 experiment as if it is similar in anyway?
No you don't.
And I'll see your mythical "pilots and mechanics," Mr. John Doe X, and raise you the entire combined structural and aeronautical engineering departments and societies of the world. See NIST and ASCE reports and footnotes for verification.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
S4S, like everything else about 9/11, you troofers are doing this backwards.
You're asking us to comment on some testimonies that we haven't seen yet.
Do. You. Understand. How. Stupid. This. Is?
Actually it's quite brilliant. Because I have an ace up my sleeve.
I am not asking to comment on testimony you haven't heard. Because, well, uh...er.. you haven't heard it yet.
What I've been asking you is IF the witnesses are and information presented is credible. And the North Side of the gas station flight path is a reality. WOULD YOU BELIEVE 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB???
A simple yes or no.
What I've been asking you is IF the witnesses are and information presented is credible. And the North Side of the gas station flight path is a reality. WOULD YOU BELIEVE 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB???
A simple yes or no.
No.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Actually it's quite brilliant. Because I have an ace up my sleeve.
I am not asking to comment on testimony you haven't heard. Because, well, uh...er.. you haven't heard it yet.
What I've been asking you is IF the witnesses are and information presented is credible. And the North Side of the gas station flight path is a reality. WOULD YOU BELIEVE 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB???
A simple yes or no.
False choice fallacy. Now put up or shut up.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
Answer: if I am covinced I will be convinced.
That's how stupid your qustion is.
Without seeing the evidence I don't know if I'll be convinced by it or not.
Why haven't you produced it yet?
Because it hasn't been produced.
It's a simple yes or no.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
False choice fallacy. Now put up or shut up.
How about niether? How about you just keep your mouth shut and stay out of the thread until the evidence is presented. Pretend I am not here.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
How about niether? How about you just keep your mouth shut and stay out of the thread until the evidence is presented. Pretend I am not here.
Your being implored to present your evidence. You are not doing so. Present it. And what is this, fifth grade? Guess what, it's a forum to which I am a member; I can post in the thread if I so wish. You don't get to kick people off of your playground.
Skeptic4Sure
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 459
Ok so we got one vote of no from Pardy.
Hey Pardy, how are you going to explain the light poles and the damage when this information comes out?
Oh I guess that will depend on the witness testimony huh, and how you can smear them? Twist their words? Kill the messenger?
Trust me, this stuff is bulletproof. I would be scared if I were you guys.
Hey Pardy, how are you going to explain the light poles and the damage when this information comes out?
More importantly, HOW WILL YOU?
Trust me, this stuff is bulletproof. I would be scared if I were you guys.
You're a joke.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Ok so we got one vote of no from Pardy.
Hey Pardy, how are you going to explain the light poles and the damage when this information comes out?
Oh I guess that will depend on the witness testimony huh, and how you can smear them? Twist their words? Kill the messenger?
Trust me, this stuff is bulletproof. I would be scared if I were you guys.
Anecdotal evidence must be in line with objective evidence. If it is not, it can not be trusted. Skeptics/critical thinkers/scientists are not "scared" of objective evidence; that is one of the beautiful things about science, it is self-correcting.
Ok so we got one vote of no from Pardy.
Hey Pardy, how are you going to explain the light poles and the damage when this information comes out?
Oh I guess that will depend on the witness testimony huh, and how you can smear them? Twist their words? Kill the messenger?
Trust me, this stuff is bulletproof. I would be scared if I were you guys.
Whatever JDX. We all know this is BS you are now spreading.
And you still failed to answer if AA77 hit the Pentagon. Yes or no?