The ongoing troofer campaign against JREF!

TexasJack,
Do you think that they might have mistaken what they thought were bombs with something that sounded and felt like bombs, like many did on that day?
Click to expand...
I will refrain from speculating as to how likely that is given all the testimonies that I have either read or heard about on the internet or in videos. The answer to your question is, of course, I think the possibility is there.

How many of these people have actually experienced a bomb going off in a building before?
Click to expand...
Probably not many of them have. Some of the testimonies I have seen online and in videos were from firefighters like in this clip:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/9...xplosives-brought-down-twin-towers/2528849401
This is just a small example of many testimonies that indicated that there were actual bombs. At the end of the clip the reporter is saying that the firefighter (in his professional opinion) felt that there were bombs planted in the building. Firefighters would most likely have a better idea of what a collapse by fire would sound like as compared to bombs. Their opinions are not uninformed. I realize that not all the firefighters are in agreement about the collapses being (or not being) the results of fire and structural damage. I think in this situation a more detailed investigation of the cd theory is called for.

Does the opinion of New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. matter to you at all?
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.htm
Does the opinion of first responder Craig Bartmer matter to you at all?
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=craig+bartmer&sitesearch=
Does the opinion of firefighter John Schroeder mean anything to you?
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=firefighter+interview+loose+change&sitesearch=
Do you see what I mean?

Use the search function, there were plenty of reasons of what they actually felt and heard.
Click to expand...
I have already been to a great number of debunking sites and I am familiar with the benign arguements that have been put forth on these sites. In large scale building fires it is not uncommon for there to be explosions. Sometimes 'things' like transformers or perhaps other electric equipment will blow up and cause huge explosive sounds. Certainly the jet fuel travelled all the way down the elevator shafts and caused the elevator explosion and all the damage in the lobby, etc. etc. I am sorry but I just find these explanations unlikely (but not impossible.)
 
Drudgewire,
Exhibiting a confrontational demeanor due to lack of social skills that gets justified internally by labelling everyone else "sheep?"
Click to expand...
I am sorry if other posters on this forum have exhibited a confrontational demeanor or have called you or anyone else "sheep." I have never used this word nor will I because people who have strong opinions based on how they interpret the set of facts they choose to look at assume that people who disagree do so because they are being led by others. Neither side can seem to acknowledge the possibility that the other side might be bringing up valid points or the possibility that they themselves could be wrong. Also, it is not my intention to be confrontational.

And without even attempting to confront the issues head-on and just responding we're either sheep, shills, or "duh-bunkers" who refuse to give any credence to ANY evidence which goes against our pre-concieved beliefs in a stunning display of displacement syndrome?
Click to expand...
It sounds to me like you have had some bad experiences with other posters on these forums. I'm sorry to hear that. I am personaly not interested in the name calling. It is a waste of time and it is plain rude. I assure you that I do read the posts and give creedence to the evidence that is being presented. If I wasn't doing this then I wouldn't be on this forum because it is clear that no-one on it is going to change their mind.

Do all of those apply to you specifically? No. But you earned your wings early on by comparing your fictional conspiracy with the very real problem of pedophelia. It's that sort of convoluted thinking and retarded sense of moral equivilency which makes me not only want to dismiss your movement out of hand, but spit in the face of anyone I see holding a 9/11 sign.
Click to expand...
O.K. my analogy was a bit heavy handed. (I realized that in the morning, it was late at night when I had wrote the comment.) In fairness, if making an analogy such as that one is all it takes to earn the 'troll wings' then I would think there would be quite a few posters on both sides of the issue that would qualify. If your point is that people who come onto these forums purporting to be searching for truth should actually examine the answers being given, then I would completely agree. The issue of asking the same kind of questions over and over is a little more complicated. Suggesting that truthers try a search first before asking a question is not an unfair recommendation but many people might not have the time to fish for their answer through an extremely big forum reading every post. It is much more efficient to ask direct questions. Having said that I think it is more than fair if a debunker responds by linking to previous answers or even recommending a search.
 
dommyboysinjapan said:
O.K. my analogy was a bit heavy handed. (I realized that in the morning, it was late at night when I had wrote the comment.) In fairness, if making an analogy such as that one is all it takes to earn the 'troll wings' then I would think there would be quite a few posters on both sides of the issue that would qualify. If your point is that people who come onto these forums purporting to be searching for truth should actually examine the answers being given, then I would completely agree. The issue of asking the same kind of questions over and over is a little more complicated. Suggesting that truthers try a search first before asking a question is not an unfair recommendation but many people might not have the time to fish for their answer through an extremely big forum reading every post. It is much more efficient to ask direct questions. Having said that I think it is more than fair if a debunker responds by linking to previous answers or even recommending a search.
Click to expand...

Absolutely fair enough. You're off my ignore list and I'll admit to unfairly judging you based on the actions of others.

BUT I'LL BE KEEPING MY EYE ON YOU PAL! ;)
 
dommyboysinjapan said:
Does the opinion of New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. matter to you at all?
Click to expand...

Apparently it doesn't matter to you. Paul was on this forum as 'Sentinel' and has stated that he was misquoted. You did not seem to care enough to research that detail. So I guess 'his opinion' as misquoted by a neonazi rag is more important than his actual opinions on the matter.
 
dommyboysinjapan said:
TexasJack,

I will refrain from speculating as to how likely that is given all the testimonies that I have either read or heard about on the internet or in videos. The answer to your question is, of course, I think the possibility is there.


Probably not many of them have. Some of the testimonies I have seen online and in videos were from firefighters like in this clip:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/9...xplosives-brought-down-twin-towers/2528849401
This is just a small example of many testimonies that indicated that there were actual bombs. At the end of the clip the reporter is saying that the firefighter (in his professional opinion) felt that there were bombs planted in the building. Firefighters would most likely have a better idea of what a collapse by fire would sound like as compared to bombs. Their opinions are not uninformed. I realize that not all the firefighters are in agreement about the collapses being (or not being) the results of fire and structural damage. I think in this situation a more detailed investigation of the cd theory is called for.

Does the opinion of New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. matter to you at all?
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bombs_inside_wtc.htm
Does the opinion of first responder Craig Bartmer matter to you at all?
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=craig+bartmer&sitesearch=
Does the opinion of firefighter John Schroeder mean anything to you?
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=firefighter+interview+loose+change&sitesearch=
Do you see what I mean?


I have already been to a great number of debunking sites and I am familiar with the benign arguements that have been put forth on these sites. In large scale building fires it is not uncommon for there to be explosions. Sometimes 'things' like transformers or perhaps other electric equipment will blow up and cause huge explosive sounds. Certainly the jet fuel travelled all the way down the elevator shafts and caused the elevator explosion and all the damage in the lobby, etc. etc. I am sorry but I just find these explanations unlikely (but not impossible.)
Click to expand...

Right off the bat you provide a video with quote mining in it, this time using Louie Cacchioli(who was none to happy about it) and others who were quoted out of context. http://www.911myths.com/html/quote_abuse.html

Paul Isaac Jr., here you go http://www.debunking911.com/quotes.htm (BTW your link was broken).

Shroeder has been discussed here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91553 and Bartmer here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67361

I realize their testimony may differ from the hundreds of other first responders who don't believe or have never stated that bombs were what brought down the towers. In fact I would find it unusual and suspicious, with a disaster this size, if there weren't discrepancies. The problem with many truthers(I'm not saying you, I find you to be more pleasant then most btw) is that they want the investigation to be all so symmetrical, that every discrepancy equals conspiracy. In real life disasters, it doesn't work that way. What you have to weigh is the testimony, and if it corroborates with the physical evidence. For me the overwhelming evidence points away from a CD.

And finally, why do you dismiss "sometimes 'things' like transformers or perhaps other electric equipment will blow up and cause huge explosive sounds' when they do occur in fires? They do happen, don't they?

Anyways, this really belongs on another thread, so if you which to discuss further, perhaps we should go there.
 
Last edited:
DC, without quoting anyone else or referring to a YouTube video, please explain how, using your intellect, you came to the conclusion that WTC7 was a CD.
 
applecorped, there's a whole other thread for that discussion already underway.
 
I doubt it, particularly as it would be a derail of this thread. Let's discontinue here.
 
thaiboxerken said:
How do twoofers explain away the lack of evidence of these bombs.
Click to expand...
The same way they do everything else - “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”. Of course they continue to apply a ridiculous double standard wrt the OS vs the Troof.
 
kookbreaker,
Apparently it doesn't matter to you.
Click to expand...
Why do you make this hasty conclusion? If Paul Isaac Jr.'s opinion didn't matter to me than why would I have bothered to link to an article about what he had said in the first place?

Paul was on this forum as 'Sentinel' and has stated that he was misquoted. You did not seem to care enough to research that detail.
Click to expand...
How would I know that 'Sentinel' is Paul Isaac? I linked an article where he said that 9/11 was an inside job. Can you show me any evidence at all that he feels he was misquoted or are you just all talk? If you can, I will look at it.

So I guess 'his opinion' as misquoted by a neonazi rag is more important than his actual opinions on the matter.
Click to expand...
Again your 'guesses' toward the magnitude of my sincerity are unimpressive. I showed you an actual news article. So far, all you have shown me is your own opinions and your own speculation that I don't care about his opinions. Why don't you try showing me any kind of evidence at all that he was misquoted instead of speculating that I don't care. I am interested in seeing if there is any evidence at all to back your claim. If I wasn't interested in looking at the evidence I wouldn't have posted on this forum. Is there any?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom