-119 votes

Truthers continue to see what they want to see.

Let me give you an example, and then I will go off on my rant.

Regarding the passport: You guys only see what you want to see. Why don't you list every item that survived? Drivers licenses survived, entire arms and other limbs, clothes, etc. Tons of things survived, but you frame the argument like only the passport survived. They already had flight manifests. They knew who was on those flights. There was no reason at all to plant a passport. The fact of the matter is that tons of things survived, not just a passport, and planting a passport would have been useless. It only seems like it matters to you guys because you want it to matter. If it was a conspiracy, don't you think the real cover up would have been about how they faked the flight manifest?

You people just continue to see what you want to see, regardless of how ridiculous it is. You take every bit of flimsy evidence and force it to support your conspiracy. Check that, I shouldn't even call it "evidence' because it isn't. It is a lack of evidence that you have. You invent questions about the incident and when you can't wrap your brain around reason and logic, you take every stupid thing any witness ever said and cling to it as if it were straight from God's mouth to your ears. You twist logic to fit your own narrative so you can feed your feable need to feel important on a national scale, like somehow the nation is reading your posts.

I remember when this sight was about liberty and free market capitalism. I remember when people here discussed topics related to the ideas Ron Paul was bringing up every day. You all have driven those fine people away with your own ignorant lack of critical thinking. I enjoyed those people. We shared information and learned together. I don't enjoy you people. You spread fallacy through verbosity. You post every tiny scrap of psuedo-evidence no matter how easily refutable, rendering the rest of us simply too tired to continue to address your never ending pile of fiction.

And worst of all, you continue to move the goal post, to the point that no amount of debunking will ever satisfy you because you will simply wait for the next bit of psuedo-evidence to come out, and if that evidence isn't readily available, you resort back to the old time honored defense of "All I know is that I don't believe the official story". And that only creates another fallacy you all love, the false dillema, where you try to shoot holes in the official story thinking that it somehow proves your story is true, only you don't even have a coherent story to back up. If I point out all the inconsistency in the Bible, does that somehow prove that Thor is real? You need evidence in support of your story, not lack of evidence in support of their's. You people don't have evidence. You don't have a story. What you do have unfortunately, and in abundance, is a never ending supply of fallacies.

As a middle school teacher, part of my curriculum is teaching fallacies, so when I claim you are using them in abundance, I'm not speaking generally. You are using them in abundance and it is killing your argument. The sad part, is that even if you all were right, your constant use of fallacy and lack of logical skills has driven away countless people who might have actually cared.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Huh? A falling elevator? fireant, is that you?

Not sure how anyone could think that extremely loud explosion that was heard when the firemen were using the phone was a falling elevator, especially when the other fireman even came up to them and told them that "seven's exploding".

But if you really think that explosion might've been a falling elevator or other falling part (or tires and batteries or any of the other absurd things fireant listed as possible explanations on another thread), consider this video with sound analysis that corroborates the explosions witnessed at the onset of the collapse of wtc7.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIIF6P8zBG8

I'm not getting falling elevator from these sequential explosion sounds.

Barry Jennings' account of the dead bodies in the lobby of wtc7 might be debatable since there was no corroboration that I'm aware of by Hess or the fireman who led them out, BUT Hess did corroborate explosion in wtc7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n4XUj1xNSY

So there are numerous witnesses describing explosions and there are audible explosions recorded and supported by Chandler's information in the video above. Explosions become harder to dismiss.

Mr. Cricket, I have worked in

Mr. Cricket, I have worked in audio engineering and have a keen interest in it. Given enough filters, I could make Paradise City sound like a controlled demolition =D

Maybe he talked about falling elevators because that seems the simplest solution? Many debunking websites consider it likely.

Ok, so what do you think was used as an explosive?

sharkhearted's picture

You are mistaken.

The truth...shall set you free. Take your head out of the f-u-c-k-i-n-g sand!

NO skyscraper can "go down" at near free fall acceleration, due to "uncontrolled fires."

Not physically possible.

Can't happen. Won't happen. Will never happen.

I mean you can try and go and defy physics like stepping out in front of a speeding car, but trust me, dude, the car will NOT suddenly alter its physical properties and go through you unharmed. In sum, you will die.

Likewise, in sum, 120,000 tons of steel and concrete (like WTC7) can not....CAN NOT...descend to the earth sometimes at the speed of gravity...without some help.

Your whole thermite oxidation blah blah is complete NONSENSE. The thermitic reaction is one of the most violent known to science. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE "OTHER OXIDATION REACTIONS."

"The concentrations were too low??" There was thematic residue EVERYWHERE. It was ubiquitous in the WTC dust.

You need to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyimz35UCiU

Why are you so trying to stick up for the official government state-sponored "account" of the events of 9-11?

3000 innocent people are dead. Do you care about them? Do you care about the twice that number of our military who have been slaughtered because of that day....and many more who commit suicide every day???

??????

Or do you care about getting your government paycheck to disinform, soviet style? (And not very good at it, at that).

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

The byproducts of a thermitic

The byproducts of a thermitic reaction would be aluminium oxide, and iron. Aluminium oxide is produced in burning Al in the presence of air. easily.

Ubiquitous is not the same as concentrated.

I look forward to your reply, maybe we can settle at least this particular issue through a decent discussion.

Heads up

Just a heads up, the Harrit et al paper has been thoroughly debunked. They never even ran the chips through an FTIR.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/9119ProgressReport022912_re...

There never was any elemental aluminum in the chips, therefore, not thermite.

They're trying to narrow down the exact chemical formula for the matching primer now.

Eric Hoffer

Ok, thanks for the report.

Ok, thanks for the report. Made for some interesting reading. My first thought when I red about the red chips was 'must be some oxide of iron'. But yeah, that is why you have scientists, they can analyse in such excruciating detail.

47 pages of references. Wow. While the truthers compile numbered lists =P

Can you tell me why many readers will look at the link, never click it and still continue to use Harriet et al as gospel truth that nano thermite brought down WTCs in a controlled demolition? It seems failure of human curiosity to me. Its as if they say 'We've asked questions so far but we'll go no further'

Its a pity they think they're 'awake' when in truth they're simply dreaming a different dream.

Straws

When you don't have many straws to grasp at, you grasp at the few you've got super hard.

Honestly, it's the only piece that comes even close to being "scientific." The problem is that they don't understand the process of actual peer review, don't understand Bentham's reputation, and don't understand that scientists can make mistakes or not fully evaluate evidence. It's "sciency" enough for them, and waving it around as "Truth" is easier on them. Of course, those not fully plugged in to the issues will accept the "scientific" study, not knowing it has been debunked and not knowing where to go to find the updates.

There are some legitimate Truthers out there with respect for the science involved, but the ones citing the nano-thermite study by Harrit, unless they're ignorant of the updates, are giving the group a bad name.

Eric Hoffer

sharkhearted's picture

Better to be a TRUTHER....

Better to be a TRUTHER (one who is seeking the truth)...

...than a LIESer!

Every sane rational person, should be a "truther."

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Using semantic arguments is

Using semantic arguments is really scraping the bottom of the barrel man..

Are 'birthers' seeking birth, for example?

sharkhearted's picture

Definition of a TRUTHER

One who seeks the truth...especially in the sense of resisting a possible cover up by the government.

Oh, now, governments never lie, though, right? We can trust them. Uh huh.

To carry your ANALolgy further:

A truther seeks the truth. Nothing complicated about that.

A birther questions Obama's birthplace. THAT is semantics.

But a truther seeks the truth...no matter what the cost. That is NOT semantics.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

My point is that neither are

My point is that neither are proper words, they have emerged in recent times in which context they should be understood.

Your definition of a 'birther' is correct but a 'truther' to anyone means someone who believes that 9/11 was a false flag operation carried out by the govt. That is all I was trying to say.

Truth Is Offensive — Paul Craig Roberts

In America truth is offensive. If you tell the truth, you are offensive.

But how long before being offensive becomes being “an enemy of the state”?

Throughout history truth tellers have suffered

and court historians have prospered.

It is the same today.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/03/31/truth-is-offensiv...

The ancient Greeks understood this well. In Greek mythology, Cassandra was the prophetess who no one believed despite her 100 percent record of being right. Telling the truth to Americans or to Europeans is just as expensive as telling the truth to the Greeks in ancient mythology.

In America and everywhere in the Western world or the entire world, telling the truth is
unpopular. Indeed, in the USA telling the truth has been criminalized. Look for example at Bradley Manning, held for two years in prison without bail and without a trial in violation of the US Constitution, tortured for one year of his illegal confinement in violation of US and international law, and now put on trial by corrupt prosecutors for aiding “enemies of the US” by revealing the truth, as required of him by the US military code. US soldiers are required to report war crimes.

Most americans go along with unaccountable murder, torture, and detention without evidence, which proclaims their gullibility to the entire world. There has never in history been a population as unaware as americans. The world is amazed that an insouciant people became, if only for a short time, a superpower.

sharkhearted's picture

AYE!

Besides being offensive...for those who are receptive to it...it (the truth) will SET YOU FREE!

Excellent post. Paul Craig Roberts is ahead of his time.

Thank you for sharing!

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Isn't the fact that the plane

Isn't the fact that the plane did not hit an important part of the Pentagon, where there were more people, evidence for it being an inside job?

No

That doesn't even make sense.

Sure it does

Some operatives are expendable. If you wanted victims for a false flag, who would you pick, essential personnel, or expendable ones?

Leges sine moribus vanae

The only real question I have on 911

The only real question I have is why not hit the Pentagon in the center and let it burn from within? Why hit the building on the side where it could easily be put out?

There is some others, but that one I question quite a bit.

Someone could have been killed

Very important for the 911 operation management that no one was killed in this operation. Then they could have become involved in a conspiracy to murder or worse. It is a hassle to fight with real victims families in court, and the operation management could have exposed themselves to blackmail. As long as the story is just made up, with no real victims, the necessary illegal acts will have a statute of limitations and the reported lies could for the media people and the hired witnesses be protected by the First Amendment. Fake news is not illegal. Recruitment to the operation would also have been much harder if it involved a conspiracy to murder.

So they blew up an empty part of Pentagon so that no real people should be killed or hurt. Of course they evacuated the few people in the area before the operation went live.

Isn't the fact that the plane

Isn't the fact that the plane did not hit an important part of the Pentagon, where there were more people, evidence for it being an inside job?

just to make a point--

in your careful documentation--

entire arms and other limbs, clothes, etc. Tons of things survived, but you frame the argument like only the passport survived. They already had flight manifests. They knew who was on those flights.

arms and other limbs "survived"? How, where; how do you know? Who is "they"?

You have used "they" twice; who are "they"?

And did you see the "arms and other limbs"?

I don't talk very much about this on here; I haven't spent a lot of time on this, though I am one of those who doubts the official story, which, in your eyes, makes me suspect--

Have you ever doubted anything "official"? Why or why not?

But the reason I am responding is that you are talking about how, as a middle school teacher, you have to uphold the truth and teach young people how to reason (I assume this is what you mean) and detect truth from error.

And yet you have no documentation for what you assert.

Show me the "arms and other limbs"--

Tell me who "they" are, and I might think you have some valid points to make.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

True or False?

False.

"There was no reason at all to plant a passport."

Yes there was a reason to plant it and that was to convince the public that we know who did this and we're gonna get 'em. Relating the passport holder to bin Laden as one of his followers.

edit: propaganda

Bingo

Yeap, agreed, 100%.

More free market capitalism and austrian economics, less physics pseudoscience and the words "Free Fall Speeds" repeated ad nauseum.

Eric Hoffer

I remember Eric Hoffer

"Lyndon Johnson has more humanity in the dirt under one fingernail than all the intellectuals in history"
--Eric Hoffer circa 1968

http://bfparker.hubpages.com/hub/Eric-Hoffer-1902-83-Remembe...

Leges sine moribus vanae

Phenomenal

He was a phenomenal reader and philosopher in mind. If you haven't read The True Believer, I'd suggest it to anyone.

I'm always glad when people recognize the pseudonym, it's rare that people do.

Eric Hoffer

Damn those pseudoscience

Damn those pseudoscience physic professor at M.I.T. and that especially that Green Beret demolition expert...what a fraud huh?

Live Free or Die Trying

Right on!

Sadly, people can't seem to accept that sometimes bad things just happen to good people.

IMO, the "truther" stuff is a huge distraction from the REAL conspiracy of how our civil liberties have been trampled on since 9/11.

I don't play, I commission the league.

What "truther" every denied that bad things happened to . . .

good people on 9/11?

*confused*

I didn't downvote you--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Then you should take it up with the OP

"IMO, the "truther" stuff is a huge distraction..."

Then you should take it up with the OP who started this inflammatory thread. He/she/it is the one who started this distraction.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

-96 and counting...

-96 and counting...

Can we make it to at least -100 tonight?

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

Thanks for demonstrating...

precisely what's wrong with the Daily Paul right now. Can't handle an opposing view, so you have to try to downvote and censor it instead.

I don't play, I commission the league.