Enough with the freakin’ questions! You are using them as a weapon, just like most of the other Truthers. Why do you bother asking them if you automatically dismiss any answer that doesn’t fit your preconceived fairy tale? If you knew ahead of time that you would dismiss the evidence concerning the bodies that you asked for, then you are not not arguing in good faith, and deserve nothing more.
It also wasn’t a hole made by two large, very tough airplane engines that folded in behind the nose and proceeded to barge their way right into the central courtyard, otherwise, where are they?
Don’t bother answering him-he’s only here doing his Truther duty, and doesn’t listen to any answer he doesn’t already believe.
People get ideas in their head and just don’t let go - even very intelligent people. My dad was college roommates with the prominent 911 conspiracy theorist Steve Jones, a college professor at BYU. He sent us a dvd of one of his lectures on the subject for christmas. I will freely admit it seemed very credible when I watched it; the arguments seemed sensible as presented. It was only when I looked for further information (and asked about it here in GD and got quickly eviscerated and mercilessly mocked) that the problems became clear. He was very smart - but this wasn’t his field. And he baked his carreer as a result.
Of course, he was also a mormon. Being smart doesn’t necessarily preclude belief about anything.
Who said there were no bodies on the planes? Aside from you, I mean. I think that most people support the official story are of the opinion that the planes were indeed occupied, and their occupants indeed died. On site.
In pieces as the images at the end of the video I posted showed. And indeed, the damage showed were the engines did go.
Now, please go back and reply to show you are getting this.
You can see a piece of engine in one of the photos here. I’m not sure who told you engines are “very tough.” They’ll do a number on you if they fall on you, but planes are made of aluminum, which isn’t so tough. They need to be light so they can fly, and this particular aluminum plane had just crashed into a brick building.
Poisoning the well, ad hominems, arguments from incredulity, arguments from ignorance, arguments from authority, and all the usual bullshit. I’m outta here.
Yes, you’ve won. There is nothing at all to be concerned about and you can all return to the previous program.
ivan astikov asked where the bodies were, as if their absence were suspicious. When Mr. Miskatonic provided some pictures, ivan astikov responded as if the presence of the bodies were suspicious. I hope I don’t need to explain why this is a logical problem.
That had been partly reinforced to withstand an indirect nuclear strike.
Pointing out that there is no ocean in the middle of the continental fucking United States is not an argument from ignorance, ivan astikov. If you don’t feel like responding to arguments about your theory, don’t bother posting it.
You didn’t have to list your tactics - we noticed them already. (And seriously, you’re not in a great position to be throwing the “arguments from incredulity” label around from. Surely even you can see that.)
And you’ll be back. If not in this thread, then in another, where you can start fresh without all the pesky people asking you to admit that you read the posts proving you were wrong.
No, we haven’t “won”, because the next time the subject comes up you will be there starting over with the same endless list of questions.
It’s still standing, right?
Let’s see, shall we?
Right. It was the not-yet-reinforced Wedge 2 that collapsed.
Not too much of a hijack, but the other night I started watching a 911 conspiracy show on the History Channel (I think) and it started with this young chick talking about how the accident scene on the ground in Pennsylvania didn’t look like what a plane crash would make.
Her conclusion: United Flight 93 NEVER EXISTED!
I have to admit that was a new one for me, but what is the theory behind this little gem? Did they invent the identities of all of the passengers on the plane to concoct a fictional hijacked airline and fake a crash scene? For what purpose? Just stick with the 3 planes that did damage. What was the need for the 4th?
I immediately turned it off cursing at myself for watching, but I am now curious about the details of this crazy theory…
I’m sure you’ll be there, just like that ocean covering Virginia, West Virginia and Ohio isn’t.
I actually used logic to figure out it was unlikely that a missile hit the pentagon, the phisical evidence (besides the withnesses) shows that a passenger plane did hit the Pentagon on 9/11/2001
And here you are also wrong, I do agree with the makers of the 911debunked site:
What I will always believe is that some people that funded the truther movements did so to discredit also the people that later bothered to protest the machinations made to pave the road to the Iraq war.
That’s an element of Operation Northwoods. The '60s relic that would have attempted to drum up support amongst Cuban rebels and ex-pats for a US invasion of Cuba by blaming Castro’s army for simulated attacks at Guantanamo and elsewhere. It, of course, was never carried out and the general who signed off on it was quickly shuffled off to Europe.
One would need to substitute, say, Puerto Ricans for Castro’s army to make Northwoods relevant to 9/11.
The Island, duh. :rolleyes: