If it comes down to the cold, hard [indestructable] facts of the black box versus the potential of corrupt witnesses, which path would your towering intellect and radical critical thought process lead you?
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Trancer-X
I just think it's hilarious that pkc actually said "anti-intellectual stupidity."
that's exactly what it is. why, what would you call it? :conf: seeking the truth no doubt. you can lead a horse to water, but you can't stop him being a ing .
10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes
6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad.
Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
If it comes down to the cold, hard [indestructable] facts of the black box versus the potential of corrupt witnesses, which path would your towering intellect and radical critical thought process lead you?
that completely depends on the nature of the topic. in this case, i am more than swayed by the hundreds of people that saw a plane crash into a building, the dead bodies of those known to be on flight 77, as well as all the debris left by the impact.
so tell me, how do YOU think they snuck the passengers into the pentagon? im really intrigued.
pkcRAISTLIN
provide some evidence that mike walter changed his story at all. he doesn't change it, you fruitcakes just have serious issues with your "research".
now, tell me how that is ANY different to what he said in the beginning you fraud?
{b.s.e.}
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
that completely depends on the nature of the topic. in this case, i am more than swayed by the hundreds of people that saw a plane crash into a building, the dead bodies of those known to be on flight 77, as well as all the debris left by the impact.
so tell me, how do YOU think they snuck the passengers into the pentagon? im really intrigued.
That is an interesting picture, but it only shows me what appears to be a body.. I don't know how anyone would die in that position after colliding with a building. More pictures, or links?
Trancer-X
So why didn't Pentagon survivor April Gallup see any evidence of the alleged plane?
This guy says he saw a 20 passenger corporate jet? lol
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
That is an interesting picture, but it only shows me what appears to be a body.. I don't know how anyone would die in that position after colliding with a building. More pictures, or links?
that particular picture is from the Moussaoui trial, you can google that as well.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
now, tell me how that is ANY different to what he said in the beginning you fraud?
come on trancer, you dont want me to post that guide detailing your M.O. down to the letter again do you? fraud.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Witnesses
A message to 9/11 conspiracists from someone who was at the Pentagon on 9/11. Please take it to heart. http://tinyurl.com/f4ykj
It is likely that hundreds of people directly saw flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Dozens were interviewed by numerous news outlets: Witness List 1 – List 2 – List 3 – List 4 – List 5 – More
Many witnesses were in their cars, in a traffic jam directly in front of the Pentagon. Most of those people drove away and were not interviewed. Below is a summary of the accounts quoted in the lists and spreadsheet summary above. These are mostly accounts that appeared in mainstream media reports. Many more people probably witnessed the attack.
From the lists above, 136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and
104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.
6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.
26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.
39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.
2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.
7 said it was a Boeing 757.
8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.
2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.
4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.
10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).
16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.
15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.
3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.
3 took photographs of the aftermath.
Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."
And of course,
0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.
0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.
when presented with the evidence, trancer ignores and instead tries to reference supposed testimony that contradicts the hundreds of witnesses.
its called confirmation bias, and the number one reason why trancer is incapable of performing university-level research. fraud.
Trancer-X
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
That is an interesting picture, but it only shows me what appears to be a body.. I don't know how anyone would die in that position after colliding with a building. More pictures, or links?
You would think that they would be smart enough to cover this up better but apparently they're relying on people who are pretty incompetent to do that for them. lol
You would think that they would be smart enough to cover this up better but apparently they're relying on people who are pretty incompetent to do that for them. lol
10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by {b.s.e.}
If it comes down to the cold, hard [indestructable] facts of the black box versus the potential of corrupt witnesses, which path would your towering intellect and radical critical thought process lead you?
Oh, so witnesses at the Pentagon are corrupt. But witnesses of explosions at the WTC? We can trust them right?:stongue:
Trancer-X
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Oh, so witnesses at the Pentagon are corrupt. But witnesses of explosions at the WTC? We can trust them right?:stongue:
You do know what a gag order is don't you?
For some odd reason the FBI was busy serving people with them after the 9/11 attacks. I wonder why? ;)
