2. Relentlessness.
They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.
5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor.
Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.
Magnetonium
There's a reason why I don't ever post in PDD forum anymore.
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
There is tons of evidence that was not mentioned, completely hidden from the public and lied about on 9/11. Thousands of inconsistencies are apparent throughout all of the events of the 9/11 time line.
Your ridiculous chart proves the official story to be bull. Logic as your silly chart implies would require people to believe things that have never happened before in history of mankind.
On 9/11 these things happened more then once on the same day. Again you would have better odds of winning the lottery 1,000 times consecutively then what we were told happened on 9/11. The official account of it that is.
If you believe in miracles then the official story makes sense.
culorut
Let me guess this guy is in it for the money and fame for using his logic.
Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career.
Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and power plant mechanic.
Essay:
In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft and in most cases the precise cause of the accident.
The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view."
IL Duce
this is totally real, because it is on television,...and television is never wrong!
Comrade Stalin
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
WTC building 7 fell practically at the rate of free fall (WTC 1 and 2 did as well). Fires cannot cause this no matter how you want to spin it. In order for fires to do this they would have had to remove all the support columns at the same time to cause symmetrical collapses, in other words impossible.
Controlled demolition does this every single time without a hitch.
The US government did ignore 9/11 specific warnings, so who's lying and covering things up?
The many agencies from countless countries around the world or the same lying bastards that told everyone there were WMD's in Iraq?
Who cares how it fell or how fast? You want to post bull about people hearing explosions hours before the collapse. Well guess what? Demolition experts detonate explosives right at the moment of collapse, not randomly far before the actual collapse itself. You also can never ever answer the question of who set the explosives and how they were able to set the many tonnes needed to bring these buildings down, without being seen and discovered. Not to mention the fact, that with the amount of people that would have to be involved, someone who have snitched by now...:rolleyes:
And of course fires alone didn't bring down the buildings. You obviously haven't read the fact that a huge 10 story section of the building was basically scooped out. Face it, your entire theory is falling apart in the face of scrutiny. You can't even answer the most basic questions of who exactly did it or how. They just did it and we're supposed to swallow this bull without question? You're open-minded my ass...My god, the US government ignored warnings about 9/11, but since they did it, they basically ignored warnings about their ing selves? God damn, you're thick...:rolleyes:
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
The only thing that fails time and time again is the 9/11 official story when scrutinized.
NIST Final Report on WTC Building 7 Proven Completely Wrong in 10 Minutes
IL Duce
youtube = no need for education?
basilisk
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Micheal Hess heard, felt and experienced the explosions in WTC building 7 just like Jennings did before WTC 1 and 2 collapsed. They were in the building together.
Are you brain damaged or something? Your idea of a "controlled demolition" is blowing charges 5 hours before the building actually collapses? Never mind the fact that eyewitness testimony is poor-quality evidence... but you've also made several leaps of logic from "they heard a sound" to "it was explosive charges set off."
Conspiracy nuts like you seem completely incapable of providing anything resembling a coherent theory of what might have happened on 9/11. You've got questions, things that don't add up, grainy yet mysterious photos, cherry-picked data, eyewitness testimony, and next to no understanding of geopolitics, engineering, or human psychology. This does not add up to anything meaningful--just a delusional haze of paranoid outrage expressed through straw man arguments and slipshod logic. It's pathetic.
The truth is that there are some very interesting avenues of research open to anyone concerned with what happened on 9/11... and you and your ilk choose the low road of ignorance and stupidity every ing time. In this sense, you and your wing-nut buddies are useful idiots (look it up if you don't know the term), diffusing legitimate inquiry and marginalizing any reasonable attempt to critically examine the official story.
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
The claim that 25 percent of the building was scooped out by debris was false and NIST had to go back on their words because new pictures of WTC 7 were released via the Freedom of Information Act which showed otherwise.
If you do not believe NIST went back on their words you should try reading the official report on WTC 7 in it's entirety directly from NIST themselves. It would be a good start before spreading more false information. NIST's final conclusion was that fires caused a symmetrical collapse of WTC building 7 at near free fall speed, LOL.
colorut is such a retard that you can see him on jersey shore season 3.
Comrade Stalin
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
The only thing that fails time and time again is the 9/11 official story when scrutinized.
Way to avoid every single gaping logical hole I pointed out in your belief system. I'm not watching your stupid Youtube videos so you can stop posting them right now. Aren't you capable of your own reasoned critical thinking? Or do you just resort to regurgitating, word for word, other people's ideas? You are nothing but a distributor of infowars anti-government propaganda. So much for reasoned debate! Can't debate rationally with a fundamentalist ideologue (YOU). Let me lay out for you so you can't avoid it any further.
1) IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PLANT THOUSANDS OF TONNES OF EXPLOSIVES WITHOUT BEING DISCOVERED. You can never ever answer the question of who set the explosives and how they were able to set the many tonnes needed to bring these buildings down, without being seen and discovered.
2) Demolition experts detonate explosives right at the moment of collapse, not randomly far before the actual collapse itself.
3) With the amount of people that would have to be involved, someone would have snitched by now. If the government can't keep Wikileaks from publishing tens of thousands of top secret Pentagon documents, they sure as hell can't keep a secret of the magnitude you're accusing them of having. Oh, forgot, they probably had "Men in Black" come to their door to shut them up or off to the FEMA concentration camp right?:rolleyes:
4) The fire/structural damage hypothesis blows a "demolition hypothesis" out of the water, in terms of feasibility because previous points #1 and #2. Again, you can't plant thousands of tonnes of explosives without being discovered, or without some insider snitching, or without hearing a huge organized series of blasts the VERY SECOND of the collapse.
5) You can't prove at all what the supposed explosions were. For some reason, you can't compute the fact that many things explode that aren't bombs.
6) LAST BUT NOT LEAST. THE US GOVERNMENT IGNORED MANY INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS OF 9/11, BUT SINCE THE US GOVERNMENT CARRIED OUT 9/11, THEY IGNORED WARNINGS ABOUT THEMSELVES!!! :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: I will certainly make sure this utter failure in logic of yours won't be forgotten...;)
