Geroin, just give it up...please. If you don't respond, he will go away.
geroin
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Peer review is THE standard for investigating scientific phenomenon. If it doesn’t pass peer review, it doesn’t exist. It’s rather amusing you don’t understand this yet accuse us of being oblivious! Ha. What you fail to realise, in your rather shallow understanding of everything 911 CT, is that there have been many idiotic papers written by the unqualified fools you are referring to here (though note, none of them are structural engineers, I wonder why that is!) and all of them have failed in their scientific endeavour. One wonders why you continue to believe their nonsense, when they are unable to meet basic standards in science. Why are you satisfied with junk science? Couldn’t be asymmetrical scepticism & confirmation bias could it? Surely not! :haha:
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.
It’s not really anybody else’s fault if you don’t understand something.
The facts are that flight 77 is known to have left the airport, hundreds travellers saw a united airways commercial plane crash into the pentagon, numerous plane debris, some of it carrying the UA logo was found at the site, DNA matches were made for all but 4 of the passengers/crew at the pentagon crash site, flight 77 and its cargo didn’t show up elsewhere, the black boxes from 77 were recovered at the pentagon, UA are satisfied their plane crashed at the site.
What exactly don’t you understand?
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.
8. Leaping to conclusions.
Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.
Grow up little boy.
the only person that need to grow up is you, you may now stop quoting your stupid ing copy/pasted paragraphs that don't respond to the information that i just posted, i dont give a what it says there i want to know concrete information and explanation.
"If it doesn’t pass peer review, it doesn’t exist."
that's a stupid ing logic because not everything needs to be peer-reviewed to be 100% proven in science. i can calculate a distace from a-b myself on my won using a specific measurement and get a result. If that is not peer reviewed that means i'm wrong? are you retarded. There are things like common sense that do not need an explanation.
"is that there have been many idiotic papers written by the unqualified fools.."
Yes, i will agree on that but
"all of them have failed in their scientific endeavour."
prove it, let's see some proof that every single one scientific explanation by other engeneers/scientist that did not get same results has failed. you're full of .
"Why are you satisfied with junk science?"
what is junk science? where is the proof that those results are better than the results that were achieved by the other scientists? because they were peer reviewed? that's nonsense.
"The facts are that flight 77 is known to have left the airport, hundreds travellers saw a united airways commercial plane crash into the pentagon, numerous plane debris, some of it carrying the UA logo was found at the site, DNA matches were made for all but 4 of the passengers/crew at the pentagon crash site, flight 77 and its cargo didn’t show up elsewhere, the black boxes from 77 were recovered at the pentagon, UA are satisfied their plane crashed at the site."
so you post a video of one guy who claims he saw it crash into the building and you want me to believe that? where is the video evidence of the crash, there are numerous tapes that are not released, why? i want to see with my own eyes then i will believe it.
In fact flight 77 is not confirmed to be the plane that crashed into the building to this ing day that is officially! the whole ing official explanation of the crash is completely UNMATCHABLE by the numbers that were provided by the officials and DOESNT MAKE ANY SCIENTIFIC SENSE whatsoever. Numerous witnesses in my video state that the plane traveled in a completely different direction. Stop ing dismissing my information and then post your stupid ing quotes that no one gives a about.
yukii
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
and then
right... what makes you think if pentagon can't prevent one thing they cannot prevent another secret from leaking. It's ing common sense just like you stated that 2 separate events should have no correlation.
You guys are completely ing oblivious to the world around you if you think everything is exactly the way it is written on paper by the govt officials, yet you rely on those documents and you claim that it is THE ING EVIDENCE. Yet anything that is proposed by "other" scientists/scholars/professors/engineers etc that claim that it did not happen that way, they are considered outcasts, their theories are obviously not "peer-reviewed" because no one wants to in the bowl they eat from and lose their jobs. This has happened to almost everyone who tries to investigate or question the material independently. There are countless of formulas/calculations/examinations that were completed independently which do not yield the same results that were provided to us by officials yet you guys completely dismiss them, claiming that is not EVIDENCE but a ing CONSPIRACY THEORY. You keep living in that same stupid ing cloud of idiocy and think that the govt does everything the way they say.
To this day i have not heard one proper explanation that fully satisfies me about the pentagon crash. I have looked up various information specifically on pentagon on sept 11 and i do not see any clear evidence that the plane crashed into the building the way it did.
While i was doing that i did come across this video which has numerous eye witnesses claiming the exact opposite of what was written by govt officials, i'd like to hear a little more explanation.
you can yourself if you are planning on dismissing any "video evidence." i don't really care.
:wtf:
I'll just leave this here:
Nick Cenik
Get 'em Gera!!
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
you may now stop quoting your stupid ing copy/pasted paragraphs
Only when you stop fitting the criteria.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
that's a stupid ing logic because not everything needs to be peer-reviewed to be 100% proven in science. i can calculate a distace from a-b myself on my won using a specific measurement and get a result. If that is not peer reviewed that means i'm wrong? are you retarded. There are things like common sense that do not need an explanation.
Wikipedia Conspiracy Theory Guide 6. Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning;
Inductive steps are mistaken to bear as much confidence as deductive ones.
Appeals to 'common sense';
Common sense steps substitute for the more robust, academically respectable methodologies available for investigating sociological and scientific phenomena.
The point is if someone is conducting research and they are unable to satisfy their peers in a respectable journal, then their work is irrelevant. It doesn’t meet the basic standards in order to be considered evidence. You (again) are unable to tell good evidence from bad.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
prove it, let's see some proof that every single one scientific explanation by other engeneers/scientist that did not get same results has failed. you're full of .
well firstly, the proof is that their work has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. Secondly, you could read the work by NASA scientist ryan Mackey, who demolishes all the common lies told by jones, gage, legge et al.
Originally posted by geroin
what is junk science? where is the proof that those results are better than the results that were achieved by the other scientists? because they were peer reviewed? that's nonsense.
Yes, the fact that they were peer reviewed means they are categorically better than the work that cannot get published. THIS IS HOW SCIENCE WORKS you ignorant twat. It is THE standard in science, one that cannot be met by your 911 retards. I mean, have you even read these papers? I suspect you haven’t. because if you had, I would be awfully surprised that you couldn’t tell what garbage they were. Which papers are you referring to when you talk about their results?
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
so you post a video of one guy who claims he saw it crash into the building and you want me to believe that?
Yeah, funny how he was good enough to cherry pick by your band of merry men when they repeatedly claimed that a missile hit the building, based on the quote from this reporter. Oh what, he disagrees with you so now his evidence isn’t good enough? Haha. But no, I don’t consider him to be anything definitive, I reproduced it to coincide with the rest of the ing evidence found at the pentagon.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
where is the video evidence of the crash,
There isn’t any.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
there are numerous tapes that are not released, why?
They don’t show anything. You should realise this had you read the FOI requests relating to the ~80 videos provided to the FBI regarding the pentagon. Welcome to 2008! Let us know when you’ve caught up with reality in 2010.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
i want to see with my own eyes then i will believe it.
I haven’t seen any video of the titanic sinking, yet I accept that it did. This assumption that if its not on video it didn’t happen is just juvenile and illogical.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANE?
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PASSENGERS AND CREW?
HOW DID THE DNA OF THE PASSENGERS AND CREW GET TO THE PENTAGON?
WHERE DID ALL THE PLANE WRECKAGE COME FROM?
WHERE DID THE BLACK BOX FROM FLIGHT 77 COME FROM?
Etc etc etc.
You no-plane retards have been unable to provide any answer to these questions. You are unable to understand occam’s razor.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
In fact flight 77 is not confirmed to be the plane that crashed into the building to this ing day that is officially!
The moussaoui trial begs to differ. It satisfied the burden of proof in a court of law. Not good enough for you though im sure, because unless you were actually there on the day, it didn’t happen!! :haha:
Originally posted by geroin
the whole ing official explanation of the crash is completely UNMATCHABLE by the numbers that were provided by the officials and DOESNT MAKE ANY SCIENTIFIC SENSE whatsoever.
what numbers? What doesn’t make “scientific” sense? You’re not exactly in a position to quote science, as you don’t seem to understand how it works and you certainly don’t understand how poor the journal of 911 studies is.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
Numerous witnesses in my video state that the plane traveled in a completely different direction. Stop ing dismissing my information and then post your stupid ing quotes that no one gives a about.
Eyewitnesses can prove problematic and should only be considered in addition to the other available evidence. I have the plane, the black box, all the crew and passengers from flight 77, and the fact hundreds of people saw a UA commercial plane crash into the pentagon. You have…confused witnesses who you put all your faith in and ignore all the physical evidence at the crash site. oh, and the fact that the plane hasn’t magically appeared elsewhere. Awesome logic there! ROFL.
There is no debate. You’re an ignorant child with a terribly juvenile understanding of 911.
Comrade Stalin
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
and then
right... what makes you think if pentagon can't prevent one thing they cannot prevent another secret from leaking. It's ing common sense just like you stated that 2 separate events should have no correlation.
It demonstrates a valid precedent. There is ZERO precedent for the US government killing thousands of its own citizens so they can dominate the world. There is a precedent for the government's inability to keep secrets. You obviously haven't allowed to let sink in the possibility that a 9/11 conspiracy plot is IMPOSSIBLE to keep secret. I have outlined reason, after reason, after reason why. I can't help you if you refuse to seriously contemplate these logical gaps in reality.
quote:
You guys are completely ing oblivious to the world around you if you think everything is exactly the way it is written on paper by the govt officials, yet you rely on those documents and you claim that it is THE ING EVIDENCE.
The 9/11 commission is not the final, end-all, be-all, explanation of the events of 9/11. As time goes on, we will most certainly have a more complete explanation. But whatever truthfully objective investigations, or historical analysis that may come to be in the future, they sure as hell aren't going to validate 1% of the bull coming out of 9/11 truth religion.
quote:
Yet anything that is proposed by "other" scientists/scholars/professors/engineers etc that claim that it did not happen that way, they are considered outcasts, their theories are obviously not "peer-reviewed" because no one wants to in the bowl they eat from and lose their jobs. This has happened to almost everyone who tries to investigate or question the material independently. There are countless of formulas/calculations/examinations that were completed independently which do not yield the same results that were provided to us by officials yet you guys completely dismiss them, claiming that is not EVIDENCE but a ing CONSPIRACY THEORY. You keep living in that same stupid ing cloud of idiocy and think that the govt does everything the way they say.
Do you know what "peer-reviewed" research is? Apparently not. For you, if it's plastered on some obscure 9/11 truth website, or a youtube video, it's divinely inspired truth. Well, let me tell you, none of that bull would be allowed in a court of law, so it has ZERO use in this debate. And yes, the video you posted is complete and utter bull, and I'm not even going to watch it. If you and your friends are so spot-on, then let's see your peer-reviewed research paper, or at the very least, an indictment of the conspirators for treason. Come on. Let's see it? How many peer-reviewed documents have been published by 9/11 truthers. Hmmm...ZERO. You people don't even know who to indict for treason, what their roles are, and how they carried it out, from the planning to the operation phases. You have NOTHING.
quote:
To this day i have not heard one proper explanation that fully satisfies me about the pentagon crash. I have looked up various information specifically on pentagon on sept 11 and i do not see any clear evidence that the plane crashed into the building the way it did.
Even though numerous eye-witnesses saw an actual plane hit the Pentagon? Have you ever been to the Pentagon in person? I assume you haven't. I have been there multiple times and the Pentagon is not in the middle of ing nowhere. There is an interstate highway just 200 meters or so from the building, surrounded by parking lots, and dense city. So please, find me the one guy who thought he saw a missile hit the Pentagon. Because I can find you eye-witness after eye-witness say they saw a plane hit the Pentagon.
While i was doing that i did come across this video which has numerous eye witnesses claiming the exact opposite of what was written by govt officials, i'd like to hear a little more explanation.
you can yourself if you are planning on dismissing any "video evidence." i don't really care.
No, YOU can go yourself if you expect me to waste an hour and half of my time watching that disgraceful excuse for a documentary. This has nothing to do with some blind trust of everything the government says. Really, it has everything to do, with my disgust of the 9/11 truth's religious blasphemy of true scientific inquiry.
geroin
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Wikipedia Conspiracy Theory Guide 6. Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning;
Inductive steps are mistaken to bear as much confidence as deductive ones.
Appeals to 'common sense';
Common sense steps substitute for the more robust, academically respectable methodologies available for investigating sociological and scientific phenomena.
The point is if someone is conducting research and they are unable to satisfy their peers in a respectable journal, then their work is irrelevant. It doesn’t meet the basic standards in order to be considered evidence. You (again) are unable to tell good evidence from bad.
Again you're with your stupid ing quotes, i'm not going to repeat myself if you're not planning on specifically addressing me on my all of my aforementioned points. Like i said, the fact that their work is being dismissed by you or that it is not being "peer-reviewed" does not guarantee nor does it prove that their research is irrelevant specifically based on this event.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
well firstly, the proof is that their work has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. Secondly, you could read the work by NASA scientist ryan Mackey, who demolishes all the common lies told by jones, gage, legge et al.
I just read some of information on this website and you want me to believe this stupid bs?
bla bla ing bla, everything he bases on he quotes the official document released by the nist, which i specifically mentioned that I DO NOT BELIEVE. how many times do i have to explain that to you. If that was peer-reviewed then there some serious ing corruption in the system.
"In Brief: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building "
like i said the flight 77 was never identified to be the plane that hit the building.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
There isn’t any.
yes there is you goddamn moron, here they are:
but the only problem is 2 out of 85 videos that dont show ANYTHING thgat were released are pretty useless, aren't they?
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Yes, the fact that they were peer reviewed means they are categorically better than the work that cannot get published. THIS IS HOW SCIENCE WORKS you ignorant twat. It is THE standard in science, one that cannot be met by your 911 retards. I mean, have you even read these papers? I suspect you haven’t. because if you had, I would be awfully surprised that you couldn’t tell what garbage they were. Which papers are you referring to when you talk about their results?
You stupid ing asshat, i was telling you that i'm not inventing anything new when i take a ruler out that already has measurements on it and it use that same ing science ruler to calculate the distance from a-b it will be the correct distance because i didn't invent the ruler, i do not need to have that peer reviewed because if i properly document my research as you'd like me to call it then i can prove just by common sense that the distance is the the one i just calculated just based on numbers. If i take a , i do not need that to be peer reviewed because i just took a and it's there, that's science and common sense at the same time, i may not even need to document that.
I read many different documents, i'm not basing my opinion solely on the information provided by the conspiracy people.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Yeah, funny how he was good enough to cherry pick by your band of merry men when they repeatedly claimed that a missile hit the building, based on the quote from this reporter. Oh what, he disagrees with you so now his evidence isn’t good enough? Haha. But no, I don’t consider him to be anything definitive, I reproduced it to coincide with the rest of the ing evidence found at the pentagon.
i dont know what band of merry men you're talking about, i was talking about my own understanding of the events that day and this one stupid reporter claiming he saw everything from a-z is not going to change my mind. if you actually believe this yourself you are worse than the actual nut conspiracy idiots, sorry but to me this just reaks of garbage.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
They don’t show anything. You should realise this had you read the FOI requests relating to the ~80 videos provided to the FBI regarding the pentagon. Welcome to 2008! Let us know when you’ve caught up with reality in 2010.
They don't show anything? so why not release them right? oh no never mind we can show only 2 which show everything, the fireball is the plane! go yourself
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I haven’t seen any video of the titanic sinking, yet I accept that it did. This assumption that if its not on video it didn’t happen is just juvenile and illogical.
oh look, using past completely unrelated events for their logic, isn't that ironic..
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANE?
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PASSENGERS AND CREW?
HOW DID THE DNA OF THE PASSENGERS AND CREW GET TO THE PENTAGON?
WHERE DID ALL THE PLANE WRECKAGE COME FROM?
WHERE DID THE BLACK BOX FROM FLIGHT 77 COME FROM?
Etc etc etc.
You no-plane retards have been unable to provide any answer to these questions. You are unable to understand occam’s razor.
you are the only retard here broski, you haven't been able to prove one point so far, plane wreckage does not exist, flight 77 is not identified, black box is empty (more below) passengers are identified?? if there is no wreckage it would be hard to believe there would be anything to indentify, oh wait theres this right?
ok you converted me now lol
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
The moussaoui trial begs to differ. It satisfied the burden of proof in a court of law. Not good enough for you though im sure, because unless you were actually there on the day, it didn’t happen!! :haha:
No, not good enough. there is no evidence on there indicating that it was in fact Flight 77, stop talking .
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
what numbers? What doesn’t make “scientific” sense? You’re not exactly in a position to quote science, as you don’t seem to understand how it works and you certainly don’t understand how poor the journal of 911 studies is.
I'm not in a position to quote science? are you a ing idiot? i'm not making up science as i go, i'm quoting information from the report that you ing quoted yourself, based on the information in the report the plane traveled in a different direction (to the south) as to what witnesses that saw the plane and that have provided the same witness information to the 9/11 commission in prior years. The number i'm talking about is ASL height to the location of the plane as it was about to hit, the numbers do not MATCH.
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Eyewitnesses can prove problematic and should only be considered in addition to the other available evidence. I have the plane, the black box, all the crew and passengers from flight 77, and the fact hundreds of people saw a UA commercial plane crash into the pentagon. You have…confused witnesses who you put all your faith in and ignore all the physical evidence at the crash site. oh, and the fact that the plane hasn’t magically appeared elsewhere. Awesome logic there! ROFL.
There is no debate. You’re an ignorant child with a terribly juvenile understanding of 911.
Yes there is no debate you have a black box that has absolutely no data on it idiot
"the FBI took charge of the box and its data.[83] CBS News reported that "Preliminary information shows there is nothing that appears to be useful on the cockpit voice tape. The tape appears to be blank or erased."[84] In its report on the CVR, the NTSB identified the unit as an L-3 Communications, Fairchild Aviation Recorders model A-100A cockpit voice recorder; a device which records on magnetic tape. The NTSB reported that "The majority of the recording tape was fused into a solid block of charred plastic." No usable segments of tape were found inside the recorder."
or maybe you have other peer reviewed material that shows that there was data on the blackbox?
"Eyewitnesses can prove problematic and should only be considered in addition to the other available evidence."
LOL ok buddy, an eye witness can prove problematic based on what? if you take a look there are 2 police officers WHO SWORE by their words and said they would say the same under the court of law that the plane traveled in different direction.
let's review physical evidence at the crash site...you mean that one piece of metal that is lying on the grass? is that what you're referring to, where is the proof from 100's of witnesses that saw Flight 77 plane crash into the building, i'm eager to see/hear it. Yes witnesses saw a commercial jet, but you haven't explained how it is travelling in another direction which is bases in your "official report"
yukii
GO PKC!!!! GO COMRADE!!! I'M ROOTING FOR YOU!!
:gsmile:
Could this be the future for geroin? I mean.. look at the facts dude.. Read this book and watch the vid..... Open your eyes... Just watch this vid ok?
Silky Johnson
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
is not being "peer-reviewed" does not guarantee nor does it prove that their research is irrelevant specifically based on this event.
No, but the fact that its illogical and scientific nonsense certainly does.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
I just read some of information on this website and you want me to believe this stupid bs?
bla bla ing bla, everything he bases on he quotes the official document released by the nist, which i specifically mentioned that I DO NOT BELIEVE. how many times do i have to explain that to you. If that was peer-reviewed then there some serious ing corruption in the system.
NIST’s analyses remain the pre-eminent research on the collapse of 1,2 & 7. I don’t care you “don’t believe” their work. You are intellectually incapable of assessing their research.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
like i said the flight 77 was never identified to be the plane that hit the building.
Yeah, the black box, the crew who flew the plane and the passengers known to be on the flight just aren’t good enough!
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
yes there is you goddamn moron, here they are:
You are truly intellectually disabled. You wanted to know why the videos hadn’t been released. Those ones have been released haven’t they head? So one would assume you were not referring to those when you wanted to know why the rest of the videos aren’t available? Or were you referring to released videos when you asked why they hadn’t been released? Haha.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
but the only problem is 2 out of 85 videos that dont show ANYTHING thgat were released are pretty useless, aren't they?
you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them smarter.
quote:
Claim: A Video clearly showing Pentagon hit has not been released / there are 85 tapes from Pentagon.
In Brief: Video showing the impact from the Pentagon Checkpoint has been released. Video showing the fireball from the Doubletree Hotel camera has been released.
Videos have been evidence for the Moussaoui trial, thus not released until 2006. A FOIA request was filled in a effort to get video footage released of the Pentagon crash. FBI has said 85 videos were potentially responsive to a FOIA request, but a huge majority of them shows neither the Pentagon crash site, nor the impact. Or show the area only after the impact. Only a couple of them show anything at all.
So there are no 85 tapes from Pentagon. There are 85 tapes. Many of these videotapes do not have footage of the Pentagon at all. Instead, many have footage of the WTC, some are security video tapes taken from a Kinko's in Florida, etc. Some that show the Pentagon were taken days after the attacks, and some in the evening of 9/11/2001.
Why did agent Maguire (FBI) talk about 85 tapes, then? Why did she think these 85 tapes were potentially responsive to a FOIA request, eventhough all of them were not even of the Pentagon area?
The answer lies in the way she determined which tapes could possibly be potentially responsive to a FOIA request.
Originally posted by geroin
You stupid ing asshat, i was telling you that i'm not inventing anything new when i take a ruler out that already has measurements on it and it use that same ing science ruler to calculate the distance from a-z it will be the correct distance because i didn't invent the ruler, i do not need to have that peer reviewed because if i properly document my research as you'd like me to call it then i can prove just by common sense that the distance is the the one i just calculated just based on numbers.
CIT, jones, gage, legge et al do not do this. they make stuff up to sell gullible fools like you tshirts and mugs. The point you’re missing is that if you measure a-z and find a-z equals 30cm, and then nobody is able to reproduce your experiment, then your measurements become seriously suspect. Perhaps you would like to read jones’ work on cold fusion and his paper on jesus visiting native Americans? Ha.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
If i take a , i do not need that to be peer reviewed because i just took a and it's there, that's science and common sense at the same time, i may not even need to document that.
This is probably the closest analogy for the work performed by jones & CIT.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
i was talking about my own understanding of the events that day
Yeah, very very poor understanding.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
and this one stupid reporter claiming he saw everything from a-z is not going to change my mind. if you actually believe this yourself you are worse than the actual nut conspiracy idiots, sorry but to me this just reaks of garbage.
there are, in addition to mike walters, several hundred people who saw a plane crash into the pentagon. You’re right though, nothing could change your mind, because you didn’t get to your opinion via logic and evidence. its just a strongly-held belief, probably because it suits your worldview. Most of the 911 tards I have come across fall into the same boat- no matter what you show them they’ll still be believers.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
They don't show anything? so why not release them right? oh no never mind we can show only 2 which show everything, the fireball is the plane! go yourself
As above. Had you done as much research as you claim, you should already know the answer to this. Not only are you wrong on just about everything, but you don’t even know anything about the evidence you claim exists. Hell, im a hardline anti 911 CTer and even I know the pretend evidence better than you do. you’re a joke.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
you are the only retard here broski, you haven't been able to prove one point so far, plane wreckage does not exist, flight 77 is not identified, black box is empty (more below) passengers are identified?? if there is no wreckage it would be hard to believe there would be anything to indentify, oh wait theres this right?
quote:
Claim: How could the passengers be identified if the plane was so destroyed? / There were no passengers.
In Brief: What some experts have called "the most comprehensive forensic investigation in U.S. history" ended Nov. 16 with the identification of 184 of the 189 who died in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.
Teams of forensic scientists, under the direction of Demris Lee, technical leader of the Nuclear DNA Section, took over the difficult chore of generating a DNA profile of the victims. Their work included not only the Pentagon crash victims, but the victims of the Somerset County crash as well. Every one of the organization's 102 DNA analysts, sample processors, logistics staff, and administrative personnel were involved -- from collecting, tracking, analyzing DNA samples, and gathering and logging DNA reference material to preparing DNA reports. For 18 days following the terrorist attacks, AFDIL employees worked on 12-hour shifts, seven days a week to meet the mission requirements.
There were the bodies and passengers we are told to. Or the 102 analysts are in on the conspiracy. Which one is more likely?
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.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
No, not good enough. there is no evidence on there indicating that it was in fact Flight 77, stop talking .
:haha: yeah mate, all that DNA and crash evidence and hundreds of witnesses aint good enough for the woo brigade!
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
I'm not in a position to quote science? are you a ing idiot? i'm not making up science as i go, i'm quoting information from the report that you ing quoted yourself, based on the information in the report the plane traveled in a different direction (to the south) as to what witnesses that saw the plane and that have provided the same witness information to the 9/11 commission in prior years. The number i'm talking about is ASL height to the location of the plane as it was about to hit, the numbers do not MATCH.
You’re not in a position to quote science because you don’t understand what kinds of science actually matter in the real world of grown ups.
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.
This is you. concentrating on directions of planes etc rather than the bodies of the crew and passengers, the plane wreckage, the black box found etc. hopeless retardation.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
Yes there is no debate you have a black box that has absolutely no data on it idiot
"the FBI took charge of the box and its data.[83] CBS News reported that "Preliminary information shows there is nothing that appears to be useful on the cockpit voice tape. The tape appears to be blank or erased."[84] In its report on the CVR, the NTSB identified the unit as an L-3 Communications, Fairchild Aviation Recorders model A-100A cockpit voice recorder; a device which records on magnetic tape. The NTSB reported that "The majority of the recording tape was fused into a solid block of charred plastic." No usable segments of tape were found inside the recorder."
Oohhhhh, OK. so the CTists and your buddies at A&Etruth got it wrong when they put the black box data together in an effort to show the plane didn’t crash at the pentagon? Hahaha. , you’re so ignorant, even of your own conspiracy theories.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
LOL ok buddy, an eye witness can prove problematic based on what? if you take a look there are 2 police officers WHO SWORE by their words and said they would say the same under the court of law that the plane traveled in different direction.
Based on the fact that eye-witness testimonies are notoriously unreliable. Don’t believe me, ask any lawyer you know. I’m sure there can and is an explanation for what the officers saw, and such issues have no impact on the hundreds of people who saw a plane crash into the pentagon, the bodies matched via DNA etc.
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.
quote:
Originally posted by geroin
let's review physical evidence at the crash site...you mean that one piece of metal that is lying on the grass? is that what you're referring to, where is the proof from 100's of witnesses that saw Flight 77 plane crash into the building, i'm eager to see/hear it. Yes witnesses saw a commercial jet, but you haven't explained how it is travelling in another direction which is bases in your "official report"
Well firstly, you need to understand that this occurred shortly after peak hour, right next to a really busy highway, hence the sheer number of witnesses. Also, there are plenty of photographs of plane debris you can find all over the web. I don’t have time to fight each piece of ignorance you choose to share.
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PLANE?
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PASSENGERS AND CREW?
HOW DID THE DNA OF THE PASSENGERS AND CREW GET TO THE PENTAGON?
WHERE DID ALL THE PLANE WRECKAGE COME FROM?
WHERE DID THE BLACK BOX FROM FLIGHT 77 COME FROM?
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.
its on youtube, it must be true!
Nrg2Nfinit
MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR
gummybear
I want to know what happened to flight 93..
Oh wait, Hollywood made a movie about it so I should go watch that to get my facts..:)
