2/3 of Americans Believe in Conspiracy Theories

[_sabotage_]

Your criticisms are the smoke screens.

[BigBallinStalin]

Your criticisms are the smoke screens.

AndyDufresne has taught me well.

[_sabotage_]

So far we have established that you are willing to ignore the obvious:

86 cameras facing the site of the crash, no video of a plane, verified by a signed affidavit from a CIA agent,
the first time in 2001 where an errant plane was not intercepted, 67 planes had been intercepted up to this point in 2001 but none on this day, even an hour after the first plane struck the WTC,
The missile battery system of both the Pentagon and White House failed to respond to a threat, only possible if the threat gave off a friendly signal.

Willing to ignore science:
A 5m hole cannot fit a Boeing 757, and since no key parts, such as the engines, were found outside, they must be somewhere, the initial response was that they vaporized, when this was proven physically impossible, they suddenly discovered the missing pieces inside, 3 years later. Testimony given the day after the event was suddenly changed three years later, obviously a person's memory does improve with time.

Willing to ignore evidence:
The fact that the flight path has been proven impossible, that the instructor's claim the pilot could not handle a plane.

Willing to obfuscate:

The warnings Bush received and the correlation of a change in plane intercept policy.

So, up to now, you have ignored key facts and challenged in minutiae relating facts. You have provided no scientific backing, testimony, or evidence, but have simple said there are alternatives. You haven't provided alternatives and in fact have substantiated a theory of an inside job with the only fact that you have provided.

You feel that reading the works of those who gained most from an inside job is the only relevant source of information and discarded contrary info produced by experts with nothing to gain but who have suffered in producing the evidence.

So, are you ready for the next set of facts?

[AndyDufresne]

So, are you ready for the next set of facts?

--Andy

[GeneralRisk]

Watch the first 1 1/2 minutes...very interesting

[BigBallinStalin]

So far we have established that you are willing to ignore the obvious:

86 cameras facing the site of the crash, no video of a plane, verified by a signed affidavit from a CIA agent,
the first time in 2001 where an errant plane was not intercepted, 67 planes had been intercepted up to this point in 2001 but none on this day, even an hour after the first plane struck the WTC,
The missile battery system of both the Pentagon and White House failed to respond to a threat, only possible if the threat gave off a friendly signal.

Willing to ignore science:
A 5m hole cannot fit a Boeing 757, and since no key parts, such as the engines, were found outside, they must be somewhere, the initial response was that they vaporized, when this was proven physically impossible, they suddenly discovered the missing pieces inside, 3 years later. Testimony given the day after the event was suddenly changed three years later, obviously a person's memory does improve with time.

Willing to ignore evidence:
The fact that the flight path has been proven impossible, that the instructor's claim the pilot could not handle a plane.

Willing to obfuscate:

The warnings Bush received and the correlation of a change in plane intercept policy.

So, up to now, you have ignored key facts and challenged in minutiae relating facts. You have provided no scientific backing, testimony, or evidence, but have simple said there are alternatives. You haven't provided alternatives and in fact have substantiated a theory of an inside job with the only fact that you have provided.

You feel that reading the works of those who gained most from an inside job is the only relevant source of information and discarded contrary info produced by experts with nothing to gain but who have suffered in producing the evidence.

So, are you ready for the next set of facts?

BBS: OH! SO YOU WANNA SETTLE THIS IRRATIONALLY?!

[_sabotage_]

Data recorder provided by NTSB for flight 77 (Pentagon), shows that the deck door was closed for the duration.

Flight 77 went of radar for 36 minutes, which require it to be flying below 500 feet.

Official time of the attack according to radar tracking is 9:37, but the clocks in the Pentagon stopped at 9:32.

[BigBallinStalin]

[rdsrds2120]

Andy, BBS, you're foolish statements make Deepak Chopra cry.





It's time to wake up America

BMO

[saxitoxin]

The warnings Bush received ...

Yeah, this is how conspiracy theories work.

A mundane fact (Bush was warned Al Qaeda might attack some unspecified location in the United States using some unspecified means at some point in the unspecified future) gets shortened to a caught-red-handed gotcha (Bush was warned of 9/11). Then, several of the gotchas are piled on top of each other to create an, apparently, common sense conclusion.

[AndyDufresne]

Andy, BBS, you're foolish statements make Deepak Chopra cry.

show

It's time to wake up America

BMO

Guys, I think RDS is onto something. Look at the map. There are 50 states, plus Puerto Rico and Dominican Republic (?) for obvious reasons. Now, that makes a total of 52. 52...what so special about 52? Just look a little closer.

52 is the 5th Bell number. Bell numbers are important because mathematicians say so. Now, mathematicians are a form of scientists who use numbers and geometry and money, and junk, to investigate the world and to better understand it, and junk.

Now, scientists, we all know, can't be trusted. Especially Darwin. But there is one scientist we can trust, Einstein. But what's Einstein's connection to all of this? Einstein predicted that RDS would be here at this very moment telling us about important information. Sufficient evidence can be found in this unaltered photo:



As we can all see, clearly Einstein has scribbled this equation: "R" and "D" and a backward "S" (to throw off his contemporary counterparts) thus ensuring the message would ONLY be understood by us at the right time, and moment in history (NOW).

I think it is safe to say, RDS is the messiah, as foretold by Einstein, and his words should MUST be heeded.


--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

The warnings Bush received ...

Yeah, this is how conspiracy theories work.

A mundane fact (Bush was warned Al Qaeda might attack some unspecified location in the United States using some unspecified means at some point in the unspecified future) gets shortened to a caught-red-handed gotcha (Bush was warned of 9/11). Then, several of the gotchas are piled on top of each other to create an, apparently, common sense conclusion.

Have you ever read/are familiar with The Day of Deceit?
With sabotage, it's like I'm running into the 2nd edition of this book. Some pesky kid Found and Replaced "FDR" with "Bush" and "Pearl Harbor" with "9-11."

[BigBallinStalin]

Andy, BBS, you're foolish statements make Deepak Chopra cry.

show

It's time to wake up America

BMO

Guys, I think RDS is onto something. Look at the map. There are 50 states, plus Puerto Rico and Dominican Republic (?) for obvious reasons. Now, that makes a total of 52. 52...what so special about 52? Just look a little closer.

52 is the 5th Bell number. Bell numbers are important because mathematicians say so. Now, mathematicians are a form of scientists who use numbers and geometry and money, and junk, to investigate the world and to better understand it, and junk.

Now, scientists, we all know, can't be trusted. Especially Darwin. But there is one scientist we can trust, Einstein. But what's Einstein's connection to all of this? Einstein predicted that RDS would be here at this very moment telling us about important information. Sufficient evidence can be found in this unaltered photo:



As we can all see, clearly Einstein has scribbled this equation: "R" and "D" and a backward "S" (to throw off his contemporary counterparts) thus ensuring the message would ONLY be understood by us at the right time, and moment in history (NOW).

I think it is safe to say, RDS is the messiah, as foretold by Einstein, and his words should MUST be heeded.


--Andy

Oh, don't get me started! What about Bernoulli Numbers?

Look at this graph:



Clearly, as the number of States and US territories (IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN) increases, then we'll run out of food because n = food. The Elite are engaging in wars to make us all starve--and they received a warning about it.


And this:



B3 and B4 represents the REAL dice of ConquerClub--whenever I play. Clearly, I'm being screwed here.

[_sabotage_]

I see, so now it is Saxitoxin who is choosing to ignore all solid evidence and focus on a single point that is open to interpretation.

Excellent.

Please answer why the flight data provided doesn't correspond with the official account provided. Why does the data show a different take off gate than was actually used by flight 77?

I have already presented several varifiable, irrefutable hard facts that show that 9/11 could not have happened according to the official account, all are ignored.

These facts point to an inside job individually and collectively. If you wish to post here saying contrary it would be pertinent that you address these facts or your points remain unsubstantiated ideological willful ignorance.

[saxitoxin]

I see, so now it is Saxitoxin who is choosing to ignore all solid evidence and focus on a single point that is open to interpretation.

Excellent.

Please answer why the flight data provided doesn't correspond with the official account provided. Why does the data show a different take off gate than was actually used by flight 77?

I have already presented several varifiable, irrefutable hard facts that show that 9/11 could not have happened according to the official account, all are ignored.

These facts point to an inside job individually and collectively. If you wish to post here saying contrary it would be pertinent that you address these facts or your points remain unsubstantiated ideological willful ignorance.

If the first piece of "evidence" presented is a very creative interpretation/dramatization of a NYT article, I don't feel responsible for needing to refute the subsequent dozen pieces of evidence point by point. It's fair to assume similar leaps of logic were made in those, as well.

To prove a conspiracy you need an unbroken sequence of events supported by documentation. If you break one chain in that sequence it's not enough that you have a lot of links about other things. When you go to court, they don't take all your evidence, put it in a box, weigh it, and whoever has the heaviest box wins.

[_sabotage_]

Of course. The first piece of evidence, the NYTimes article was not presented as evidence of an inside job, it was presented as evidence supporting the initial post stating that believing Bush had prior knowledge was a conspiracy theory.

If you wish for a point by point analysis suggesting an inside job, I revert to the full length movie that I posted.

[saxitoxin]

Awhile ago I went to some 9/11 Truth presentation. It started with an "UNEDITED!" video being shown, played over a bed of spooky synthesizer music. At the time I wondered: why does the "RAW DATA!" always come with spooky synthesizer music?

it was presented as evidence supporting the initial post stating that believing Bush had prior knowledge

Yeah, as previously noted, it only does that if the summary of the article is kept as vague as possible (i.e. "had prior knowledge" instead of "had prior knowledge that something would happen somewhere at sometime, someway").

[BigBallinStalin]

Of course. The first piece of evidence, the NYTimes article was not presented as evidence of an inside job, it was presented as evidence supporting the initial post stating that believing Bush had prior knowledge was a conspiracy theory.

But I've already provided enough criticism which should make anyone skeptical of what's missing from the author's position. He simply isn't addressing my concerns, nor is he exact enough in the "Bush knew about it" claim. Even the author makes a dubious conclusion--which hardly confirms the soundness of your claim.

But of course, you'll ignore this because it doesn't matter how faulty the initial claim is. Your box of evidence feels heavy enough as is, right?

[_sabotage_]

I've already addressed this.

You haven't provided a single piece of evidence validating your official story theory, you haven't even stated you believe the official theory.

If you would like, for example, to base the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon based on the flight data provided, please say so.

If you would like to base it on video evidence of the 80 + cameras focused on the site, please do so.

If you would like to base it on the physical evidence at the site, please do so.

If you would like to base it on procedure, please do so.

Please provide a single piece of evidence along with a theory that it supports. Otherwise you are just being a critic.

[AndyDufresne]

When you go to court, they don't take all your evidence, put it in a box, weigh it, and whoever has the heaviest box wins.

This is how the legal system should work.


--Andy

[jonesthecurl]

Andy, BBS, you're foolish statements make Deepak Chopra cry.

show

It's time to wake up America

BMO

Guys, I think RDS is onto something. Look at the map. There are 50 states, plus Puerto Rico and Dominican Republic (?) for obvious reasons. Now, that makes a total of 52. 52...what so special about 52? Just look a little closer.

52 is the 5th Bell number. Bell numbers are important because mathematicians say so. Now, mathematicians are a form of scientists who use numbers and geometry and money, and junk, to investigate the world and to better understand it, and junk.

Now, scientists, we all know, can't be trusted. Especially Darwin. But there is one scientist we can trust, Einstein. But what's Einstein's connection to all of this? Einstein predicted that RDS would be here at this very moment telling us about important information. Sufficient evidence can be found in this unaltered photo:



As we can all see, clearly Einstein has scribbled this equation: "R" and "D" and a backward "S" (to throw off his contemporary counterparts) thus ensuring the message would ONLY be understood by us at the right time, and moment in history (NOW).

I think it is safe to say, RDS is the messiah, as foretold by Einstein, and his words should MUST be heeded.


--Andy

Then there was the time-travelling episode of Animaniacs in which they wrote "acme" on a blackboard. Einstein read it in a mirror and it said emc2.
Now they want us to think this was just a joke...

[rdsrds2120]

Now they want us to think this was just a joke...

BMO

[_sabotage_]

Awhile ago I went to some 9/11 Truth presentation. It started with an "UNEDITED!" video being shown, played over a bed of spooky synthesizer music. At the time I wondered: why does the "RAW DATA!" always come with spooky synthesizer music?

it was presented as evidence supporting the initial post stating that believing Bush had prior knowledge

Yeah, as previously noted, it only does that if the summary of the article is kept as vague as possible (i.e. "had prior knowledge" instead of "had prior knowledge that something would happen somewhere at sometime, someway").

As in any unexplained situation, there will be a lot of speculation. I have tried to provide a simple link to highly respected commentators using factual evidence. You have chosen to ignore it.

As for me being very vague, the original post was quite vague. I have addressed this issue. Whether or not there was conflicting information available, Bush had several warnings which he could have taken action on, instead, all actions taken assured the success of 9/11.

[BigBallinStalin]

I've already addressed this.

You haven't provided a single piece of evidence validating your official story theory, you haven't even stated you believe the official theory.

If you would like, for example, to base the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon based on the flight data provided, please say so.

If you would like to base it on video evidence of the 80 + cameras focused on the site, please do so.

If you would like to base it on the physical evidence at the site, please do so.

If you would like to base it on procedure, please do so.

Please provide a single piece of evidence along with a theory that it supports. Otherwise you are just being a critic.

Yeah, I'm being a critic. There is no shame in being a reasonable skeptic.

Anyway, we're still waiting for you to address the community's concerns on the "Bush knew about it" claim. That NY Times article failed to resolve that issue, and you've failed to counter my criticism about it.

Let me predict your next move.... I see smoke.... plenty of it. But no fire. Alas.

[saxitoxin]

You haven't provided a single piece of evidence validating your official story theory,

If I say trees can ride bicycles it's my job to prove it, not your job to find a source that says they can't.