Thoughts on Proof

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Furthermore, being that conspiracy theorists don't trust the government, even if evidence were provided, they probably still wouldn't believe it.

Herein lies the problem.

It is possible to *prove* an affirmative statement. E.g., I claim to have a dollar bill in my pocket. I then pull out the dollar bill to show you that it was in my pocket. The affirmative claim was easily proven, right?

Now the government has made several affirmative claims re 9/11, but they haven't been able to produce much evidence to prove any of their claims. They claimed to have the dollar bill in their pocket, but when asked to look in their pocket, they tell you that you're not allowed to look.

What's worse is that it's undeniable that the government controlled evidence that could have been used to support or refute specific claims, and they've destroyed the evidence. Specifically, the steel at WTC was destroyed. And Able Danger officers claimed they had evidence that their unit identified Mohammed Atta pre-9/11. The DoD ordered 2.5 terabytes of data destroyed, and then, along with the 9/11 Commission, disregarded the Able Danger officers because they couldn't produce evidence of their claims.

This is lunacy at best, and more likely a blatant obstruction of justice.

So it doesn't matter if you think the CTers would believe the evidence or not -the bottom line is that the evidence that *could* support the government's claims has been repeatedly destroyed or hidden.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that it is the government's job to investigate 9/11, not ours. The government by their own admission didn't even investigate many critical aspects of 9/11, let alone provide evidence of their claims. Worse, the goverment has tried to silence or disregard people with evidence that contradicts the governments' claims.

Don't believe me?

Then here's a simple test:

The government claimed repeatedly bin Laden orchestrated 9/11. This has become accepted as fact.

So just name one piece of evidence that has been produced linking bin Laden to 9/11. That should be simple enough, right?

No, the fault here does not lie with teh conspiracy theorists. Even the term "conspiracy theorists" is an affront to reasonable people who point out that the Emperor has no clothes. In this case, it's blatantly obvious that the government has produced no evidence, or even reasonable explanations, and the people who point this out are labeld "conspiracy theorists?"

As for WTC steel being destroyed-

The USS New York has steel from the WTC in it, there's beams in various museums(including the Special Operations Museum at Ft Bragg, NC). I'm pretty sure that were further study required, samples could be found.

www.snopes.com...

As for the other evidence- there are various levels of how sensitive info is classified(what it is, and how it was acquired).

The reason some evidence isn't public knowledge is because it may compromise the means it was gathered(or security of the folks who provided it). Other issues have already been addressed, or dismissed due to absurdity. My personal feeling on 9/11 is that there were a combination of mistakes made(lack of communication between agencies and with the appropiate personnel), inability to put together a picture of a 9/11 scenario based upon raw intel data, combined with a lack of procedures in place to deal with such an eventuality(limitations in ATC capabilities, lack of security on board flights, lack of significant interceptor/SAM capabilities CONUS, lack of coordination with NORAD). Perhaps there was enough info even if not specific to warrant some upgrades to procedures or capabilities, but short of an attack the public would have been less willing to deal with the additional hassles at airports, and other assorted security changes.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
The point debunkers make though is that, they're being asked by the conspiracy theorists to disprove a negative.

Disprove a negative.. hmmm... I say X didn't happen, disprove that - or simply prove X happened? I'm a bit fuzzy here... I say the failure of defense on and before 9/11 - intel, law enf. - air defense - even architecture and physics maybe - was probably NOT a string of accidents. It's an impossible claim to disprove, which is why I'm hard to debunk and that makes you upset.

If one proposes a theory about an event, the burden of proof is on them.

That's a two-way street. I don't consider any of the government's evidence "proof" beyond a shadow of a doubt by a long-shot. And as I said i can't prove it, but strongly ilustrate, as many of us have. The logic is there, the past precedent, the motive, the means, the opportunity. they offer an unlikely string of well-placed screw-ups.

It's not possible to prove an impossibility, which is where the logical fallacy comes into play.

I'm asking people to ATTMPT to prove what I feel actually IS possible, if unlikely - that the government is right.

on sources and methods/nat'l sec. withholdings: Good point. We don't have a full slate of data, and some is covered-up, some legitimately hidden. But unless we know what that evidence is, it could go towards either argument.

Furthermore, being that conspiracy theorists don't trust the government, even if evidence were provided, they probably still wouldn't believe it.

Again, that's a two-way street. Evidence around here is more like a rorchach test - you see what you want. We all do that. It's good to just be aware of that and work to counter it. that's the path of the reasonable ninja.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
As for WTC steel being destroyed-

The USS New York has steel from the WTC in it, there's beams in various museums(including the Special Operations Museum at Ft Bragg, NC). I'm pretty sure that were further study required, samples could be found.

That's what I mean. Okay, not all the steel was shipped off. Okay, that's evidence that perhaps the towers' rubble DIDN'T contain any embarrassing clues. I'm not bothering to do counter-arguments, I'm sure someone else will. In fact I'll help you guys out:
Now we have:
1) Tightened security since 9/11 - evidence of lessons learned and reforms taken in a truly broken system
2) The WTC steel was not entirely shipped off, is still around and likely innocent of demo clues.

Is that about right so far?

My point is that it's one thing to hold the Government accountable for all the screw ups leading to 9/11, and expecting the problems to be fixed. It's quite another to say I think that Bush/Cheney/Powell/Rice/US Military/CIA/etc.... conspired to kill 3000 Americans in order to increase Oil Company profits or advance some Freemason plot for whatever.

of course it's different. that's why i followed my gut instinct to the latter observation. But that's just me.

I have been asking the people who believe in the official story for over a year to show some real, hard evidence or FBI / NTSB reports to support the official story. I have not seen any yet.

Thier is not enough evidence to prove the government was behind 911 (YET) but thier is planty of evidence that proofs the government knows more then what they are telling and may have let it happen.

[edit on 2-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have been asking the people who believe in the official story for over a year to show some real, hard evidence or FBI / NTSB reports to support the official story. I have not seen any yet.

Thier is not enough evidence to prove the government was behind 911 (YET) but thier is planty of evidence that proofs the government knows more then what they are telling and may have let it happen.

[edit on 2-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Ypu might want to diversify your evidence portfolio eventually, nutyeah, good point. and the "debunkers" continue to stay away. This is a pattern.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Ypu might want to diversify your evidence portfolio eventually, nutyeah, good point. and the "debunkers" continue to stay away. This is a pattern.

Well i have tried different facts and evidence areas and even offered monetary rewards and still no evidnece to support the official story.

[edit on 2-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Lexion
My proof, after ?
Nothing else in the U.S. has been blown up.
Enough for me.

Lex

Job done. It went perfectly. Benefits garnered. No further action at this time.
Watch this space.

As for Bin Laden my stance is IF the US kills him, the LAST thing the US should do is parade his head around on a stick (figuratively) ...It would be foolish to have him be seen dying as a soldier. Better him rot, broken, and diseased..than die as a Martyr.

Correct!
They lose their fall guy.
He's probably been dead for years.

He may be dead, or being kept quiet until a useful moment.

So was the 9/11 failure just a screw-up?
C'mon coincidence theorists! In case all you know is what's in loose Change and its various "vieweres guides" and debunkings, check this page for some key points you're going to have to tackle to prove the official story right or disprove our negative claims, your pick.

they-let-it-happen.blogspot.com...