Challenge to debunkers

reply to post by jprophet420


Thats what I figured. Only here to attack Ultima1.

Thank you Throat Yogurt at your attempt to debunk. I will say I feel this thread is a huge success if you look at the views to reply ratio. Not really much evidence out there that backs the story as a whole, only pieces of information that debunk CT's.

reply to post by jprophet420


Attacking Ultima? nah, he does a good job at that himself.

You claim to have read the papers I listed. (I doubt you read them all but thats ok)

Please explain to me why none of these 90 + professional plus the 100's of others that read these papers/went to the conferences have any problem with the NIST report. Surely a good amount of them have read the report. (if not all)

Are they all wrong?

reply to post by ThroatYogurt

How do you mean? Do they think the math is wrong? Doubt it.

For example, do any of the papers you cite say that NIST inspected the steel and determined that no CD was involved?

That would be a flase statement and none of them say it. Several of them state why the author believes no CD took place. None of them inspected the steel to come to that conclusion.

That certainly is an incomplete investigation, you cant get the math wrong on what you leave out. So why would they have a problem with what NIST says?

Secondly, I also cite a huge list of papers written against the NIST papers. I have asked you what you thought of them, and have yet to receive an answer.

Originally posted by jprophet420
Thats what I figured. Only here to attack Ultima1.

His attacking me is really desperate.

He knows he cannot post real reports and real evidence to support his claims or the official story so he has to make a personal attack.

As soon as i get some more material back from FOIA requests i hope to finally get him and the other beleivers to wake up from thier fantasy world.




[edit on 18-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]

As usual, the hard questions remain unanswered.

I guess Gavron doesen't care that the investigation is incomplete after 7 years.

I guess Throatyogurt doesent care if there are many papers that go against what he believes.

I guess all the other debunkers are on extended vacation.

So I am 'bumping' this on the grounds that I feel it would be redundant to repost the bulk of this information. However the new NIST report has been out for about a month now, and that should have given everyone (who cares) time to read the new NIST report.

SO I boldy ask:

Is there any information in the new NIST report that changes the story as related to this and the contained threads?

I say nay. I eagerly await to be proven wrong, or better yet not answered as has been the case.



[edit on 20-9-2008 by jprophet420]

There are a lot of new members here and almost a year has passed, I feel thats ample time to debunk what i have posted. I eagerly await information from either side that could "show me the light" if I am incorrect about any of the threads I linked to in the OP.