I Was A "Professional" 9/11 "Truther" (And I Still Am!)

a reply to: hellobruce

This is just one source....I am not debating which data source is more reliable MSM or Cyber-Media.....I will simply state my preference is cyber-media.

americanfreepress.net...

Everybody who “failed” on 911 didn’t get demoted or lambasted, or not even criticized but actually promoted.


Look at all the major points of failure you’ll see that.

That alone is proof of conspiracy

www.washingtonsblog.com...

Professional = Someone who does something as a profession. Or in other words, it's your job/you make money out of what you do.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: hellobruce

We have yet to see any peer reviewed paper Jones has done!

Hint:- Pay to publish does not mean peer reviewed!

I did not say Jones Paper was Peer Reviewed did I.

So the "opinions" that Jones did not find Thermite is just that, an "opinion". Am I correct?

No, you are not correct. The data in Jones' paper is inconsistent. I did several posts on the thermodynamics. He got too much energy out per unit weight for it to be thermite; it was burning organics. This was because he did the thermal analysis in air which burned the organic binder in the paint. The key analysis should have been done in the absence of air, as thermite does not need air to react. He also claimed that 10 tons of unreacted material was in the debris. For a "highly reactive" material, that seems inconsistent.

There is no peer reviewed paper refuting Jones because no reputable journal would publish such a non-paper. Where would one get the paint chips with provenance? Why didn't Jones publish the promised follow on paper with the thermal analysis in the absence of air? Did he actually do it and not have it work or just decide to coast?

Jones and his analytical team are incompetents.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: MALBOSIA

but like myself I would not speak above a whisper in my office what I thought about 9/11.

Because you don't really believe the conspiracy yourself.
Or
You know your 'evidence' cannot stand to to face to face discussion.

Well considering your efforts have not casted a sliver of a doubt on my beliefs and I have never been shy about sharing them, it would stand to reason that my beliefs would hold up just fine against the average proffessional that is not as nearly as invested in a certain view point as you are.

I have beem knocking your weak snip down for years and it just keeps getting easier...

It wouldn't be lucrative for someone to make money as a truther because you would essentially excommunicate yourself from society with nothing to gain. Writers would get fired, employees would get blackballed.

On the other side there would be allot to gain from being a pro-truster. Youd be on the side of right, and tptb.

So when we look at it from both of these angles which professional makes more sense?

The sad thing about 911 we forget is that they got away with it.

Just like they got away with the Kennedy assassination.


And that dark day is the etiology of all this insane madness today over ISIS and Al Qaeda, terrorism, and all this pain and misery in the ME.


Just imagine the enormity of the foul evildoers who did this deed.

If there’s a God in heaven then he has made Hell the home of the perpetrators of 911

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
It wouldn't be lucrative for someone to make money as a truther because you would essentially excommunicate yourself from society with nothing to gain. Writers would get fired, employees would get blackballed.

On the other side there would be allot to gain from being a pro-truster. Youd be on the side of right, and tptb.

So when we look at it from both of these angles which professional makes more sense?

You got it. How much money do fanatics have to spend on fanaticical theories when they are outcasts in proffesional money making poistions? Seems like a narrow market in a small community, like the ghetto.

How much money can be made off of secret criminal enterprises that need their cover-ups sold to as many people as possible to avoid prison or exicution? Now that is a market to get into. They got connections, money and it's do or die. Whooee! Gold rush!

originally posted by: Willtell


If there’s a God in heaven then he has made Hell the home of the perpetrators of 911

This is why it's hard to believe in God. Meanwhile athletes thanks God for making them 10 million more, while cronies get away with 911.

And even if you believe in the OS,pro athletes thank God for winning because God cares so much about that while babies were turned into blobs of living goo from Chernobyl. Mysterious ways indeed. Go " insert sports team here". 'merica!

a reply to: pteridine

No, you are not correct.

I disagree.

You and I have debated this topic for many years and the fact is, I was able to prove you wrong.

Jones "Peer - Reviewed" Scientific Journal Found Credible!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Where is your Peer Reviewed Paper disproving Jones paper?

Where is your science? You have only "opinions" and nothing else.

If you have spent a good bit of time studying it, I have a question. What is your opinion on the death toll? With janitors saying the buildings were nearly empty, airline people talking about empty planes and many of the dead leaving no footprint whatsoever in the past, I don't know what to think

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat

With janitors saying the buildings were nearly empty, airline people talking about empty planes and many of the dead leaving no footprint whatsoever in the past, I don't know what to think

You need to examine the context of his statement.
The dead had a very large foot print. Family and friends.

If all you information comes from conspiracy sites then you are going to get skewed conjecture.

I doubt those on here who believe in the conspiracy agree with the no foot print statement.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine

No, you are not correct.

I disagree.

You and I have debated this topic for many years and the fact is, I was able to prove you wrong.

Jones "Peer - Reviewed" Scientific Journal Found Credible!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Where is your Peer Reviewed Paper disproving Jones paper?

Where is your science? You have only "opinions" and nothing else.

The title of your thread was Jones "Peer - Reviewed" Scientific Journal Found Credible." What you failed to mention is that Jones' paper in the journal was not credible, that the editor resigned after a lack of peer review on Jones' paper, and that it was a pay-to-publish journal.

The science, or lack of it, was in Jones paper. You did not prove me wrong as I was using Jones' data. Maybe you proved Jones wrong.

It would seem that you have only opinions and nothing else.

a reply to: pteridine

The title of your thread was Jones "Peer - Reviewed" Scientific Journal Found Credible." What you failed to mention is that Jones' paper in the journal was not credible, that the editor resigned after a lack of peer review on Jones' paper, and that it was a pay-to-publish journal.

The editor left because it got past her, Yet she could not debunk Jones paper.

As far as Jones paper found not credible, I have yet to see any Peer Reviewed paper against it today.

The science, or lack of it, was in Jones paper. You did not prove me wrong as I was using Jones' data. Maybe you proved Jones wrong.

I was able to prove that you repeatedly twisted Jones science, I called you out many times and proved it. Anyone reading the materials on that thread could read what you were doing.

It would seem that you have only opinions and nothing else.

Perhaps so, however the hard cold fact is, "opinions" are all you have ever given about Jones paper, and no credible science to back up your "opinions".

You can demonize Jones all you want, but it does not prove that you are right.

a reply to: Informer1958


Why would someone peer review a junk paper? That makes no sense.

originally posted by: DEANORULES24
a reply to: JaMeDoIt

Answer 14 ? U.S. shot down flight 93

Using what? Please educate us on what weapon was used to shoot down Flight 93?

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat


The planes, were flying at near their normal passenger levels for Tuesday morning flights. Thankfully the Towers, stayed up long enough that a lot of people were able to escape, and the surrounding buildings evacuated.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Why would someone peer review a junk paper? That makes no sense.

Junk paper? says who? Do you have something you want to share with us?

Besides, the well known bias 911 Myths website, who else has done a paper against Jones work? Was it also Peer Reviewed?

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
all this nonsense distracts from the plausible theory, but I think that might be the idea

911 was a multi phase operation. It had more than one agenda.

Imhavinv a hard time pinpointing your sideof things then. Are you against the possibility of a 911 conspiracy altogether? Or is your disagreement here just with veracity of conclusions drawn but you could believe we have been lied to were expert testimony and data to be scrutinized by the appropriate parties?

And on a small sidenote, Ihave to dig up what i found just too strange regarding the toll, I won't do it justice but i take an eternity to commit to a belief or theory and if i can find it, maybe I can benefit from getting your take on it as Its quite normal for imaginations and confusion to work in tandem to create a sensationalized idea of how events take place, I know. But i also know from experience that sometimes truth IS stranger than fiction.