911 OS Debate Facts, Bring sources, not Opinions

reply to post by ImAPepper


Thanks for the link to the CameraPlanet video.

It is quite obvious that the collapse initiated in the heart of the impact damage and subsequent fire. Just the place where, had there been any, demolition charges and their detonators would have been disrupted and destroyed.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


You are assuming all the noises were explosives and part of the "big plot." Who is to say what all of the noises were? Falling building parts, breaking floors, etc.
The idea that such widely scattered "explosions" were part of a controlled demolition is unlikely as per my previous note. Controlled demolitions are all about control. Control means that uncertainties must be minimized. Widely spaced sequential explosions introduce too much error.

reply to post by REMISNE

The first responders described the noise as best they could. Their descriptions are just that and not evidence of explosives.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
As you can see in the above post from the truther Remise, they try to bait you by making baseless accusations. He too has failed to show the explosions.

Well we know building 7 was brought down due to the statements of the firechiefs that the firemen were out of the buiding BEFORE the call to Silverstein when the fire commander stated PULL IT.

[edit on 8-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by pteridine
The first responders described the noise as best they could. Their descriptions are just that and not evidence of explosives.

So you are stating that these professionals do not know what they are talking about?

reply to post by REMISNE

What I said was that the first responders described the noises as best they could but that their descriptions do not prove explosives were used to bring down the building.
Did any of them say that they saw an explosion that brought down the buildings?

Originally posted by pteridine
What I said was that the first responders described the noises as best they could but that their descriptions do not prove explosives were used to bring down the building.

So your saying they do not kow what they are talking about.

Did any of them say that they saw an explosion that brought down the buildings?

YES,

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by REMISNE


David Griffin is always entertaining.

I recommend that Dave and you contact the district attorney immediately and I will wait for the indictment. What was on floor 78 anyway?

reply to post by bsbray11

Every damned time I ask you for evidence of something (ie that the explosions weren't caused by explosives/bombs, etc.), you claim I don't have evidence to the contrary, and pretend that is positive evidence. And then you try to spin it around and make ME have to prove all of my statements positively while you still have not proven your own.

But I'm satisfied. So are most people. It's up to you to change our minds and you're doing a horrible job of it. You even admit a couple of posts later that you aren't convinced the sounds are the product of bombs going off.

PLEASE stop deflecting like that or I am going to start saying my proof that they were bombs is in the fact that you can't refute that, either, and you have already admitted as much so don't back-track on that now like some slippery weasel that can't make its mind up or I'll just start posting your contradictions right next to each other, too.

Go ahead.

Then you ask for evidence that these were actually caused by bombs/explosives, I start laying out evidence (witness testimonies, recordings of sounds that must be over 130 dB since they are obviously louder than a jackhammer would be from that distance, etc.), and you start discrediting all the witnesses by saying they were panicked, dismissing the video above out of hand, etc. Great work man.

I walked past a guy chucking basins into a skip yesterday. It was incredibly loud, like a bomb going off. So I suppose it must have been a bomb.

This is literally the standard of your "evidence". It's not winning anyone over.

I would say you have absolutely no positive evidence that these witnesses were confused about a traumatic, explosive event that just happened right in front of their faces, either, but then you would probably just say I don't have evidence to the contrary ( ) and go about your business continuing to believe the same nonsense.

It's nonsense to believe that people caught up in the events of 9/11 might have been panicked? What planet are you on?

"You can't prove me wrong" is NOT a logical answer to me asking YOU for evidence, neither is trying every single time to somehow put the burden back on me for a simple request for YOU to prove something. That's what this whole thread is about! The burden is on YOU for once to actually establish what you have blindly assumed to be true from day 1!

No, it's not. I'm satisfied. So is the rest of the world, barring a few oddballs. If you want us to change our minds you better come up with something better than constant repetitious demands for us to prove our position to you, someone whose evidential standards are eccentric, to say the least.

Your tone also is that of someone whose preconceptions are being threatened. I've seen it before in religious types when they've been challenged about their untenable views.

Originally posted by pteridine
I recommend that Dave and you contact the district attorney immediately and I will wait for the indictment. What was on floor 78 anyway?

Nice way to avoid the facts.

Thanks for showing you cannot have a mature disscussion.

Originally posted by ImAPepper

Here is the CameraPlanet footage that truthers ignore. The close up video shot of the collapse initiation. Please show the explosions.

It is a 50 second video....start it at 15 seconds.

www.vidoemo.com...

Youtube video:

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Here is the CameraPlanet footage that truthers ignore. The close up video shot of the collapse initiation. Please show the explosions.

It is a 50 second video....start it at 15 seconds.

Here is response by first repsnders,


www.youtube.com...

reply to post by REMISNE


Roger, try to grasp this; No one is saying that the first responders were lying. It is more than likely that there were explosions.

I am asking you or anyone else: Please point out the explosions at the time of collapse. I have posted the video twice.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Roger, try to grasp this; No one is saying that the first responders were lying. It is more than likely that there were explosions.

Thanks for admitting there were explosions.

I am asking you or anyone else: Please point out the explosions at the time of collapse. I have posted the video twice.

Look at the timelines of the videos and first responder statements.

Originally posted by REMISNE

Thanks for admitting there were explosions.

explosions do not always = explosives. Please keep that in mind.

Look at the timelines of the videos and first responder statements.

I asked YOU to point out the explosions at the onset of collapse. That is why I posted the video. Don't feel bad, you are not alone. Not a soul has been able to.

reply to post by ImAPepper


Point at where there not....and why there not...

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
I haven't claimed that I know what caused them, so quit lying. I and others have given alternatives.

I know what didn't cause them - explosives, since they lack the telltales discussed.

That is still making a positive claim.

So prove how you know this, what evidence you are basing your assertion on. I'm not talking about OPINIONS or what you think it "sounds like." I'm talking about how you can DEMONSTRATE that the sounds were definitely not explosives or bombs.

And FYI, your continued asking to bring positive evidence that they weren't explosives is asking us to prove a negative, the most childish of fallacies

It's not a fallacy when you are making the claim yourself. I'm not just coming out of nowhere and asking you to prove a negative. You're telling me that you CAN prove a negative, that you KNOW they WEREN'T explosives. So put up or shut up! If you can't prove the negative then STOP SAYING YOU CAN.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
He too has failed to show the explosions.

There were explosions happening all morning and into the evening. Even if you can't hear clear explosions in your video, only a vague rumbling sound, firefighters that were there even said themselves it sounded like "detonators" were in the building, and the floors were being blown out, "boom boom boom boom boom." Don't give your pancake theory cock and bull story either because for one thing pancake theory has been debunked, for another you can't prove that's what these firemen were hearing, and for a third they say themselves it sounded as if there were detonations, not steel hitting steel.

But more to the point, can you prove what was causing explosions like this, which was heard near WTC7?:




Just a simple yes/no quesiton: Can you PROVE what was causing this explosion?

If you think it definitely could not have been an explosive/bomb, can you also PROVE that, or are you willing to admit you can't dismiss that possibility either? If you're going to dismiss it as a possibility you need good reason, ie EVIDENCE in order to do so. And just because you don't think it's going off at the right time is NOT good evidence because you would be assuming you would know exactly in what order things would have to be done, which is also a cock and bull story.


Just demonstrate to me what exactly was causing these explosions, that were clearly recorded numerous times (and are clearly distinct from people jumping) and that many more people gave witness testimony to experiencing. Just prove what was causing them. Or admit you don't know. One or the other.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
But I'm satisfied. So are most people. It's up to you to change our minds

Hey buddy did you read the OP?

Are you sure you're posting in the right thread?


911 OS Debate Facts, Bring sources, not Opinions


It's not my job to convince YOU of anything here. I am asking you where your evidence is that these explosions were caused by anything other than explosives/bombs, ie for you to POST this evidence.

If you can't do it then I don't give a damn. Just admit you don't know what was causing them, end of that discussion.

reply to post by pteridine


You know this thread is about you proving YOUR beliefs about what happened on 9/11, right?

If the "official story" is so damned right and has so much evidence going for it, one would THINK it wouldn't be too much trouble for someone like you to post the meat and potatoes of what actually establishes its basic assertions. The same kind of evidence you always ask us to post. Can your own position stand the same criticism? I'm saying put up or shut up, the actual definitive demonstrations and pieces of evidence that prove you know what you're talking about. If you respond to this post with just a rant then you're not doing what I'm asking, and you're a hypocrite.