911 OS Debate Facts, Bring sources, not Opinions

Originally posted by hooper
But since you made the claim without evidence in hand I have no other choice but to apply the REMISNE standard and declare you a......

Thanks again for showing that you will not acept or admit to evidence shown.

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
But since you made the claim without evidence in hand I have no other choice but to apply the REMISNE standard and declare you a......

Thanks again for showing that you will not acept or admit to evidence shown.

First, you have shown NO EVIDENCE. You posted an almost two year old letter, which isn't even sourced except it is on "photobucket", which states, in no uncertain terms, that when you made the statement you did not have any evidence, and therefore are, by your own standards, a liar.

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Actually, there is proof that they weren't bombs.

Bombs, cutter charges, etc have characteristics, such as brissance, detonation velocities, and decibel levels, that are undeniable facts.

Really?

Can you post all the different types of explosives, bombs and incendiaries available to the military (including those that are classified) and all the relevant detonation velocities, decibel levels from varying distances and positions within the building, etc?

That's what you'll need to prove the explosions we're hearing weren't caused by any such devices. This will be interesting to see. You must have done a lot of research!

9 pages and still no one has shown the evidence that proves the "official story."

You know, one day your kids/grand kids are going to ask how you knew everything they told you was true, and you guys are going to look pretty stupid.

Originally posted by hooper
First, you have shown NO EVIDENCE.

I have and can show lot of evidence that shows resonable doubt in the official story. Its not my fault if you will not accept or admit to it.

You posted an almost two year old letter,

I would give you the numbe to the FOIA office but i know you are too afraid of the truth to call.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by bsbray11


Wow, that really changes the entire argument.

So can you prove what exactly was causing the explosions?

Again, no.


Do you even have any proof that they WEREN'T bombs?

No.



See how you don't even like to admit this obvious fact, that we STILL don't know what was causing all of those explosions? No, I doubt you want to see your own shortcomings.

Do you understand the significance of being biased? I don't think so.

When enough people are aware of all of these unaddressed issues, as most people probably aren't even yet aware of all of the reports and other evidences of explosions in Manhattan that day (I see people claiming all the time 'there would have been explosions'

), this kind of stupidity will eventually have to come to an end. And by "this kind of stupidity" I explicitly mean pretending you know what was causing those explosions when you absolutely do not. A pre-schooler could understand the significance of such an issue. Psychological denial renders you back to being unable to step back and comprehend this situation objectively. I see this on a daily basis and it's more proof to me than anything that you lot really ARE in denial.

[edit on 1-2-2010 by bsbray11]

You sound so shrill. It's almost as though you have to keep reminding yourself that you're definitely right.

You're correct to say that I don't know what caused the explosions. But I sincerely doubt that it was demolition charges.

You yourself provide evidence of explosion sounds long before the towers came down. If they were wired then why did the perpetrators also risk discovery by putting other devices elsewhere that then went off at the wrong time?

It'll be ten years soon. And then twenty. And you'll be no nearer to your precious show trials and the public hangings. But I bet you'll still be telling everyone how clever you are in that cloying sophomoric style.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by TrickoftheShade]

Originally posted by REMISNE

I would give you the numbe to the FOIA office but i know you are too afraid of the truth to call.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Give me the number. I will call. What is it you expect them to tell me?

I'll call them.

My main fear wouldn't be of "the truth" but of them thinking I was some sort of crazy.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Actually, there is proof that they weren't bombs.

Bombs, cutter charges, etc have characteristics, such as brissance, detonation velocities, and decibel levels, that are undeniable facts.

Really?

Can you post all the different types of explosives, bombs and incendiaries available to the military (including those that are classified) and all the relevant detonation velocities, decibel levels from varying distances and positions within the building, etc?

That's what you'll need to prove the explosions we're hearing weren't caused by any such devices. This will be interesting to see. You must have done a lot of research!

Oh, ooookay. So the reason they don't sound like normal bombs is because they're super classified bombs.

I can post every single type of bomb and detonation device available to the military, with serial numbers and videos - many of them classified - of their use.

Oh no, actually I can't. Which must mean that you're right.

Or of course one could use a reasonable standard of evidence and logic to assess what happened and end up with a far more mundane and frightening story than your little fantasy.

many opinions herer, but here's a fact...the morninng theat thus # heppened i came 2 bwork &* heard about it.....sucks...........thought 2 myself tjet thes is BSA... NOW a PRESDICTION...the h2o will turn 2 wine ...b carefuyll from now fprward

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Oh, ooookay. So the reason they don't sound like normal bombs is because they're super classified bombs.

You haven't even demonstrated that "they don't sound like normal bombs."

That's the whole point. They sound an awful damned lot like normal explosives to me, at least the ones that were recorded. And witnesses to others seem to agree.

Are you denying that there is classified technology available to the military? Trying to make the idea sound stupid by throwing "super" in there only demonstrates your maturity level here.

I can post every single type of bomb and detonation device available to the military, with serial numbers and videos - many of them classified - of their use.

Oh no, actually I can't. Which must mean that you're right.

Oh yeah, that's right, which LOGICALLY means that you're right about it not possibly being any of them. Makes perfect sense to me.

Or of course one could use a reasonable standard of evidence and logic to assess what happened and end up with a far more mundane and frightening story than your little fantasy.

Great. I'm all ears.

Still waiting for you to demonstrate that these sounds conclusively are not from explosives/bombs. Your opinion is worth about as much to me as Hitler's opinion of Jews.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You sound so shrill. It's almost as though you have to keep reminding yourself that you're definitely right.

Have you ever considered that I am?

Maybe that is what's bothering you.

You're correct to say that I don't know what caused the explosions. But I sincerely doubt that it was demolition charges.

And I sincerely don't give a damn what your opinion is.

A lot of people died that day, there were numerous explosions, and no one apparently knows what caused them.

This is a very solemn problem.

You yourself provide evidence of explosion sounds long before the towers came down. If they were wired then why did the perpetrators also risk discovery by putting other devices elsewhere that then went off at the wrong time?

This is exactly what you would call "truther logic." Neither of us have any idea of knowing if anything "went off at the wrong time," so your assertion is absurd to begin with. And it seems to me the only risk they took was in their estimation of how collectively stupid the American people are. And their calculated risk seems to have been pretty much on the money thus far.

There's little of substance in your posts, just bluster. And the usual TM tactic of demanding an utterly unreasonable standard of evidence to "prove" that your ludicrous assertions are wrong.

Earlier I posted a thread that suggests that every single US citizen is in on 9/11, that it is a conspiracy being waged by the American people on the rest of the world. By your logic it is incumbent upon you to disprove this to me. Since no one has even attempted to do so I'll assume that it must be right.

I'm also surprised that you don't care what Hitler thought of jews. It had quite an impact on the history of the 20th century.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
There's little of substance in your posts, just bluster.

This is known to the field of psychology as projection.

And the usual TM tactic of demanding an utterly unreasonable standard of evidence to "prove" that your ludicrous assertions are wrong.

Apparently "an utterly unreasonable standard of evidence" is asking for any evidence at all.

I asked you to demonstrate your proof that these sounds were not explosives/bombs. That they definitely were not was YOUR claim. Apparently asking for any evidence is asking too much!

You and I both know you have no such proof, so why do you pretend you do?

Earlier I posted a thread that suggests that every single US citizen is in on 9/11, that it is a conspiracy being waged by the American people on the rest of the world. By your logic it is incumbent upon you to disprove this to me. Since no one has even attempted to do so I'll assume that it must be right.

Sorry but not even close.

You are the one insinuating the claim, that Joey Canoli made, that you have actual proof that these sounds and witness reports are not of explosives/bombs. Since you are making this claim, the burden of proof is on you. I for one would love to see how you arrived at this conclusion. I'm sure everyone else that has been following this subject would love to see your proof as well. You're really doing us a disservice by refusing to demonstrate how you KNOW these were not explosives/bombs through comparative audio analysis.

I'm also surprised that you don't care what Hitler thought of jews. It had quite an impact on the history of the 20th century.

You know exactly what I meant. You're so cute.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by bsbray11

Apparently "an utterly unreasonable standard of evidence" is asking for any evidence at all.

I asked you to demonstrate your proof that these sounds were not explosives/bombs. That they definitely were not was YOUR claim. Apparently asking for any evidence is asking too much!

But you are claiming they are bombs. And you have no evidence.

Oh look. It works the other way around as well.

You and I both know you have no such proof, so why do you pretend you do?

I don't. I even wrote as much. But since you have no proof of your extraordinary claims either I'm going to go ahead and assume I'm right.

Sorry but not even close.

You are the one insinuating the claim, that Joey Canoli made, that you have actual proof that these sounds and witness reports are not of explosives/bombs. Since you are making this claim, the burden of proof is on you.

And you are claiming they are bombs. So, once again, the burden of proof is on you.

Unfortunately you haven't got any proof, have you? So you retreat to semantic and logical games. You've proved nothing, you've got nothing. There are some loud noises, which terrified, panicking people, most of whom have never heard an bomb outside of a movie theatre, describe as explosions. Hardly compelling.

I for one would love to see how you arrived at this conclusion. I'm sure everyone else that has been following this subject would love to see your proof as well. You're really doing us a disservice by refusing to demonstrate how you KNOW these were not explosives/bombs through comparative audio analysis.

Above I actually wrote that I don't KNOW this. Neither do you. You're making an assumption based on very little evidence.

Of course I'm making an assumption as well. But mine is based on some conception of how reality works, as opposed to paranoid adolescent fantasy.

It occurs to me that a further difference between us is that I'm not arrogant enough to assume I know all the answers. Perhaps that's what contributes to your colossal bias.

You know exactly what I meant. You're so cute.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by bsbray11]

I've no idea what you mean half the time. So - perhaps foolishly - I go by what you actually write.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
But you are claiming they are bombs. And you have no evidence.

Oh look. It works the other way around as well.

Aha! Now you are weaseling out of what you were defending earlier! I made no such claim here. Look through all the posts you want.


So, to answer the question, "Do you have proof that these sounds WEREN'T bombs/explosions?"

Your answer is "No, I do not."


Joey said there was proof the explosions weren't caused by explosives/bombs. I guess, despite your coming to his defense when I responded to him, you two aren't in agreement anyway.

The explosions sound exactly like explosives/bombs from within the buildings as far as I am able to discern such a thing. You guys act like that can't possibly be the case but you can't show me why.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by Lillydale
What is it you expect them to tell me?

That the document i asked for exists.

The phone number is 301-688-6527. FOIA Case 56796

[edit on 3-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by bsbray11

The explosions sound exactly like explosives/bombs from within the buildings as far as I am able to discern such a thing.

This is your opinion. The thread says to bring facts, not opinions.

If you have facts that dispute the statement I made about cutter charges, then let's see what you've got.

An apeal to magic doesn't work in this thread by questioning about what "secret explosives" the military has.

If you can't being facts, my statement stands as true.

Besides, other truthers have stated that any claims to there being explosives as being disinfo. Greg Urich wrote an open letter to Gage asking him to remove his explosives claim from his material. gage has not even responded, and so Urich dropped his support of AE truth and started his own website. There, you'll find some real discussion about the facts, not a continual support of the 8 1/2 yr old failed delusion that 9/11 was an inside job that is here at ATS. ATS is not a place to fact find. It is a site to enforce the preconceived notions that are common in the TM.

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by bsbray11
The explosions sound exactly like explosives/bombs from within the buildings as far as I am able to discern such a thing.

This is your opinion. The thread says to bring facts, not opinions.

The OP is about people like you bringing evidence to support the "official story."

You were the one saying that you have proof that the explosions were NOT caused by explosives or bombs. I know you're incapable of producing this proof but I'll ask again for the hell of it --- where is it?

The least you can do is admit you were having a brain fart when you claimed you had actual proof. Take your own advice -- your opinion is not a fact.

Originally posted by bsbray11

I'll ask again for the hell of it --- where is it?

It's in the NIST report on 7. You can research the validity of the modelling software that they used. If you can bring any facts that dispute it, let's see it.

They state the decibel levels, for one thing, needed for cutter charges to sever col 79. It's a fact that none were heard. Nor the barotrauma that would come from being in such close proximity to these fantasy explosives. nor the window breakage. Etc.......

The same standard would hold true for the tower core columns.

It's a fact that none were heard.

It's your opinion only that the explosions heard were of this caliber. Interesting that you only apply the "bring facts only, and not opinions" standard to me, and ignore that plea where you are concerned.

Also interesting that you haven't disputed your pure speculation about these "secret military explosives" either. While I can state as fact that no one has come forth, in either the military nor private industry with any statement how they know of a demo explosive that is quiet. Another undisputed fact.

Keep trying.