It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SiliconJon
How is this post not a violation of the site rules? Does that red box around you give you special rules?
9/11 Conspiracies: This forum is dedicated to the discussion and speculation of cover-ups, scandals, and other conspiracies surrounding the events of 9/11/2001. Participants should be aware that this forum is under close staff scrutiny due to general rudeness by some. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.
That aside, it's a massive buffet of fallacy. While the general does make a valid point in that some of the theories brought into discussion in the search for truth on that day's events are extreme one cannot generalize "truthers" for the analysis and speculation vary widly if you spend enough time searching for variations. As mentioned to you general, your behavior would imply it to be equal to then put you into that same group for seeking the truth and ad hominem you and your stance for daring to seek the truth.
See also: guilt by association, red herring, straw man (and more I'm sure, when being so fallacious as the general was the fallacies tend to overlap due to the monstrous puddle of logic that spills upon the floor)
Originally posted by SiliconJon
So what airplanes did you see hit the towers? Where they greyish blue, or UA & AA? Even if you had seen commercial craft, identifiable by markings and design, would that give you any insight beyond what you immediately saw, such as knowing who was on the plane / in control of the plane? How would seeing planes hit the tower negate the possibility of explosives planted within the building as an additional component of that day's terrorism?
You do know there's a great deal of (likely majority) support that planes hit the buildings AND explosives where the Coup de grâce that brought them down, no?
Are you able to tell what the debris at the Pentagon belonged to? Would you be able to tell the difference between debris from: a passenger jet, a reaper drone, a Boeing 757-223, a B-52, etc?edit on 14-10-2011 by SiliconJon because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by pshea38
reply to post by ThePublicEnemyNo1
Careful Now! if you have something on tape that the government doesn't want the
public to see, you could be in danger. All those tapes from cameras trained in the direction
of the pentagon were not confiscated for no reason. Interesting.
Strange that in 10 years you haven't been curious enough to find out what was or was not recorded.
If you took a ten pound sledge hammer and smacked a hard drive you would destroy the drive completely and the force of which those servers were hit with was into trillions of time stronger force than a ten pound sledge hammer. But to prove your stance we would need to find a demolition site of a building of comparable size and structure of the WTC and put a server of working drives in it and then afterwords lets see if those drives are recoverable? the computer hard drives on the planes and their almost indestructible black boxes were completely destroyed. The force of those buildings coming down was many times stronger than that of the plane hitting the building
Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by ChesterJohn
If you took a ten pound sledge hammer and smacked a hard drive you would destroy the drive completely and the force of which those servers were hit with was into trillions of time stronger force than a ten pound sledge hammer. But to prove your stance we would need to find a demolition site of a building of comparable size and structure of the WTC and put a server of working drives in it and then afterwords lets see if those drives are recoverable? the computer hard drives on the planes and their almost indestructible black boxes were completely destroyed. The force of those buildings coming down was many times stronger than that of the plane hitting the building
I am not arguing the almost total destruction of the contents of the buildings. The computer systems that were on the exit walls of the debris that went through the towers were literally pushed out of the offices and sustained the least amount of fragmentation damage. I would suspect that the drives in those systems were the ones that were recoverable since they fell to to the ground outside of the major collapse. In any case, they did find some that were recoverable, so some kind of scenario allowed these drives to survive being totally ripped apart.