9/11 Truth Frustrations

aren't we all, by definition, ignorant of what we don't know?







That is my point. I don't know. do you?

Originally posted by conwaylemmon
aren't we all, by definition, ignorant of what we don't know?

No.

I am aware that I know nothing of Quantum physics. Or nuclear power generation. Or writing computer code

.And many other things.

The difference between myself and many truthers is that I am aware that even though I know something of structural engineering now, as a result of researching how the buildings fell, that this STILL does not make me proficient enough to make sweeping proclamations about the speed of collapse, or how planes can't break through the ext columns, etc.

I am self aware enough to know that I need to defer to those that have a demonstrated proficiency in the subject matter. And to understand what the concensus is of a large body of those individuals. truthers, on the other hand, are ecstatic to find one guy that says what they want to hear and uphold his proclamations as the Holy Grail, with zero skepticism.

Bad for learning the truth, IMHO.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by conwaylemmon
aren't we all, by definition, ignorant of what we don't know?

The difference between myself and many truthers is that I am aware that even though I know something of structural engineering now, as a result of researching how the buildings fell, that this STILL does not make me proficient enough to make sweeping proclamations about the speed of collapse, or how planes can't break through the ext columns, etc.

but you are proficient enough to know that plane damage and fire were definitely the only cause of the failure? (i apologize if that is not what you claim. many do.)

I am self aware enough to know that I need to defer to those that have a demonstrated proficiency in the subject matter. And to understand what the concensus is of a large body of those individuals.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Although I wouldn't say that I defer. and your large body and my large body are different large bodies.

truthers, on the other hand, are ecstatic to find one guy that says what they want to hear and uphold his proclamations as the Holy Grail, with zero skepticism.
Bad for learning the truth, IMHO.

I am a complete skeptic. You could substitute "OS defender" for "truther" and be describing your own camp?

Originally posted by conwaylemmon
but you are proficient enough to know that plane damage and fire were definitely the only cause of the failure?

Yes.

I have studied what has been written by recognized professionals such as bazant, have read the opinions of the NIST report by organizations such as the CTBUH, and read criticisms of the NIST report by fire engineering experts such as Quintere. They ALL have written papers in engineering mags that have been read and discussed by other professionals in their field. The other pros have no real issues with plane impact damage+ fire protection removal by the impacts + uncontrolled office fires were the cause of the collapses.

And I believe the concensus of their expert opinions cuz I have studied what has been said by them. What I didn't know, Ilearned about. Do I remember it all NOW, and do I consider myself on their level? No freaking way.

Truthers however, believe that they are after researching via Google U. i've even read one dude say that he believes HE can design a highrise building, even though he has no experience with building anything more complicated than his backyard fence.

That's also a display of Dunning-Krueger if I ever saw it.

I am a complete skeptic. You could substitute "OS defender" for "truther" and be describing your own camp?

Nope.

Truthers are for the most part oblivious to their shortcomings. They cannot discern correct info from incorrect. i have no explanation for it, but it is apparent to everyone.

Some of my favorite frustrations about 9/11 are the fact that everyone seems to be painted with such a broad brush under the word *Truther*

Let's be clear.

I'm pretty crazy.

I believe in all sorts of stuff that would make most people *SCOFF* loudly at then instant *SMIRK* and *BURST OUT LAUGHING* and pointing and jumping up and down at how "different" I am and how could anyone possibly ever sincerely believe *insert 'zany' idea here*

Typical "Crazy Guy".

I don't mind. Laugh away! I encourage everyone to join me and "Go Crazy"! It's awesome! Lots of fun, I promise. But that's off topic for another thread.

But it's really silly to make large sweeping "Truther" assumptions about a hugely varied group of people based on what they "believe" about a certain aspect of "Nine Eleven Topics".

When searching for truth, I like the Oracle of Delphi's "Know Thyself" mixed with a healthy Socratic "The only thing I know is nothing at all" and a dash of general paranoia for good measure.

We're all on the same team here guys! This forum is such a nice haven to discuss anything you could possibly think of in an "alternative" realm, and varied civil discussions about brilliant topics are just a few clicks away

To help make discussion around here more...hmmm... positive? Maybe everyone should just stop and consider how silly it is to use the label "Truther" as a sneaky lil 'jab' at someone's belief system, and try to paint them with an extremely large brush that "therefore means they're clearly wrong"

But there seems to be this "tone of voice" per se, that's just instantly condescending, at least to my perception, that's used in certain scenarios quite frequently when the "LABEL" of "Truther" is put onto someone or something

How you can refer to the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth in shorthand form as "AETwoof" and not expect people to have an instant negative reaction however else valid your points may be? It's just unnecessary. Let people go to the site themselves and read the material. Calling it "Twoof" although indirectly, is pretty cheesy.

Also all the "Witch Hunter", "Go enjoy your witch hunt" comments.

Just doesn't move the conversation anywhere productive, ya know?

All of this can of course be said for the "OS camp" or whatever the opposite of a Truther is nowadays.

Who cares. Doesn't really matter, because no one should try to label the "other side" for all the same good reasons to not label people "Truthers" in the first place.

Discuss specific points or philosophies or theories all you like! Debate away! Let's forum this *insert expletive* up!

Let people decide for themselves who and what's REALLY crazy on a case by case scenario.

I'm sure there's enough common ground for us all to play on the playground and share ideas!

TLDR: Don't label people. It's silly.

I do also realise that the title of this may allude to ''Truther Movement'' but this is not, I was just illustrating my frustation with the search for the truth, just wanted to clear that up.

Originally posted by TheDagDa

Also all the "Witch Hunter", "Go enjoy your witch hunt" comments.

You must be talking to me.

If you think there are no victims in your little Witch Hunt. You are wrong.

Read this.

www.cluesforum.info...

Why should a victims family have to put up with crap like this.

Don't tell me that you are not like this sick little girl. If you have ever said " no plane crashed in Shanksville' then you are exactly like her. Wether you know it or not.


Make no mistake about you are taking part in a witch hunt.

reply to post by waypastvne


Nice to meet you, too! It's a pleasure to have civil discourse with you, Kind Sir Waypasvne.

As a matter of fact, I have read the clues forum!

Does it even matter what I think about it?

"My little witch hunt"?

You seem to have wasted no time labeling me with some kind of "ownership" of claims made by people who aren't me, as part of this "Witch Hunt".

Sorry, that's not my website, nor have I specifically endorsed or not endorsed anything from or related to much around here yet in the first place

If you would be ever so kind as to find some examples of MINE to discuss in future posts, go for it! I don't think anyone would object to calling out clear obscene behavior or inappropriate comments. Please quote me specifically and accurately as possible so I can reply in kind and try to understand new ways to think about or look at things.

If at any time you have felt that I have been disrespectful, please let me know because it is not my intention

"Whether I know it or not" is an interesting phrase. Guess I've always got something to learn. thanks for the food for thought!

I would be more inclined to learn more about your position on the subject of "The Shanksville Plane" and all of the evidence for and against certain claims in any of the relevant threads regarding the subject, no need to start it all up in this one.

Maybe consider a new approach to people who appear to be on the "other side of the fence" from you?

Let's quote it up to finish this post off!

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar

Originally posted by TheDagDa

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

But I have entertained "Truther Thoughts" I have looked at all the evidence Truthers have asked me to. The only conclusion I can draw after looking at their evidence is... Truthers are not very smart. I have a thread open about Shanksville. Lets see what evidence you've got.. Witch Hunter.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by pigsy2400

One of the wildest yet plausible theories.The video is in parts

reply to post by waypastvne


Your post is a prime example of the condescending "Truther" suffix/prefix. "Truther" thoughts and "truther" evidence. "Their" evidence. We were all on the same planet and experienced the same events together!

It's no more "mine" than it is "yours" or "theirs".

I think it's great that you've read everything about everything and think you know whats up and have absolutely no doubt of of the veracity of all of your claims. I"ll keep an eye out for your insights, and lil gems of knowledge.

Implying that if I was a "truther", i must be "not very smart" is interesting to say the least, and once again quite the broad brush to paint upon a fellow member of this forum.

and then "Witch Hunter" once again.

If you have a point to make about something specific regarding "9/11 Truth Frustrations", I'm all ears. otherwise guess I'll catch ya in the other threads?

Side note:

awesome thread by the way OP, thanks for sharing in the first place!

Originally posted by TheDagDa

Your post is a prime example of the condescending "Truther" suffix/prefix.

Thank you.

This thread itself has almost become a Self Fullfilling prophecy, people have demonstrated that the truth is only their perception, of which everyones is different but the saddest part is that it has also shown that the divides within our own community regarding 9/11, is the reason why the debat is not taken seriously out there in the public domain.

As I stated in a previous post, the title of thread was not about the ''Truther'' movements, it was to show my frustrations in the journey for the truth, whatever that may be & whatever consequences it may bring or not!

Self fulfilling prophecy!

reply to post by conwaylemmon
Thanks, Conway. They don't know how to handle people like you, people who are asking legitimate questions. Reason? Because in order to get answers to these questions, a new investigation of that day would have to take place. They will do all they can to convince people that that's not necessary, and that tells me that they have an agenda that's not concerned with truth, but of obstruction.
The smart-ass attitude comes from their inability to stomach what they have to do here everyday, and it's un-heathy side effects. Telling lies all day, and defending them the next, is making all these shills pay for their deeds. I find some comfort in that. Every action produces an equal, and opposite reaction.

Originally posted by conwaylemmon
A)
How do you know to which legitimate questions I was referring? I mentioned no gov't disinformation, planted aircraft wreckage, or fake eyewitnesses. I'm not going to give specific examples, because you won't consider them, although you will claim that you have considered them, and proven them wrong.

I have no idea what "legitimate questions" you were referring to. That's why I was asking what these "legitimate questions" were that you claimed to have. The point is that unless you've discovered something new that hasn't been seen in the last ten years, odds are there is a legitimate answer to your legitimate question. The problem is that time and time again, the truthers refuse to accept the answers as being legitimate. It would be one thing if they could offer a logical reason, but by and large it's entirely becuase they accuse it of "being planted by sinister secret agents" which is simply an exercise in pitiful excuse making for why they shouldn't believe what others tell them.

If you can show something to the contrary that you won't fall back upon the "it''s been planted by sinister secret agents" excuse, by all means, please post it.

B)
I'm forming my theories based on many sources, yes. I believe that I have the ability to form logical, reasoned conclusions based on the information that I have seen. and I trust my own judgement. Either way I'm being conned. You're theory could be the correct theory, and if it is, I'm being conned by the loony conspiracy websites and a lot of well meaning scientists. If your theory is incorrect, and mine is at least partially correct, I am being conned by my government. Hmm...Who has conned me before?

If you're going to go that route then you need to ask yourself, who has historically hijacked passenger aircraft for political/religious agendas, murdered innocent civilians for what we in the west would consider frivolous reasons to the poiut of being surreal, and have thrown their own lives away in suicide attacks against their perceived enemies. That Is what the 9/11 attack was, after all. Islamic fundamentalists can't NOT be on the top of the list of suspects...particularly when we see they're not being particularly repentent about their blind devotion to theology even after the attack. Who was it that rioted over cartoons of Mohammed in Danish newspapers, again?

Theories have nothing to do with it; it's what the evidence actually shows, and there's an enormous amount of evidence showing it was in fact a legitimate terrorist attack and preciously scant evidence showing it was a staged event...and the ones providing the preciously scant evidence, like Gage, Jones, and Avery, have been caught red handed at presenting false evidence in the past. I will givve you all the evidence of that as you would like.

you try to get the police to investigate. You tell all of your family and friends you go on internet forums that might relate. Most say "doctors don't poison children". It comes out on the news that some loony is accusing doctors of killing babies. The Discovery Health channel has a show on how doctors pledge the hippocratic oath and can't possibly kill. I could go on. but I would like to ask you to sincerely answer this: Would you demand that her body be exhumed for further investigation

Yes I would, absolutely...but then your analogy doesn't apply here because the hospital attendent informing me of the impropriety is by definition a whistleblower, and a whistleblower is by definition someone willing to come forward and offer evidence. I dont need to tell you that despite the ever growing pool of people accused of being involved in this conspiracy and/or coverup, not a single whistleblower came forward exposing this to be a staged event. No timetables, no documents, no tangible lists of conspirators, not even a prostitute coming forward revealing a customer told her how the explosives were smuggled into the buildings. ZERO. Using your own analogy, all we have in this case is some guy calling me up telling me "everything I know about my daughter's death is wrong and he'll tell me the REAL truth if I give him my money". I look into his credentials and find out he doesn't even work at the hospital- he flips burgers for a living and has no connection to the hospital whatsoever. In that case, what would YOU do- believe everything he says completely and without question, or brush him off as a self serving con artist trying to use your grief to rip you off?

If you're going to theorize these alternative conspiracy stories, that's one thing, but at least use analogies that actually apply.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


You've obviously twisted and extended my analogy the same way you twist and ridicule the thoughts and ideas of concerned people to suit your agenda. a few points:

- I've never given anyone money to believe what I believe.
- I never said the guy works there. many honest and observant people probably flip burgers.
- The absence of a whistleblower doesn't prove the absence of a conspiracy.
- my analogy is fine. just because one source of info may be unreliable, doesn't mean the girl wasn't poisoned. There are other sources. and wouldn't you still want to go further to find out.

Look man, this is getting old fast. this will be my last post in this thread... i hope.

this is a generalization:

you claim one thing is the truth. it's summarized in your signature. and you ridicule and manipulate those who disagree with it.

I think there are other, yes, "sinister" possibilities. I could be wrong about the whole darn thing. In that case, I guess I am a loony with no sense of reality. But what if you are wrong? what are you then?

so, i'll ask you one more time. Could you be wrong?

reply to post by conwaylemmon
And may I second that? Is it possible that you are wrong, Dave? I know it's asking alot, but a simple yes, or no, would do.

Originally posted by conwaylemmon
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

You've obviously twisted and extended my analogy the same way you twist and ridicule the thoughts and ideas of concerned people to suit your agenda. a few points:

- I've never given anyone money to believe what I believe.

I see right on Richard Gage's website there's a status bar showing how many donantions he's collected to get his new movie out. He's collected $3000+ to produce a movie that literally is nothing but a recut of his prior movies. You yourself might not have given him money but it's patently obvious he's finding a bumber crop of suckers somewhere...and that's just Richard Gage. If even one one hundredth of the spooky-scary stories that Alex Jones was spewing was true, the gov't wouldn't be writhing their hands in anxiety wondering what to do. If they were so vicious that they'd murder 3000 innocent people over some global conspiracy they wouldn't hesitate in the least to send Mr. Spooky and his silenced pistol over to Jones for a little visit.

The 9/11 truther movement IS infested by crackpots and self serving con artists milking the truthers for a fast buck, whether you happen to agree with the statement or not. All I'm doing is pointing out this is a legitimate frustration of the 9/11 truth movement, which IS the subject of this thread, after all.

- I never said the guy works there. many honest and observant people probably flip burgers.

You're digging yourself deeper now. How would someone know such intricate details of what happened to my daughter at the hospital if he had no connection whatsoever to the hospital? The guy who revealed the details of the Watergate break-in to Woodward and Bernstein turned out to be the number 2 man in the FBI, so he definitely was connected to what the investigations were turning up as connected could get.

- The absence of a whistleblower doesn't prove the absence of a conspiracy.
- my analogy is fine. just because one source of info may be unreliable, doesn't mean the girl wasn't poisoned. There are other sources. and wouldn't you still want to go further to find out.

Oh, so now you've just removed the anonymous warning my daughter's death wasn't from the tylenol reaction altogether, leaving me to believe there's impropriety with my daughter's death, how, exactly? An internet web site or conspiracy bulletin board?

Unless I received information that showed the story I was given was false somehow, I would accept the story I was given becuase I would have no grounds to suspect it. I dont go around accusing people of murder for no reason, after all. Do you?

so, i'll ask you one more time. Could you be wrong?

Of course I could be wrong. Absolutely. But for me to be wrong it would mean that all the evidence I looked at that showed it was a genuine attack by Islamic terrorists was wrong, not to mention, the eyewitness accounts of people who were there were wrong, not to mention, the people I spoke to personally were wrong, Needless to say, I would want to know why as well as why there isn't even a microbe of evidence showing I was wrong, and I think you know by now that I find simply accusing everyone of being a sinister secret agent is being pretty intellectually lazy.

reply to post by GoodOlDave



I'll admit i'm a total crackpot sucker, but only because i'm responding to you again. I feel dumber each time. everyone else has quit already.

I happen to work in the film business. and $3000 is nothing if you're trying to present a film in multiple cities. FWIW

Your other points are just not worth it, although you DO address the OP's thread quite nicely. I'm going to go dust off my crack-pot and play online arm-chair explosive expert some more. its a really cool game.

Thanks for admitting you could be wrong. I believe you are. I wish you well. Good luck to you and to all of us. It has been enlightening. I'm sure I'll see you around.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by pigsy2400

 

I feel that there are some theories that simply cast the rest of us as Total Loonies that dare to question the governments of the world, all you have to do is mention that you don't believe the official story of 9/11 & most people within society will cast you as a total crackpot! I am sure you know that ''look'' that people give you if you mention your beliefs about that day! I must point out that I live in England also.

Some of us feel that those theories originated, and are continuing to be put forth, to do just that, give easy ammunition to those who wish to discredit everyone. Some people are just gullible and follow along blindly, others do it by design.

For example, when talking to someone about 911 and my questions and suspicious, without even telling them what I felt, their response was:

"So what did they do with all the people from the jets they replaced"

see? That's how it works.

Oh, you question anything about 911, then you obviously believe every single fringe theory out there about it.

If the buildings were pre-wired with explosives, which they had to have been, then the jets would have had to have been swapped out drones. It's simple, straightforward deductive reasoning, and there's some evidence to also show that, for example, the plane that impacted the south tower could not have been the so-called originating flight 175. The problem is it's too difficult for people to fathom or get their mind around.