Unanswered questions in regards to 9/11[W:762]

Fledermaus · Oct 1, 2014

What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

And do they undermine the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"?

Bob0627 · Oct 1, 2014

Fledermaus said:
What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

For you, none. For the rest, this is just the tip of the iceberg:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110511195303/http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/fsc_review.pdf

Fledermaus · Oct 1, 2014

Bob0627 said:
For you, none. For the rest, this is just the tip of the iceberg:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110511195303/http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/fsc_review.pdf

Quick look at the document provided show NOTHING that undermines the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"

TheNextEra · Oct 1, 2014

Bob0627 said:
For you, none. For the rest, this is just the tip of the iceberg:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110511195303/http://home.comcast.net/~gold9472/fsc_review.pdf

Simple question that NO truther will answer. If the planes did not hit the buildings, and people got on those planes, where are the people?

KokomoJojo · Oct 1, 2014

Fledermaus said:
Quick look at the document provided show NOTHING that undermines the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"

Bob, you have to keep in mind when a debunker says core concepts, that translates into "IT FAW DOWN".

Bob0627 · Oct 1, 2014

TheNextEra said:
Simple question that NO truther will answer. If the planes did not hit the buildings, and people got on those planes, where are the people?

You claim your question is "simple" but it makes no sense as written. No one can answer questions that no one knows anything about, "truther" or non-"truther" so obviously no one will. The question you ask not only makes no sense but is extremely vague. What planes didn't hit what buildings? How do you know anyone or who actually got on those non-specific planes? If they were on the planes and they did hit the buildings, they're obviously dead. If they weren't on the planes, whether the planes hit the buildings or not, who do you expect can possibly answer where they are?

Ask a question that makes sense and maybe you can get an answer if there's someone who can actually answer it.

Mark F · Oct 1, 2014

Bob0627 said:
You claim your question is "simple" but it makes no sense as written. No one can answer questions that no one knows anything about, "truther" or non-"truther" so obviously no one will. The question you ask not only makes no sense but is extremely vague. What planes didn't hit what buildings? How do you know anyone or who actually got on those non-specific planes? If they were on the planes and they did hit the buildings, they're obviously dead. If they weren't on the planes, whether the planes hit the buildings or not, who do you expect can possibly answer where they are?

Ask a question that makes sense and maybe you can get an answer if there's someone who can actually answer it.

Let's give Bob a hand.

If on the morning of 9/11/2001 the four commercial airline flights that were allegedly hijacked and then crashed - American Airlines Flights 11, and 77 and United Airlines Flight 175 and 93 - were not in fact hijacked and crashed into the World Trade Center Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania then what do you suppose happened to the passenger and crew, and for that matter the aircraft themselves?

KokomoJojo · Oct 1, 2014

Mark F said:
Let's give Bob a hand.

If on the morning of 9/11/2001 the four commercial airline flights that were allegedly hijacked and then crashed - American Airlines Flights 11, and 77 and United Airlines Flight 175 and 93 - were not in fact hijacked and crashed into the World Trade Center Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania then what do you suppose happened to the passenger and crew, and for that matter the aircraft themselves?

have you considered consulting your psychic?

I hear 911 psychic readings are quite expensive now days?

zyzygy · Oct 1, 2014

Are you people still reacting to these two just for the comedy? You know that they will never answer your questions.

NWO_Spook · Oct 1, 2014

Fledermaus said:
What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

None worthy of any discourse.

And do they undermine the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"?

No, the truther propaganda is just a collection of hyperbole and untruths.

Bob0627 · Oct 1, 2014

Mark F said:
Let's give Bob a hand.

If on the morning of 9/11/2001 the four commercial airline flights that were allegedly hijacked and then crashed - American Airlines Flights 11, and 77 and United Airlines Flight 175 and 93 - were not in fact hijacked and crashed into the World Trade Center Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania then what do you suppose happened to the passenger and crew, and for that matter the aircraft themselves?

Let's give Mark a hand, see Koko's suggestion.

Fledermaus · Oct 1, 2014

Bob0627 said:
You claim your question is "simple" but it makes no sense as written. No one can answer questions that no one knows anything about, "truther" or non-"truther" so obviously no one will. The question you ask not only makes no sense but is extremely vague. What planes didn't hit what buildings? How do you know anyone or who actually got on those non-specific planes? If they were on the planes and they did hit the buildings, they're obviously dead. If they weren't on the planes, whether the planes hit the buildings or not, who do you expect can possibly answer where they are?

Ask a question that makes sense and maybe you can get an answer if there's someone who can actually answer it.

We (the general public) know what planes hit what buildings.
We (the general public) know who was at the controls when the planes hit those buildings.

The only people unclear on the subject are TRUTHERS.

Is that your question? Do you need clarification?

Jango · Oct 4, 2014

NWO_Spook said:
None worthy of any discourse.

No, the truther propaganda is just a collection of hyperbole and untruths.

1) Lie. 28 pages that deal with 'Foreign Involvement' requires discourse. That's but one example.

2) Lie. It is not 'just', it has 'some', but it is not as encompassing as 'just'.

Jango · Oct 4, 2014

Fledermaus said:
What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

And do they undermine the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"?

1) A better question to ask is: Are there unanswered questions in regards to 9/11? If the answer is yes, well, then those questions need to be answered. Like, what does the 28 pages on 'Foreign Involvement' say.

2) This depends on what we find out from when unanswered questions get answered.

Mark F · Oct 4, 2014

Jango said:
1) A better question to ask is: Are there unanswered questions in regards to 9/11? If the answer is yes, well, then those questions need to be answered.

Do they?

Can they?

Jango · Oct 4, 2014

Mark F said:
Do they?

Can they?

Yeah.

Mark F · Oct 4, 2014

Jango said:
Yeah.

That was lame. How about thinking this time.

What unanswered questions need to be answered and can they be answered?

Jango · Oct 4, 2014

Mark F said:
That was lame. How about thinking this time.

What unanswered questions need to be answered and can they be answered?

From post #14, mine, as I'm responding to the OP:

1) A better question to ask is: Are there unanswered questions in regards to 9/11? If the answer is yes, well, then those questions need to be answered. Like, what does the 28 pages on 'Foreign Involvement' say.

2) This depends on what we find out from when unanswered questions get answered.

The very next post, #15, from you, and after editing my post, you said this:

Do they?

Can they?

I said, "Yeah," in response to that, which you responded with what I'm quoting above, namely, "What unanswered questions need to be answered and can they be answered?" I already answered that. It's the part you ****ing edited out. But here, once more, so you can think: "Like, what does the 28 pages on 'Foreign Involvement' say."

Think, grasshopper, think.

Fledermaus · Oct 4, 2014

Jango said:
1) A better question to ask is: Are there unanswered questions in regards to 9/11? If the answer is yes, well, then those questions need to be answered. Like, what does the 28 pages on 'Foreign Involvement' say.

2) This depends on what we find out from when unanswered questions get answered.

Open your own thread.

THIS thread:

What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

And do they undermine the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"?

Jango · Oct 4, 2014

Fledermaus said:
Open your own thread.

THIS thread:

What unanswered questions in regards to 9/11 are there?

And do they undermine the core concepts of what some call the "Official Conspiracy Theory"?

Are you high? Drunk? Inhaling gasoline? I ask because something has seriously impacted your reading comprehension. I'll call 911 for you if you need me to, man.

ozeco41 · Oct 4, 2014

Mark F said:
That was lame.

True and and it was also evasive.

Mark F said:
How about thinking this time.

Posting history shows a consistent avoidance of sound reasoning. Whether that is "cannot think" or "pretending cannot think" is not clear to me.

Mark F said:
What unanswered questions need to be answered...

That is the appropriate question and gets away from Jango's truther style arse about logic. It is also a sub-set of his characteristic reliance on "false generalisation".

Mark F said:
and can they be answered?

In most cases it won't be a simple "yes/no" "black/white" answer. If the answer is difficult or costly to find then the value of the "need" to the whole relevant community has to be weighed.

Something that these truthers disregard - the decisions have to be legitimate by whole of community governance - essentially the rule of law - and there is limit to how far any responsible governed community should go in trying to appease the dishonest manic fringe. The challenge is to draw the line separating the manic fringe from the extreme but genuine holders of real concern. And AFAICS no one posting here has been able to present a genuine supportable issue of concern which could justify further expenditure of community funds.

Fledermaus · Oct 4, 2014

Jango said:
Are you high? Drunk? Inhaling gasoline? I ask because something has seriously impacted your reading comprehension. I'll call 911 for you if you need me to, man.

Attempt to redefine the OP rejected.

Personal insults noted (It appears to be all you have at this point).

zyzygy · Oct 4, 2014

Fledermaus said:
Attempt to redefine the OP rejected.

Personal insults noted (It appears to be all you have at this point).

Why do truthers have only one modus operandi? Lack of education?

Fledermaus · Oct 4, 2014

zyzygy said:
Why do truthers have only one modus operandi? Lack of education?

Interesting note:

Jango often shows a real ability to learn and understand. This is to be respected.

AND he has shown the ability to admit when he has been proven wrong. And is gracious in admitting. This I respect as well.

AND he has at times presented real and relative points that require thought and the ability to reason. This too is a wonderful thing.

Perhaps I pressed this point too hard. He dug in his heels and reverted to TRUTHER tactics instead of really looking at his claim critically.

Part of the problem may be me.

ozeco41 · Oct 4, 2014

Fledermaus said:
Interesting note:

Jango often shows a real ability to learn and understand. This is to be respected.

True.

...AND he has shown the ability to admit when he has been proven wrong. And is gracious in admitting. This I respect as well.

True also - the problem is that it does not extend to recognisong the fundamental problems with his approach to logical reasoning. Four of them usually combined.

...AND he has at times presented real and relative points that require thought and the ability to reason.

Also true - but sadly not applied to the foundation of logic issues.

This too is a wonderful thing.

I'm not sure about "wonderful" - unusual in the truthers of 2014...wasn't so in 2006-7. Whether "wonderful" or not it is an essential or necessary "thing".

...Perhaps I pressed this point too hard. He dug in his heels and reverted to TRUTHER tactics instead of really looking at his claim critically....

The "point" ("points" actually) has to be pressed. There will be zero progress with discussion whilst ever the faulty logic processes are allowed to continue. And at least three of our current posters are dedicated to keeping the fogginess.

(BTW the base error of thinking or reasoning process is that "they" rely on "divergent thinking" whilst decision making requires "convergent thinking". Our recent active members J, B, S all indulge in "divergent" "false generalistions" as the foundation of their evasive non-thinking. Maybe it's time to OP a thread on that specific error.)

...Part of the problem may be me.

Don't blame yourself. Several of us are capable of identifying the errors and at several levels of meta-process.

Unless the "truther" is prepared to recognise their fundamnetal weaknesses of reasoning NON of us can help them at any level. And that barrier to progress is exactly what some members are aiming for.