Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

CarltonDanks69

What are your controversial beliefs?

Recommended Posts

Potto

Hitler is still very much alive and is actually browsing this forum right now. I even know which user it is, believe it or not! 

 

- Sent from my iPhone 11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
On 10/8/2019 at 12:05 PM, CarltonDanks69 said:

Well one would think that when debating 9/11, you’d have at least some prior knowledge of the events. Look up the NIST report. They confirmed this.  

Wrong- NIST only made measured statements on the "free fall" collapse of WTC7, whose collapse was captured in significant proportion. They caveat their statements by outlining the fact it is estimated from video evidence, then proceed to absolutely decimate your assertion it fell at near free fall with this:

 

NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions

 

You can read it here- https://www.nist.gov/pba/questions-and-answers-about-nist-wtc-7-investigation

 

NIST comment on sections of the other towers falling at high speed and give a full technical investigation here https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster-failure-studies/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation but they're a) not rigourously timed as per the example above timed as you claim, b) only show elapsed time from the initiation of collapse to first external materials hitting the ground, and c) clearly state that significant proportions of the building core structure did not collapse until ~25 seconds after the main event.

 

 

This typifies exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. "Truthers" have so many different contradictory and competing claims that they often entirely lose sight of the factual surroundings of their claims. You've gone from making an entirely unevidenced sweeping statement on all three buildings, to citing NIST reporting on one of them that contradicts your point. I didn't even need to rebut your point, you did it to yourself!

 

On 10/8/2019 at 11:15 AM, CarltonDanks69 said:

The turning off the transponders barely hindered ATCs ability to find and identify them. They were identified within MINUTES.

Even if this were true, it's largely irrelevant as it completely misinterprets the role and function of US ATC (and also missed my point given that I wasn't referring to ATC)

 

Before 9/11, no automated mechanism existed to alert NORAD (who are responsible for interception of aircraft within the airspace of the US) to anomalous activity.

NORAD did not have access to ATC data, instead using their own transponder systems and networks of radar stations; NORAD had only once conducted an interception over the US mainland in the ten years preceding 9/11 and no Air Defense Identification Zones existed to permit tracking and identification of targets within the US mainland. NORAD's presumption had always been that detection and interception would happen over water on the perimeters of the US, as it was architected solely to identify Soviet bombers during the Cold War.

 

The facts of NORAD's alerting from ATC are thus:

  • Flight 11 was reported hijacked to NORAD eight minutes before it hit the North Tower.
  • Flight 175 was reported hijacked to NORAD at pretty much the exact moment it hit the South Tower.
  • Flight 77 was reported missing (not hijacked) to NORAD three minutes before it hit the Pentagon.
  • Flight 93 was not reported either missing or hijacked to NORAD until after it had crashed.

Even if the entire might of the USAF could have been immediately leveraged from the moment NORAD were informed, they would still have been unable to intercept any of the four aircraft, let alone prevent them achieving their aims.

 

On 10/8/2019 at 11:15 AM, CarltonDanks69 said:

Which begs the question why so few aircrafts were left to defend the ENTIRE NORTH EASTERN UNITED STATES that day? 

Given the above, it really wouldn't have mattered anyway, but the number of aircraft available to NORAD was not exceptionally low on 9/11.

 

On 10/8/2019 at 11:15 AM, CarltonDanks69 said:

also dude, google and a little research is your friend. It’s PROVEN that debris was found in Indian lake and even 6 miles away from the crash site

Small scraps of paper, fabric and lightweight metal foils were found up to 1.5 miles from the crash site, including in Indian Lake, but these were not airframe debris so their presence is both irrelevant and entirely expected, given the prevailing winds on the day.

The "6 miles away" claim has been steadily chopped and changed by conspiracy theorists, who first claimed that Indian Lake was six miles from the crash site, and subsequently revised this to debris being found six miles away. There's no independent evidence for the latter at all.

 

On 10/8/2019 at 11:15 AM, CarltonDanks69 said:

EDIT: one more thing, it’s extremely disrespectful to just throw away all eyewitness accounts that don’t line up with the story we were given. 

Firstly, I'm not ignoring eyewitness accounts that don't line up with the story we're given, I'm advocating ignoring eyewitness accounts entirely irrespective of what they say.

This is pretty much the approach taken by air crash investigators, who will only look at eyewitness statements once they've exhausted all other forms of empirical evidence, and who frequently give little to no weight to eyewitness testimony as it's regularly empirically demonstrated as wrong.

 

An appeal to emotion about a "hero" whose technical competence at identification of explosions is completely nonexistent, undergoing and extremely stressful set of events, makes for an entirely unconvincing eyewitness even in the wider context of their unreliability.

Even if his statements were accurate, they still wouldn't speak to a conspiracy given the accepted factual circumstances of events, or indeed the basic laws of physics. It's perfectly possible that he witnessed one of the common fire artefacts, such as flashover of jet fuel, that appear as "explosions" to lay people but technically aren't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reameb

The murican moon landing was fake af and recorded in the desert my g, prove me wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Potto
30 minutes ago, Reameb said:

The murican moon landing was fake af and recorded in the desert my g, prove me wrong.

I am actually the moon and I can confirm that it was fake. 🌚

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69

Key 9/11 FACTS  for @sivispacem

 
 
• High ranking members of the 9/11 commission said the the whole investigation was "set up to fail." The commission was set up at the last minute and the investigators encountered resistance from various government organizations, many of which directly lied to them. On top of all that, the investigation was incredibly underfunded, with less money spent on the 9/11 investigation than the Lewinsky investigation. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_9/11_Commission#%22Set_up%22_to_fail)
 
• NIST admits that building 7 fell at free fall speed for over 2 seconds, meaning that the building encountered no resistance as it was falling, how is this possible? [Source](http://archive.is/iYtA6)
 
• The official NIST simulations of the WTC7 collapse don't even match what actually happened. Compared to the [actual footage,](https://youtu.be/tcI8SFLANi8) which simulation of the collapse looks more accurate? [This simulation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw7W55dBbAM) from the UAF study, [or this one](https://youtu.be/TNEKtvB80us) from the NIST which was in charge of the official investigation?
 
• The official story says that 4 of the hijackers passports were found in legible condition, one was recovered before the first tower had even collapsed. How did the passports fly out of the plane, and out of the building, while still remaining in legible condition? [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM#Passports_recovered)
 
• In addition to the passports, they recovered a seemingly undamaged red bandana from the fiery crash scene of flight 93.
 [Does this look like it came from a plane crash?](http://archive.is/DXqJd)
 
• Many workers at the twin towers reported strange happenings leading up to 9/11. Scott Forbes was employed by Fiduciary Trust Company International, located on the 97th floor of the South Tower at the WTC complex. He says there were some very strange events in the weeks leading up to the attacks, including; a complete power down of the building for over 36 hours, and mysterious ‘engineers’ doing work in the building using spools of wire just days before the 9/11 attacks. " [Source](https://archive.is/EIalB)
 
• Many first responders reported hearing multiple explosions before the collapse of the towers. [Source](https://youtu.be/Kz_RCw0eFi4)
 
• Why is [the only video](https://youtu.be/0SL2PzzOiF8) released from the Pentagon choppy and low quality? You might say all security cameras at the time were like that, but there is a smooth full motion video that's (allegedly) from a security camera in an airport. [Are we supposed to believe that a random airport has better cameras than the Pentagon?](https://youtu.be/uLEqjpHVPhM)
 
• The crash site at Shanksville has no plane debris, or much of anything at all. Am I expected to believe that [this is a crash site?](https://i.imgur.com/eCfdABQ.jpg)
 
• How was Hani Hanjour, a poorly trained pilot whose own instructor said he "could not fly at all", able to pilot a massive jet that he had no experience with, and pull off a 270 degree corkscrew turn that even most airline pilots cannot replicate? [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hani_Hanjour)
 
• How did all of the alleged hijackers get travel documents to begin with? The former head of the American visa bureau in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, is a man named Michael Springmann. While stationed in Saudi Arabia, Springmann alleges he was "ordered by high level State Dept officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants", including terrorist recruits of Osama Bin Laden. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Springmann)
 
• The 7 countries plan. Former 4 star army general Wesley Clark said that after 9/11 he was told about a plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years. [Here's video of him talking about this.](https://youtu.be/SXS3vW47mOE)
 
• The Mineta testimony. Norman Mineta, who was Secratary of Transportation at the time, gave a very interesting testimony in front of the 9/11 commission, although they didn't put it in their report for some reason. The testimony is fascinating and I won't try to summarize it, [I would recommend watching it.](https://youtu.be/bDfdOwt2v3Y)
 
• Operation Northwoods was a false flag plot that the DoD and Chiefs of Staff proposed in 1962. They planned on shooting down a plane full of American citizens so that they could blame it on Cuba as an excuse to start a war. The plan was vetoed by John F. Kennedy. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods)
 
• Another interesting precedent is the first gulf war. One of the major reasons for invading was the Nayirah testimony. A girl named Nayirah testified that the Iraqis had committed atrocities against the Kuwaiti people. She alleged that the soldiers had ransacked a hospital and "taken babies out of incubators". George H.W. Bush repeated this story at least ten times in his speeches, and it was almost certainly the biggest reason that so much of the public thought war in Iraq was necessary. It later turned out that Nayirah's testimony was a lie. She had been hiding her identity as the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S. and the whole testimony was organized by a PR firm. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony)
 
 
 
 
 
But nope. Im just a crazy boomer, loony, nutjob, etc.
Nothing to see here :)
Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zello

Here's one

 

 9/11 conspiracy theorists/truthers are batsh*t crazy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Key 9/11 FACTS  for @sivispacem

So instead of responding to the various rebuttals I've made, you double down with another Gish gallop of "facts" (many of which actually aren't factual), and additional question-begging?

I'm starting to think you don't actually have an interest in discussing this in any meaningful way.

 

Given you've refused to provide a sensible number of points for me to rebut and instead thrown what is, frankly, a load of sh*t at the wall in the hope some sticks, I'll just respond to the top five.

 

12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

• High ranking members of the 9/11 commission said the the whole investigation was "set up to fail."

Factual, but misleading and misrepresentative. The co-chairs of the commission did indeed describe the Commission as "set up to fail" due in part to its underfunding (as well as minimal scope and unrealistic deadlines), but the wider issue and the main reason for their consternation was the lack of political engagement and the bipartisan resistance to its establishment and actions, particularly those with close relationships with many of the entities who were roundly criticised by the commission (including the intelligence community, NORAD, FAA, US DoD and others). The conspiracy here is one of politically-motivated individuals trying to dodge blame being apportioned to the various bits of government or executive agencies they had vested interests in; the misrepresentations made by NORAD, for instance, to the commission, were designed to make their performance in response to the hijackings look better than it actually was.

 

12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

• NIST admits that building 7 fell at free fall speed for over 2 seconds

False, not to mention a hasty backpedalling from a previously (also false) point you've already made. NIST gives a detailed explanation for the collapse, based on their analysis, in the very link you provide (which is just an older version of the same Q&A I cited on the previous page). In their own words:

 

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

 

The onus here is on conspiracy theorists to demonstrate that the above evidence-based narrative is either unexpected given the circumstances, something they've roundly failed to do due largely to the overwhelming technical consensus against them (even "technical" truther organisations like Architects and Engineers are largely populated by people whose disciplines do not given them any subject matter expertise). Conversely, the NIST analysis has been extensively supported by subsequent analyses, modelling and simulation performed for peer-reviewed academic and industry publications, including Structure (https://web.archive.org/web/20090419050714/http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf).

 

12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

• The official NIST simulations of the WTC7 collapse don't even match what actually happened.

On whose authority are you making this assertion? You have absolutely no clear subject matter competence to speak on what "closely matches" events, because you a) have no direct expertise related to them to draw down on, b) have less access to supporting material than NIST did in their assessment.

In essence here, you try and elevate your own judgement above that of organisations that are self-evidently far more qualified than you to speak on the subject. All this really boils down to is you thinking NIST are wrong- which is your prerogative, but doesn't make for a convincing argument given your absolute absence of SME.

 

12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

• The official story says that 4 of the hijackers passports were found in legible condition...
• In addition to the passports, they recovered a seemingly undamaged red bandana from the fiery crash scene of flight 93

I'm failing to see what would be described in my industry as a "so what" here. Nothing about this is particularly surprising; in fact it is entirely common for undamaged objects (particularly lighter weight ones made from fabrics or papers) to be recovered from pretty catastrophic crashes, even if they do involve substantial post-crash fires, or even complete mid-air disintegration due to explosives or similar. The onus is on you here to explain why this is unexpected, unusual or inconsistent- which you are likely to struggle with given that similar finds are commonly made in crashes. 

 

12 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

• Many workers at the twin towers reported strange happenings leading up to 9/11

This is what's known as "eisegesis"; reading of events or narratives in such a way as to introduce preconceived bias. There's nothing ostensibly abnormal or unusual in many of the things described by eyewitnesses in the days or weeks coming up to 9/11, but the narratives of conspiracy theorists who wish to portray them as such have introduced these observations into the wider narrative as anomalies. And a single eyewitness statement in and amongst literally thousands of employees and regular visitors is not at all compelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Candy_Licker
On 10/8/2019 at 1:38 PM, Evil empire said:

I'm a die-hard socialist and atheist.

 

 

zing. Me too. But I'm so disillusioned with humanity that I'm basicially a nihilist.

 

Also, I think free will is an illusion

Edited by Candy_Licker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69

Oh my goodness at the “so what” shrugging off of a paper passport flying out of an exploding building where every single passenger and their personal items were vaporized.... I quit. 
 

also, anyone with functioning eyes can see that the NIST collapse model for building 7 doesn’t match what actually occurred when the building collapsed into its own footprint. 
 

whatever, sivi. You win lol 

 

 

also, there is no concrete evidence that even proves that those “hijackers” even boarded those planes that morning. No security footage with the time stamp, no photos, no nothing. But somehow someone found a passport amidst the chaos before the north tower even collapsed out of the endless amounts of paper flying out the buildings that morning 

2 hours ago, sivispacem said:

This is what's known as "eisegesis"; reading of events or narratives in such a way as to introduce preconceived bias. There's nothing ostensibly abnormal or unusual in many of the things described by eyewitnesses in the days or weeks coming up to 9/11, but the narratives of conspiracy theorists who wish to portray them as such have introduced these observations into the wider narrative as anomalies. And a single eyewitness statement in and amongst literally thousands of employees and regular visitors is not at all compelling.

Yes because heavy mechanical work being done on numerous floors that were locked off to everyone isn’t suspicious at all. Let’s just ignore Willy Rodriguez, a hero of 9/11 that saved many lives and was awarded a medal by the devil himself, George Dubya, and several others that reported the same thing. Let’s ignore that Willy Rodriguez also reported an explosion in the basements seconds before the first plane struck. Let’s ignore all that sh*t because it doesn’t line up with the Bs story we were told. Let’s ignore that there is audio evidence playing the 2 separate explosions going off within 9 seconds of each other. You’re right. 

13 hours ago, Zello said:

Here's one

 

 9/11 conspiracy theorists/truthers are batsh*t crazy

 

And why is that? 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jpm1

except that you don't know if it isn't a child victim of abuse, or simply a disease. the problem is with the parents who give too much sodas, not the kids themselves. it's a question of education. (like always i'd say). if you were told when you were young, that sodas abuse can bring diabetes, you will never abuse of these. bashing is hates, thus can't be good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Short Stay
On 10/8/2019 at 3:08 PM, Smith John said:

Extinction Rebelion brush their teeth more than twice a month.

Isn't that also how often the women of Extinction Rebellion change their underwear and is this why they are known as Crusties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

whatever, sivi. You win lol 

I knew you'd give up- conspiracy theorists are always chomping at the bit to list 101 "truths" about 9/11 but have an instantaneous meltdown and throw in the towel the moment anyone starts questioning them.

It's a shame really, given as a group you're all so obsessed with "opening people's eyes" and so ready to call out apparent ignorance on the part of their detractors, that you all seem pathologically unable to defend your own views.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

a paper passport flying out of an exploding building

As I said before, give me a single example, one single example where an airliner has exploded and no debris of this nature has been recovered. It doesn't happen, so the magical thinking that it must have happened on 9/11 despite the immediate destruction (and especially the immediate fire/explosion on impact) being much less severe than, say TWA800 when the entire fuel load of the aircraft exploded in pretty much a single instance due to the ignition of fuel vapours in the central wing tank, and in which case plenty of similar debris was found.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

every single passenger and their personal items were vaporized

Utter drivel. Plenty of human remains and personal effect recovered.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

also, anyone with functioning eyes can see that the NIST collapse model for building 7 doesn’t match what actually occurred when the building collapsed into its own footprint. 

If "anyone with functioning eyes" thinks their observation of a portion of a collapse caught on video, taken from a single angle, represents any kind of evidence- let alone worthwhile evidence- to rebut extensive engineering modelling built not only from footage but from material analysis, forensic evidence and computer simulation, they need their head examining. 

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

also, there is no concrete evidence that even proves that those “hijackers” even boarded those planes that morning.

What evidence are you expecting there to be? What would constitute "concrete" to you in this instance?

 

I mean the most hilarious thing about this all is that truthers pick on (usually inaccurately or incorrectly) what are at best minor inconsistencies in the official line but then pay no attention to making sure their alternative narrative isn't evidently steaming sh*t. Like,  big rolling fireball explosions are exactly what you wouldn't see in a controlled demolition using proper shaped charges. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69
35 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

As I said before, give me a single example, one single example where an airliner has exploded and no debris of this nature has been recovered.

Flight 77. And all the bodies, luggage...anything of Flight 93 besides the conveniently I burned bandanas that were excavated from the small hole that a Boeing supposedly crashed in. 
 

 

Can I get an example of how office fires can fully collapse 3 steel framed building within just a few hours basically vaporizing everything? I’ll wait. 

35 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

What evidence are you expecting there to be? What would constitute "concrete" to you in this instance?

The f*ck?...uhhh maybe footage from the terminal? Photographs? It’s a f***kn airport for Christ’s sakes and these 12 “hijackers” are the most wanted men on the planet yet we don’t have a single FRAME of evidence proving they boarded those flights that morning. I hope this is an act you’re putting on. 

35 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Utter drivel. Plenty of human remains and personal effect recovered.

75% of those fragments of remains smaller than a pinky.  Can’t explain how a gravitational collapse does that...

35 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

If "anyone with functioning eyes" thinks their observation of a portion of a collapse caught on video, taken from a single angle, represents any kind of evidence- let alone worthwhile evidence- to rebut extensive engineering modelling built not only from footage but from material analysis, forensic evidence and computer simulation, they need their head examining. 

Yeah cause this:

 

 Equals this:

 Gee...wonder why even up

to now, the NIST model can’t show the full collapse? And why they didn’t even bother investigating for explosives? Hmm

 

 

EDIT: BWAHAHAH “minor inconsistencies in the official line” Yep. Just minor inconsistencies here, folks! PLEASE DISPERSE! NOTHING TO SEE HERE 

 

Maybe you can help Bush find concrete evidence linking Osama to the 9/11 attacks too (even though he denied it right out the gate) 

 

we should probably try to find an old VHS tape with sh*tty quality in some random hut in Afghanistan that conveniently shows the perp admit to carrying out the attacks! 
 

 

 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Flight 77.

Entirely wrong. Aircraft wreckage including large pieces, human remains, personal artefacts and other items were all found in the wake of the Pentagon impact. I don't know where you've got the notion it was "vaporised" but it wasn't. 

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

The f*ck?...uhhh maybe footage from the terminal? 

Why do you think footage of the hijackers doesn't exist? Where has that notion even come from? Literally five seconds of googling immediately demonstrates this as wrong.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-14347433/9-11-video-shows-hijackers-being-screened

 

If you can't get these absolute Billy basics right, then how can we trust anything you say?

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

 75% of those fragments of remains smaller than a pinky.  

Are you trying to make a point here? Other than effectively disagreeing with yourself? I'm failing to see one. I mean what you're really saying is "25% of the debris was larger than about 2"x1" which doesn't sound enormously surprising given the circumstances.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Just minor inconsistencies here, folks

At worst. Most of the "inconsistencies" highlighted by truthers are either misrepresentation or outright lies. As you've consistently demonstrated throughout this discussion.- if you could even call it that. I'd probably use the word "diatribe" or "tirade".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69
22 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Why do you think footage of the hijackers doesn't exist? Where has that notion even come from? Literally five seconds of googling immediately demonstrates this as wrong.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-14347433/9-11-video-shows-hijackers-being-screened

 

If you can't get these absolute Billy basics right, then how can we trust anything you say?

I SPECIFICALLY said footage of them boarding those flights that morning. That footage is from a connecting flight that they took and the other footage has no time stamps (which is abnormal) so it could’ve been from any day at any time prior to the attacks when they were supposedly going on practice runs. 

22 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Are you trying to make a point here? Other than effectively disagreeing with yourself? I'm failing to see one. I mean what you're really saying is "25% of the debris was larger than about 2"x1" which doesn't sound enormously surprising given the circumstances.

And what are those circumstances? That an unprecedented collapse of 2 110 story steel framed buildings completely obliterated the 80 or so floors of healthy structure below the impact point? Maybe. 

22 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Entirely wrong. Aircraft wreckage including large pieces, human remains, personal artefacts and other items were all found in the wake of the Pentagon impact. I don't know where you've got the notion it was "vaporised" but it wasn't. 

It may not have been vaporized. Because somehow 95% of the plane was literally excavated from that small burning hole and covered itself up before first responders even arrived.

 

https://photos1.blogger.com/img/115/3864/400/flight 93 crater.jpg

 

Those are some skillful terrorists! And the the black box was found 12 feet under ground (you can fact check these, but you’ll just shrug it off as nothing as usual)

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paperbagdude

I believe the matter of climate change has become too overrated and extreme.

 

I personally can't stand climate activists, especially Greta Thunberg. A puppet manipulated into causing panic and making climate change seem like our doom.

 

It is not our doom. Although our modern day climate change has been accelerated by industrialization and its emission of green house gasses, our climate is astromonically set to change according to the Milankovitch cycles. Generally speaking, the position and axial tilt of Earth will change periodically, hence increasing or reducing solar radiation exposure towards Earth (particularly the northern hemisphere). The climate is meant to undergo changes, and our human ancestors have managed to survive these just fine with limited resources and no advanced technology what so ever. 

 

Even if global warming will take its toll on the ice capes, causing sea levels to rise, feedback mechanisms will gradually rebalance the climate one day. Less ice/snow on Earth's surface, means less albedo, hence the darker tinted oceans will absorb more energy and make the climate warmer. More evaporation of surface water means more clouds. Clouds are white and bright and has a high albedo, and will begin to reflect solar radiation more than before. The climate will eventually cool down and freeze the oceans around the polar regions. The albedo can however accelerate global cooling and potentially throw us into another ice age, but what ever.

 

We'll be fine and f*ck Gretas misleading panic spread.

 

Edited by paperbagdude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69

Also, @sivispacem , if Todd Beamer placed his (in)famous “Let’s Roll” phone call from a GTE airphone, how was the call left open for hours after the plane crashed? The ATC operator confirmed that the call was left open and that she stayed on the line until she learned that the flight had crashed. 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Outlaw Biker Viking

I think some stuff within the Bible is supposed to be taken literally whereas other stuff is supposed to be taken metaphorically. Also, I think that the Big Bang and evolution both happened, only I believe that God was the one who started both processes. Also, for all we know, perhaps Heaven and Hell are REALLY distant planets, God is the good alien who created us and wants to protect us, and the Devil is the evil alien who wants to corrupt and destroy us. Just a theory. Nothing more. Nothing less. I fully respect your opinion if you disagree with me. I’m NOT enforcing this on anyone. It’s just my personal belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
1 hour ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

I SPECIFICALLY said footage of them boarding those flights that morning. 

No you didn't, you said footage from the terminal. The presence of footage after that point isn't enormously unsurprisingly (like most things cited by conspiracy theorists) because it was only really in the post-9/11 era that proliferation of CCTV and security post-checkin has actually taken place, in the US at least.

 

I doubt you're old enough to ever have caught a domestic flight in the US in the pre-9/11 era. Truth be told I only ever did once, but security was hilariously lax. All the controls put in place by airports were at the edge perimeters, and very little existed outside of that. 

 

But yet again, the desire here is to turn absolute normality into evidence to furnish a conspiracy.

 

1 hour ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

And what are those circumstances? 

That was clear for the context, if you were reading/following- a high speed impact involving the complete disintegration of an aircraft and the ignition of its fuel load. Nothing about the mechanics of the collapse is "unprecedented" and, contrary to the assertions of conspiracy theorists, other high rise buildings have collapsed in a similar manner due to uncontrolled fires. They're just selectively ignored because they don't fit the conspiracy narrative.

 

Your other points have already been addressed; you'd be better served addressing those responses rather than repeating yourself ad nauseum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69

Whoops. Here comes the insults in substitute of the wanted evidence..

 

So you’re telling me that before 9/11, having security cameras in an AIRPORT weren’t common in the most powerful country in the world with the most heavily defended air space in the world??!? Thankfully we have those few frames from the ones that did exist to prove that the terrorist were even real people! 


 

A recap of the story that you’re called crazy for disagreeing with btw

 

 

should we disregard Barry Jennings story of that morning too, as it doesn’t fit the official narrative? 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Whoops. Here comes the insults in 

I've been nothing but civil and patient with you, providing you multiple opportunities to respond to rebuttals I've presented, to explain your own statements in more detail, and to support your views with empirical evidence. You have roundly failed to do any of them, or even in most cases to simply acknowledge my responses. In fact, I don't think you've responded directly to a point I've made with a counter-point even once in this whole back and forth.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

So you’re telling me that before 9/11, having security cameras in an AIRPORT weren’t common in the most powerful country in the world 

Having security cameras pre-screening? Yes. Having cameras in certain internal bits of airports departures area to prevent theft of duty free and other similar crimes? Yes. Having cameras overlooking the actual tarmac so that footage is captured of people disembarking and boarding? I'm not even convinced it's that common these days, let alone twenty years ago.

 

What you seem to forget is how hilariously lax security was in US airports before 9/11. Modern train and bus stations are an order of magnitude more heavily surveiled. Particularly in the case of domestic flights, security was frankly laughable.

 

2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

should we disregard Barry Jennings story of that morning too, as it doesn’t fit the official narrative? 

Barry Jennings gave various conflicting testimony during his time (as have many of the other sources used by conspiracy theorists, such as William Rodriguez). He also retracted significant portions if his testimony

 

What's often overlooked by conspiracy theorists is that he was trapped in WTC7 with another individual, Michael sheds, who initially gave similar testimony and layer re-evaluated his comments and came to the firm belief he had not, in fact, witnessed or experienced any explosions. Why is he stricken from the conspiracy theorist's record. Is it because his testimony doesn't correlate with their theories?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69
22 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Having security cameras pre-screening? Yes. Having cameras in certain internal bits of airports departures area to prevent theft of duty free and other similar crimes? Yes. Having cameras overlooking the actual tarmac so that footage is captured of people disembarking and boarding? I'm not even convinced it's that common these days, let alone twenty years ago.

 

What you seem to forget is how hilariously lax security was in US airports before 9/11. Modern train and bus stations are an order of magnitude more heavily surveiled. Particularly in the case of domestic flights, security was frankly laughable.

What you’re forgetting is that the footage does exist. It’s just that for some reason we’ve never been shown it.  If you took the time to research or just watch the documentary, you’d know this. Why are you so against watching it? At least watch the 5 minute video that I posted and got deleted. 

 

22 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Barry Jennings would suggest you disregard Barry Jennings initial statements on his experiences of 9/11; he has subsequently said himself that he "assumed" it was an explosion because of what was most likely the effects of Tower 1 falling; the failure of power, building shaking and the associated sound of the collapse.

 

In fact, he's going further. Barry Jennings is on the public record as saying he does not believe he witnessed or experienced an explosion at all.

 

He represents an astute example of someone making a snap observation then re-evaluating this in the light of better evidence, and yet he is consistently misrepresented by the conspiracy theorists who refuse to even acknowledge the fact he believes he was wrong. Why do you and your ilk not do him, someone you commonly represent as a hero, the basic dignity of accurately representing his views?

Yes we all know the story of Barry Jennings who was scared into changing his initial story from the day of the attacks and years after. You want to represent his views but not acknowledge his first few testimonies of what happened that day. What about Mr Hess? The coworker that was with him that day and experienced the same events? Is it likely that he was also wrong about what he actually witnessed that day? 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Mr Hess, as in the same guy whose also on the public record as believing he was wrong about feeling explosions?

 

I mean, how big does the conspiracy go? The US government, FAA, DoD, NORAD, FBI, CIA, NTSB, NIST, global mass media, fire department...all conspired to execute this?

 

21 minutes ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

What you’re forgetting is that the footage does exist. 

So what's the narrative here? That footage doesn't exist? That footage does exist but just isn't public? Make your mind up- it's these sorts of glaring inconsistencies that make these theories so laughable.

 

If footage does exist but isn't public...then what? You think that's something unusual or conspiratorial I presume? Not that releasing footage that can potentially provide insight into security measures post-checkin in airports is probably not a hugely sensible thing...or that it's the prerogative of authorities to release what they wish, and they don't need to pander to the absurd demands of a small group of oddballs?

 

 

 

If you're going for controlled demolition, why even bother with aircraft? A 1993 style basement car bomb offers a far better cover, doesn't need you to fake hijacking four planes or enroll thousands of people entirely unnecessarily in your conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69
2 hours ago, sivispacem said:

So what's the narrative here? That footage doesn't exist?

The QUESTION is why cant the public see this footage? Why cant the public listen to audio recorded by the black boxes? why cant we view the serial numbers of the black boxes? why cant we view the other 85 confiscated pentagon impact videos that the FBI doesnt want us to see because "they did not feel the videos captured the crash"? If thats the reasoning, why confiscate them? Why is the Airforce pilot's ,that received the vague shootdown order from dick cheney,  testimony to the 9/11 commision classified? Why did it take a large amount of pressure from the public for our government to even launch an investigation into the largest terrorist attack in American history?

 

 

2 hours ago, sivispacem said:

If you're going for controlled demolition, why even bother with aircraft? A 1993 style basement car bomb offers a far better cover, doesn't need you to fake hijacking four planes or enroll thousands of people entirely unnecessarily in your conspiracy

...jesus christ.

 

EDIT: If you really need me to explain, the whole "hijacking" story is more plausible to believe by the public, believe it or not right?, than 12 terrorists lead by some arab in a cave pulling off an operation that would have the terrorists coming in an out of the highly monitored and surveilled  buildings and rigging explosives in the core columns for months. Even though both scenarios are still retarded. But one story was the shiniest of 2 turds and tricked our entire country 

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DownInTheHole

the milk comes before the cereal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameron Star

This could have been such a fun thread 😿

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DownInTheHole
11 minutes ago, Cameron Star said:

This could have been such a fun thread 😿

this is an uncontroversial opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
6 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

The QUESTION is why cant the public see this footage? 

Why do they need to? 99% of people believe the evidence based narrative and there's no persuading the 1% who want to see conspiracy in everything. 

 

As I've already pointed out, if the footage does exist (and you've not actually done anything to evidence that it has) then there might be entirely legitimate reasons for not releasing it.

 

6 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Why cant the public listen to audio recorded by the black boxes? 

Black boxes don't record audio.

 

6 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Why is the Airforce pilot's ,that received the vague shootdown order from dick cheney

This bears not reflection to reality. In fact, it doesn't even make basic sense. If their testimony was classified, then summary of it would almost certainly be too, so you wouldn't know what was said.

 

6 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Why did it take a large amount of pressure from the public for our government to even launch an investigation into the largest terrorist attack in American history?

If you're referring to the commission here (which was not the only investigation(, I've already explained this. Try to keep up.

 

6 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

the whole "hijacking" story is more plausible to believe by the public, believe it or not right?

...How? Ramzi Yousef was pretty much just vehicle placement away from bringing down one of the towers with his truck bomb in 1993. McVeigh flattened a federal building in 1998 using a truck bomb that cost him less than $5k to build. 

 

I don't know what basis you think four hijacked airliners bring used as missiles which was effectively unprecedented (though similar plots had actually been planned previously, they weren't widespread public knowledge until post 9/11) being more "believable" is. Care to explain?

 

 

Yet again, we have a myriad of questions and no attempt to engage directly with anything I've said. The old "throw sh*t at the wall and see what sticks" approach. Which is a poor enough approach to discussion even if you aren't repeating the same questions that have already been responded to.

 

If you can't engage with my posts, there's no point you replying. At this point it's basically spam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CarltonDanks69
4 hours ago, sivispacem said:

Black boxes don't record audi

Flight data recorders do though. And one was found along side all the planes that had the black boxes found. 

4 hours ago, sivispacem said:

Why do they need to? 99% of people believe the evidence based narrative and there's no persuading the 1% who want to see conspiracy in everything. 

What about the families of the victims that are constantly asking for a larger investigation and more information like this? Oh they don’t matter. They’re crazy lunatics! 

4 hours ago, sivispacem said:

If you're referring to the commission here (which was not the only investigation(, I've already explained this. Try to keep up.

Jesus Christ. No investigation prior to the half assed commission even TRIED to look into the circumstances revolving 9/11. Nor did anyone even check for explosives (even though some sort of Nano thermite was found in the dust of the collapsing towers, and molten steel was found at ground zero, and fires lasted until December 2001) but of course, you’ll just sweep that under the rug because you’re too afraid to even slightly question authority especially when a bullsh*t narrative is already set it stone.  
 

care to sweep this under the rug too? Concrete proof of some sort of manipulation in the only few frames released by the FBI showing the explosion at the pentagon? Not to mention it was released 5 years after the attack: https://youtu.be/ZlbqxqYlGnc

Edited by CarltonDanks69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Short Stay
2 hours ago, CarltonDanks69 said:

Nor did anyone even check for explosives (even though some sort of Nano thermite was found in the dust of the collapsing towers, and molten steel was found at ground zero

Yeah, but you're totally forgetting that particular brand of Nano Thermite can only be manufactured off-planet and the only station operating at the time was the Mir station. That would involve not only the Russians but also the difficulty of getting the ingredients up to the station and getting the thermite back without any non-players noticing it. Could be done but v. difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.