News Flash

[ShadowMarth]

Hmm. Well. I'm less than satisfied that that video makes any logical sense if it's trying to suggest that the building's destruction was artificial, or that it was our government's doing. It would be completely illogical.

[Lkr]

Pilot, I've watched all of those, and they contradict themselves too many times to be believable.

[Pilot_51]

Nearly everything that involves human information and unproven beliefs also involves contradictions. Science contradicts itself, religion contradicts itself, government contradicts itself, the internet contradicts itself, and so on and so forth. I look past the contradictions and a lot of what I don't believe as proof and use what I do believe.

Right now I want to focus on WTC7, which as far as I can tell is the best evidence. Tell me how it can fall straight down as it did with just a few isolated fires and without demolitions. Haven't you seen failed demolitions where part of a building or the whole thing didn't collapse? That's what they should've looked like. Heck, if fires have a 3 in 3 rate in taking down large buildings, why don't they use them instead of explosives? If one part of the conspiracy theory is proven true (basically any demolitions used inside any of the buildings with the purpose to bring them down), then that pretty much proves the whole thing was set up one way or another.

Originally Posted by Mormon

Lol, I love how pilot thinks he's enlightened and knows far more than the government does.

This has nothing to do with the amount of knowledge, it's about knowing what the government doesn't want the public to know about. If you wanted that comment to be remotely true, replace "government" with any of you guys. The government knows a whole lot more than any of us, especially since the government is composed of thousands of people and they have things known as "top secrets", a few of which translate to "conspiracies" in the eyes of many.

I used to be a Bush/Republican supporter, but now I don't think I could ever trust any of the government fully and I'm pretty much torn between Republican and Democrat. I guess I'd just be voting purely for whoever holds my beliefs the closest regardless of party and probably regardless of promises too (since many promises during political campaigns tend to be broken).

Stop saying how I'm stupid or whatever and make intelligent comments on the matter, I still have yet to see any of you say anything that contradicts the evidence. I'm serious, tell me why you don't believe it. I'm too smart to take such a broad answer as "I've seen it and don't believe it" as a good answer.

[Mormon]

Ooooooooooooooooooooooo

Pilot's too smart.

Watch out guys!!!

Being christian, maybe you should try out that humility trait xD

[Pilot_51]

I give up, I should've known you didn't care about any of it and just wanted to make fun of me. Such a simple care-free mind, like a pet, too simple to understand the complex human thoughts of the other 99.5% of the human race.

[canadaboy700]

Ooooooooooooooooooooooo

Pilot's too smart.

Watch out guys!!!

Being christian, maybe you should try out that humility trait xD

And that is why Mormon gets slapped everytime he meets a girl.

[ShadowMarth]

Very well Pilot. I didn't want to waste time on this one, but if you insist... First, the fire comment. Of course they don't use fires to take down buildings, they can cause far too much collateral damage, and explosives are much easier to control. Second, why would the government blow up the WtC7 building? It would only make sense if they were trying to do damage. The whole conspiracy theory is that the government did this to cause enough public sentiment for the War on Terror, yes? Well if they had done that to cause damage, why would they try to cover it up, since publicity was the whole idea?

Also.


And.
There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons.

I realize these have no facts in them, really. They are just relevant material.

[bignds]

Pilot, why are you arguing with Mormon? He's an LA prick, his biggest worry is getting that new limited addition frappacino at starbucks or waking up and finding out ESPN no longer exists.

Maddox is funny, just not always right and he can get a little pissy/preachy at times. 9/11 will always be a subject shrouded in mystery. and to argue it out here, with the likes of lkr of all people just doesn't make much sense.

I'm not going to enter the fray because frankly theres not much point, people will always see what they want to, and for that reason, The Matrix is quite true.

[Pilot_51]

Seeing as ShadowMarth actually made an intelligent response, I'll just argue it out with him and ignore everyone else (unless they magically become intelligent).

Originally Posted by ShadowMarth

First, the fire comment. Of course they don't use fires to take down buildings, they can cause far too much collateral damage, and explosives are much easier to control.

Yeah I'll give you that, but it doesn't answer how an entire modern building can collapse all the way to the ground with such minimal fires fueled mostly by paper and furniture (with no jet fuel). My fire comment was more of a sarcastic nature anyway. Fact is, AFAIK, it's probably something like 3 out of hundreds of large buildings that completely collapsed due to fire, which is a very low success rate to even consider replacing explosives with fire.

Originally Posted by ShadowMarth

Second, why would the government blow up the WtC7 building? It would only make sense if they were trying to do damage. The whole conspiracy theory is that the government did this to cause enough public sentiment for the War on Terror, yes? Well if they had done that to cause damage, why would they try to cover it up, since publicity was the whole idea?

It's about money and promoting war. All 3 buildings were owned by the same person, who, correct me if I'm wrong, bought the buildings shortly before, and 9/11 was shortly before the insurance on them expired. In turn, insurance paid him crap tons of cash due to the total loss. Covering it up only involved blaming it on an enemy of the country, a known terrorist who people would expect could do something so horrible. I'm not saying I'm against the war, that's a whole different topic for another day, but the government doesn't need to think twice about sending thousands of troops to their imminent death and the government doesn't get very sympathetic about those who do die in action; so why do you think they would be much different about killing a few thousand citizens they've never heard of for the cause of the war? There's stories all over the place indicating foreknowledge of the incident, such as military personnel telling their family not to go to work that day, and the Islamic intelligence (who invented the current wire-tapping technology for the US). If there was any government foreknowledge of an attack on that day on the WTC, they would've had the towers evacuated the whole day and probably until they had the security for the buildings and airports improved, but instead they pretended to have absolutely no idea of it to improve the sense that the government really wasn't behind it.

Originally Posted by ShadowMarth

And.
There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons.

I realize these have no facts in them, really. They are just relevant material.

You're right, there are no facts in that, but then again none of this is really fact until proven fact; most of it is stupid arguments about how folding a bill just right will make strange messages indicating that it was indeed planned (which is of course false, only the extreme[ly stupid] conspiracy theorists would see that as evidence). I've already said a lot and the anti-conspiracy evidence on that page appears to be weak, so I don't want to get into details on that page right now; ask me later if you really want to.

BTW, I'm moving this to the Debate forum. Even the original topic, Macs vs. PCs, is a debate, but one which everyone agrees to disagree, so nobody debates it anymore.

[Mormon]

Ew, starbucks >.>

I'm not arguing with Pilot because I don't know if any of you figured it out yet, but... Like Shadow, he finds it completely incomprehensible that he could be wrong. When you argue with people like that, you might as well be talking to a wall.