View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Hello everyone

Introduce yourself here!

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Chris Sarns » 22 Jun 2010, 17:50

ProfWag,

This is my Hello thread. Please address the issue I have forwarded.
NSA Summary and Analysis
http://csarnsblog.blogspot.com

If you wish to ignore me then start a thread of your own. Thank you.
User avatar
Chris Sarns
 
Posts: 12
Joined: 18 Jun 2010, 17:07






Re: Hello everyone

Postby ProfWag » 22 Jun 2010, 20:21

Chris Sarns wrote:ProfWag,

This is my Hello thread. Please address the issue I have forwarded.
NSA Summary and Analysis
http://csarnsblog.blogspot.com

If you wish to ignore me then start a thread of your own. Thank you.

If this is your "Hello" thread, then this conversation is already off topic.
However, I'll answer and if the mods wish to move it, then by all means.
Before I give my two cents, could I just verify from your blog that you are providing evidence that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon and then either a missle or a bomb actually caused the explosion? At least, that's the way I am interpreting your blog.
Wag
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Eteponge » 23 Jun 2010, 00:40

ProfWag wrote:If you believe an American Airlines jet did not fly into the Pentagon, then you must believe that the people on that plane are alive (or killed elsewhere), that people planted the parts of the plane around the Pentagon, that the thousands of rescue workers at the Pentagon that day and the months after were part of the conspiracy, that the Mortuary processing body parts were part of the conspiracy, and that the eyewitnesses who saw the plane actually hit the building were stoned.

That is indeed the major problem with that theory. The three video segments I watched presented suggestive evidence that something other than a plane hit the Pentagon, but if so, the problems you posted above, which are the same problems I have, need to be addressed with evidence. If you suggest something other than a plane hit the Pentagon, even if there is suggestive evidence in favor of such a hypothesis, those other problems listed must be dealt with. One follows the other.
"I think Eteponge's Blog is a pretty cool guy. eh debates Skeptics and doesnt afraid of anything."
User avatar
Eteponge
 
Posts: 300
Joined: 06 Jun 2009, 13:26

Re: Hello everyone

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jun 2010, 01:46

Eteponge wrote:
ProfWag wrote:If you believe an American Airlines jet did not fly into the Pentagon, then you must believe that the people on that plane are alive (or killed elsewhere), that people planted the parts of the plane around the Pentagon, that the thousands of rescue workers at the Pentagon that day and the months after were part of the conspiracy, that the Mortuary processing body parts were part of the conspiracy, and that the eyewitnesses who saw the plane actually hit the building were stoned.

That is indeed the major problem with that theory. The three video segments I watched presented suggestive evidence that something other than a plane hit the Pentagon, but if so, the problems you posted above, which are the same problems I have, need to be addressed with evidence. If you suggest something other than a plane hit the Pentagon, even if there is suggestive evidence in favor of such a hypothesis, those other problems listed must be dealt with. One follows the other.

Thanks Eteponge! I was beginning to think I had lost my mind, but it's refreshing to see someone else have the same or similar issues as well.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Chris Sarns » 23 Jun 2010, 04:38

ProfWag wrote:
Chris Sarns wrote:ProfWag,

This is my Hello thread. Please address the issue I have forwarded.
NSA Summary and Analysis
http://csarnsblog.blogspot.com

If you wish to ignore me then start a thread of your own. Thank you.

If this is your "Hello" thread, then this conversation is already off topic.
However, I'll answer and if the mods wish to move it, then by all means.
Before I give my two cents, could I just verify from your blog that you are providing evidence that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon and then either a missle or a bomb actually caused the explosion? At least, that's the way I am interpreting your blog.
Wag


Thank you for addressing the topic at hand and reading my S and A.

You have it backwards. There is NO evidence that the NoC [North of Ctigo] flight path proves that the plane flew over the Pentagon. CIT lied about the witnesses being unanimous in confirming the NoC flight path, and there being witnesses for flyover. They also omitted statements by their own witnesses that the plane hit the Pentagon. NSA is a fraud.
User avatar
Chris Sarns
 
Posts: 12
Joined: 18 Jun 2010, 17:07

Re: Hello everyone

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jun 2010, 05:06

Chris Sarns wrote:
Thank you for addressing the topic at hand and reading my S and A.

You have it backwards. There is NO evidence that the NoC [North of Ctigo] flight path proves that the plane flew over the Pentagon. CIT lied about the witnesses being unanimous in confirming the NoC flight path, and there being witnesses for flyover. They also omitted statements by their own witnesses that the plane hit the Pentagon. NSA is a fraud.

Apologize for getting it backwards. I have a difficult time understanding how anyone could think American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon on 9/11 so I was rreading it thinking that you supported the fly-over or missile theory which just confused me all to heck.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Chris Sarns » 23 Jun 2010, 05:13

ProfWag,

No worries mate. ;-)

There is enough conflicting disinformation to make people believe different scenarios. This is intentional. All they have to do is release the videos but they don't so they can get us to argue about it.
User avatar
Chris Sarns
 
Posts: 12
Joined: 18 Jun 2010, 17:07

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:07

Chris Sarns wrote:Scepcop,

You mentioned that you couldn't get Profwag to watch the videos you posted. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. I cannot get you or anybody else to read my Summary and Analysis. Invariably, everyone totally disregards my request to read it and goes off on something else, completely missing the point. NSA is a FRAUD!

Will anybody read this please?
http://csarnsblog.blogspot.com


Well I looked at your article twice. It was too long and would take an hour to read. I'd rather watch a video if you have one. There are just too many things to read.

Chris, have you seen "Zero an investigation into 9/11"? It's the best 9/11 film, and I'm surprised it's not getting the attention that Loose Change is. It's one of those films where, at the end you will sit in awe through the rolling credits and think "Wow that was an amazing film, touching and inspiring!"
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:11

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:70 percent of the questions from the victims' family members have not been answered. They refuse to do so.

Okay, here is a perfect example of how conspiracy theorists embellish stories and do not do their personal research. Don't worry Scepcop, I did it for you.
The 70% of questions stemming from victims' family members comment came from a nephew of one of the deceased, Manny Badillo. Questions asked originated from the Family Steering Committee (The Family Steering Committee (FSC) is an independent, nonpartisan group of individuals who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001. The FSC is not affiliated with any other group, nor does it receive financial or other support from any organization or individual.) The actual 70% reference remains a mysterie to me, however, here is where the story comes from (underline/bolding mine. Reference:
http://www.911independentcommission.org/)
(I would also like to add that Manny Badillo, aka the 70% of questions person, was NOT part of the Family Steering Committee.)

Final Statement of the Family Steering Committee

January 11, 2005

The signing of legislation implementing many of the 9/11 Commission recommendations represents a milestone for The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (FSC). The passage of this legislation is the culmination of the efforts of the FSC and the other family members who worked with us; the 9/11 Commission; the members of Congress who sponsored the bill; their staffs; the press whose coverage provided a conduit to the American people; and each and every person who wrote, called and faxed our elected officials on these issues.

Our 12 member group officially became The Family Steering Committee in 2002, when the 9/11 Commission was created after our yearlong campaign for its formation. Our ultimate goal was to identify and subsequently correct those circumstances that contributed to the failure of our government to protect us and our loved ones.

The FSC monitored the Commission's work to the best of our ability, making every effort to ensure that it fulfilled its mandate. At times we found it necessary to demand that they revise their procedures to better achieve an in-depth, substantive, and independent inquiry. We also worked with the Commission to obtain additional funding, access to witnesses and documents, and an extension to enable the Commission to complete its mandate.

When the Commission concluded its investigation, it issued a report containing 41 recommendations for improving our nation's security. The report did not answer all of our questions, but its in-depth analysis of intelligence, foreign policy, security and other failures and subsequent recommendations for improvement were reforms we could endorse. The FSC then focused our efforts on ensuring that those recommendations would be implemented. Congress responded by holding hearings and drafting legislation. After a rigorous battle, a bill incorporating many of the 9/11 Commission recommendations passed both Houses of Congress and was signed into law on December 17, 2004.

After three years of work toward making America more secure, the FSC is transitioning in order to address issues such as the release of the still embargoed 9/11 CIA and FAA reports; terrorist financing; immigration reform; the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission; and other issues that continue to emerge. Although the FSC as a group will no longer exist, many of us will continue to work individually and through other 9/11 related groups for these causes.

In closing, our heartfelt thanks go out to the countless Americans who supported us and whose words of encouragement and recent expressions of gratitude made our difficult journey worthwhile.


ProfWag,
You're arguing irrelevant points. It doesn't matter whether the unanswered questions are 70 percent or any other percent. The point that you miss is that there are A LOT of questions by the victims' families that are UNANSWERED. And that is a BIG RED FLAG. If the neo con cabal had nothing to hide, they'd answer all the questions. Avoiding questions means you have something to hide.

Are you deliberately pretending not to have common sense? It seems like you're just playing games here.

You won't come clean with whether you watched the film I gave you or not, and you were evasive about it. Why do you play such games? Why not just say whether you saw it or not?

You are not only evasive but you argue pointless semantics. That's typical of what pseudoskeptics do.

Perhaps deep down you know you're wrong, but you just want to try to debunk everything while pretending to be "open minded"?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:13

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:I actually found the source without having to go to a conspiracy website. Imagine that!!!
I have just asked you, how do you know I haven't watched them?


Cause you won't discuss or address the points in those three clips. I already answered that. Didn't you see in the last post?

If you saw them, then why won't you talk about them? Cause you can't refute them huh?

Oh, sorry. I see that post now. I was in the middle of clarifying your comments for you about the 70% of victims families... thing.
Is there one or two specific points in the video you want me to refute? Trust me, I can refute just about every one of them.


Yeah there is. I'll post it in the other thread about the film, not in this one. This is supposed to be Chris' thread.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:15

Eteponge wrote:Scepcop, I've watched the videos, very interesting stuff. I may write about it later, right now I'm very tired.


Yeah give me your impression of the points presented. Weren't they solid and compelling?

If you have time, watch the whole film from the beginning. Here is part 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-YqET96OO0

It's one of those films that when you reach the end will sit through the rolling credits in awe at how good the film was.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:17

ProfWag wrote:
Chris Sarns wrote:ProfWag,

This is my Hello thread. Please address the issue I have forwarded.
NSA Summary and Analysis
http://csarnsblog.blogspot.com

If you wish to ignore me then start a thread of your own. Thank you.

If this is your "Hello" thread, then this conversation is already off topic.
However, I'll answer and if the mods wish to move it, then by all means.
Before I give my two cents, could I just verify from your blog that you are providing evidence that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon and then either a missle or a bomb actually caused the explosion? At least, that's the way I am interpreting your blog.
Wag


Don't forget that another possibility is that a military plane or rocket dressed up like a plane was used on 9/11. I will explain why in the other thread about the Zero film.

I don't think Chris or anyone has all the answers. There are too many unanswered questions and inconsistencies.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 18:23

ProfWag wrote:
Chris Sarns wrote:
Thank you for addressing the topic at hand and reading my S and A.

You have it backwards. There is NO evidence that the NoC [North of Ctigo] flight path proves that the plane flew over the Pentagon. CIT lied about the witnesses being unanimous in confirming the NoC flight path, and there being witnesses for flyover. They also omitted statements by their own witnesses that the plane hit the Pentagon. NSA is a fraud.


Apologize for getting it backwards. I have a difficult time understanding how anyone could think American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon on 9/11 so I was rreading it thinking that you supported the fly-over or missile theory which just confused me all to heck.


You got it backwards. There is no proof that what hit the Pentagon was Flight 77. They merely presume it. There is no physical proof that it was that plane. Nor video proof. But you believe whatever you are told by authority. That's the problem and that's why you are not a true skeptic who exercises critical thinking to all sides.

I'm appalled that you call yourself a skeptic yet exercise ZERO doubt over whatever you are told by authority. That's NOT what a skeptic is. And you know it.

In the Zero film, it was mentioned that Flight 77 disappeared off radar for an hour. During that time, who knows where it went. What reappeared on radar may not have been Flight 77. We just don't know. And neither do you.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Hello everyone

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jun 2010, 18:29

Scepcop wrote:
ProfWag,
You're arguing irrelevant points. It doesn't matter whether the unanswered questions are 70 percent or any other percent. The point that you miss is that there are A LOT of questions by the victims' families that are UNANSWERED. And that is a BIG RED FLAG. If the neo con cabal had nothing to hide, they'd answer all the questions. Avoiding questions means you have something to hide.

Are you deliberately pretending not to have common sense? It seems like you're just playing games here.

You won't come clean with whether you watched the film I gave you or not, and you were evasive about it. Why do you play such games? Why not just say whether you saw it or not?

You are not only evasive but you argue pointless semantics. That's typical of what pseudoskeptics do.

Perhaps deep down you know you're wrong, but you just want to try to debunk everything while pretending to be "open minded"?

I realize you're a busy person Scepcop, but I have stated twice that I watched the video. Very well made and is great entertainment for those who are gullable for conspiracy theories, but their points do not add up to a hill of beans.
I would also like to correct you that there are not "A LOT" of questions. Most were answered, the rest are classified in the interest of national security. You can read my post that explained the questions the families had, but as you mentioned, if it's not a youtube video full of misrepresenting facts, then you probably won't understand. I'll state again, bring up one point that you find the hardest hitting and let's discuss it.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Hello everyone

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jun 2010, 20:26

ProfWag,
Explain why it's in the interest of national security to not release the videos that show the plane hitting the Pentagon?

Our government has done false flag attacks before, killing innocent people in the process. So why is it hard for you to believe?

I know why. You fought in Iraq and so cannot psychologically handle it all being due to a fraud, right?

There are many irrefutable points in the film. Why don't you respond to them one by one sequentially?

How can a 757 move at 500 knots while 20 feet off the ground?

Why were there no visible pictures of debris on the lawn and in those big photos? No 757 can crash fast enough to vanish.

Why are you more credible than the experts in the film? We don't even know your full name or picture. You are anonymous. How credible are anonymous people to you?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

PreviousNext

Return to Introduce Yourself

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest