Conspiracies, sheeple, the universe and everything

[Mittelwaechter]

You are moving in causal circles, gentlemen.

You ask me why I doubt, you ask for valid questions concerning 9/11 and for my opinion on your comments and answers, but you are bored to answer "a truther's" doubts, questions and comments.

Does it make sense?
As I said before you may have to convince yourself again to believe the official claims by repeating them.
I think you have to feel the approval, the legitimation of the majority, to ensure yourself to support the right side.
So you feel reassured, you back each other and you applaud yourself. Additionally there may be some joy in supporting the authorities.

You constantly ask me for evidence. Questions need no evidence, but claims do. If the claims are intransparent or doubtable they are to be questioned.
If they are not - like my 'black hat operations stay behind the scenes commonly' claim - asking for evidence is just infantile, shows the lack of a position or is just intentional trolling.

There are thousands of truther trolls out there. With doubtable evidence they are not better than the officials offering doubtable evidence.
This group behaviour of mutual assurance, this encouraging each other, the feeling to support a noble cause are similar motivators to the ones described above.
Again, I don't consider me to be a truther. I don't have to believe all the truther claims as I don't have to doubt all official claims.
There is much nonsense to find out there. And there is some official evidence for claims of the believers.

But there are also serious concerns and questions by serious scientists, experts and regulars, who just want to find the causes, the real connections, the so called truth.


I show you a picture of the original airplane, carrying some object attached to its fuselage, simply recognizable with our senses - evident!
You show me a picture of an airplane of the same type, but without the attached object - simply recognizable with our senses - and you call it evidence.
This is on the level of the thousand truther trolls. Doesn't it make you a debunker troll?

It simply disqualifies you. You refuse to deal with the obvious and retreat into your comfort zone.
Mainstream is not stupid by default, but it isn't correct either. It's an easy chair, commonly provided by some interested party.

Don't mix gameplay, brain food, entertainment, critical analysis of a situation, alternative interpretation of an issue with serious questions on doubtable claims.
Irony, cynism, stilistic writing, context, personality etc. are to be considered by judging the intentions of a comment. This may be difficult, especially through language barriers.



Damn, I didn't even want to discuss 9/11.

[Tchocky]

Good god I almost didn't make it through that post.




MW - enough with this rubbish about the 767. There is no device

[Tchocky]

Double.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Aliens have abducted a load of the tags for this thread!

Must be a boring day in outer space as well then.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Must be a boring day in outer space as well then.

Well, you can't abduct humans, draw crazy circles in crops and mutilate cattle every day without getting a little bored, I guess.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

You are moving in causal circles, gentlemen.

No, we're not. We're using our brains.

You ask me why I doubt, you ask for valid questions concerning 9/11 and for my opinion on your comments and answers, but you are bored to answer "a truther's" doubts, questions and comments.

No, we don't ask for "valid questions". What we ask for is one single shred of evidence that will stand up to scrutiny, and so far you, and they, have provided none. Not one piece.

As I said before you may have to convince yourself again to believe the official claims by repeating them.

I don't have to convince myself of anything. It's you who needs to convince others. I don't believe, or accept, any official claims. If you can show one actual piece of proof then we'll have something to talk about. On the other hand you do exactly what you accuse others of doing. You believe all the Truthers' claims without question. You have already convince yourself that the claims are true, and won't accept any other answer.

I think you have to feel the approval, the legitimation of the majority, to ensure yourself to support the right side.
So you feel reassured, you back each other and you applaud yourself.

What a crock. You can think that all you want, but it's just not true. Most of us don't support the authorities at all. You have no idea what I or anyone else thinks.

Additionally there may be some joy in supporting the authorities.

I could argue the opposite, that you have failed so badly that you can't be happy unless you convince yourself that we can only think what the leaders tell us. It's a game. If you can't prove your case, insult the other side.

You constantly ask me for evidence. Questions need no evidence, but claims do. If the claims are intransparent or doubtable they are to be questioned.

Questions are fine, but you're not asking questions. You are claiming that it's a government conspiracy, and keep referring to other claims made by other people. You use references to those claims to "prove" your point, and we show that those references are wrong and the claims have no proof.

Question: Did the Bush administration create 9/11 to give them a cause for war?
Answer: I don't know. Anything is possible.

Claim: The Bush administration created 9/11 to give them a cause for war.
Answer: Prove it. Sure it's possible, but I'll need to see some real evidence.

Claim 2: Here is evidence.
Answer 2: That's not evidence. Here are the problems with it.

Claim 3: You just don't want to believe it! You're willing to be duped by the government!

Do you see how the game is played? Do you see what you're doing?

If they are not - like my 'black hat operations stay behind the scenes commonly' claim - asking for evidence is just infantile, shows the lack of a position or is just intentional trolling.

We all know the government engages in secret operations. Some of them are exposed, some are not. When you say they are engaging in a specific operation, asking for evidence is not infantile, it's important.

You have now sunk so low that you have to accuse those who oppose you of being trolls. Your arguments are getting worse and worse.

There are thousands of truther trolls out there. With doubtable evidence they are not better than the officials offering doubtable evidence.

I get it. You think that a group of militants learning how to fly a plane well enough to crash it is a government lie, and you want the government to prove it. The problem there is that we know they did attend the flight school and there is evidence that they took over the planes. On the other hand you want us to believe that thousands of government employees planted bombs and not one of them has been convinced to admit it. If that's true, where are all the passengers who were supposed to be on those flights? Are they part of the conspiracy? Were they murdered by government agents.

The problem with your version is that it leaves even more questions than the "official government line". It's possibly true, but you need to come up with something that a rational mind can't see through.

This group behaviour of mutual assurance, this encouraging each other, the feeling to support a noble cause are similar motivators to the ones described above.

We aren't a group in that fashion. We are individuals. I would be saying what I'm saying if was the only one saying it. It just happens that there are other individuals who also think you're falling for a line yourself. Again you try to argue by making accusations. This demeans you and makes your own arguments look bad. Trying to argue by labelling your opponents that way just makes you look desperate.

Again, I don't consider me to be a truther. I don't have to believe all the truther claims as I don't have to doubt all official claims.

So you say. On the other hand you sure talk like one.

There is much nonsense to find out there. And there is some official evidence for claims of the believers.

By "believers" do you mean "truthers" or do you mean me and others who question them. If the former then you need to show some of that evidence. So far none of it has been worth anything. If you mean the latter then I have to remind you that we haven't made any claims.

You're right in that questions do need to be asked. That is a universal given. On the other hand when the questioners claim that their questions are answers but can't show it, then they also need to be questioned.

I show you a picture of the original airplane, carrying some object attached to its fuselage, simply recognizable with our senses - evident!
You show me a picture of an airplane of the same type, but without the attached object - simply recognizable with our senses - and you call it evidence.

No, you showed a picture of the original airplane. Anyone familiar with airliners at all can immediately see that the "object" is obviously the landing gear housing and wing fairing. I showed a picture of the same type, and the housing is obviously there. The was no "attached object".

This is on the level of the thousand truther trolls. Doesn't it make you a debunker troll?

No, it's simply pointing out the obvious.

It simply disqualifies you. You refuse to deal with the obvious and retreat into your comfort zone.

Again you try to argue by insult. That is indeed trolling. The problem you have there is that what you said also applies to you, only you can't see it.

Don't mix gameplay, brain food, entertainment, critical analysis of a situation, alternative interpretation of an issue with serious questions on doubtable claims.

One last time: The questions are fine. The answers the Truthers claim to provide are not, unless they present some real evidence. So far they've provided none which will stand up to any close look. The only people who believe what they've shown so far are the ones who already wanted to believe something like that.

[Mittelwaechter]

Just stumbled over this here:

https://directory.eoportal.org/web/e...sensors/uavsar

The design of the UAVSAR focuses on two key challenges:
First, repeat pass measurements need to be taken from flight paths that are nearly identical. This instrument utilizes real-time GPS that interfaces with the platform flight management system (FMS) to confine the repeat flight path to within a 10 m tube over a 200 km course in conditions of calm to light turbulence. The FMS is also referred to as the PPA (Platform Precision Autopilot).

...

For an observation flight, an experimenter may only select waypoints and the desired flight altitude - all other functions of platform control and navigation are being provided by the PPA.
(Platform Precision Autopilot)

[Stealhead]

I like how his comfort zone is the crazy theory.

I also like how the same excuse is used over and over despite the fact that it falls flat on its face every time.That is the thing though everything else is disinformation so you can not trust it.



Edit: and now your just reading things of off the web and placing what ever spin you want on the information.
I might as well link this article about kids and their favorite colors and then say that the article proves that the petrodollar is real and that galactic butt monkeys are controlling world governments.It makes just as much sense.
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/f...identity_.html

By the way having worked with aircraft on a daily basis for 12 years i can assuredly tell you that you do not know what the heck you are talking about.

that system was not even developed until 2003 and it is a one off platform.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

Just stumbled over this here:

https://directory.eoportal.org/web/e...sensors/uavsar

The design of the UAVSAR focuses on two key challenges:
First, repeat pass measurements need to be taken from flight paths that are nearly identical. This instrument utilizes real-time GPS that interfaces with the platform flight management system (FMS) to confine the repeat flight path to within a 10 m tube over a 200 km course in conditions of calm to light turbulence. The FMS is also referred to as the PPA (Platform Precision Autopilot).

Okay, let's discuss that. What is it for? Examining "Crustal deformations", i.e. looking at the earth's crust. Currently it is looking at volcanoes in Japan. The part that you keep jumping on, "repeat flight path", simply says that they have to over the same route several times to make sure their data is correct. The article states clearly that the first one flew in 2009, or eight years after 9/11.

Let's assume that they had one in 2001. What was the purpose of it flying into the Trade Center? To look as seismic faults on Manhattan Island? You might say I'm beeing flippant, or mocking, but that's what the device is for.

The device itself looks nothing like the "object" in the 9/11 video. Also if you look very closely at the video pictures you can see that there is not just one on the starboard side of the airliner, as claimed in the video, but one on the port side as well. Landing gear housings, just like in the photo I posted. You're looking for something that isn't there, because you want to believe it.

[Platapus]

"he would make outrageous claims that he invented the question mark. He used to accuse chestnuts of being lazy..."

[Wolferz]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Must be a boring day in outer space as well then.

The aliens continue their solar manipulations unabated. Prepping for the next CME kill shot.
Got generator?

[Penguin]

back with a hangover, so excuse my slow typing

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

Now you show up with this verbose - but well mannered - comment on... well, sorry but I don't get your point.

i don't even know if I have a point . My point with many conspiracy people is that they happen to be exactly those close-minded, self-centered folks which they paint anyone who disagrees with them. My point is that I miss the critical thinking they claim to have.
My point with you is only, assuming you are German, that you don't vote for those arses from the PDV, haha, really, they are even worse than the FDP which is pretty much the bottom of the German party barrel. You seem to have the heart in the right place and care for the crap going on in this world, so I hate to see this wasted by one-sided thinking.

One of my fav CT's is from Southpark, where they make the US government being behind the truther movement. If you consider this seriously, you see that every hour you watch videos on YT, looking for the smoking gun in the rublle of the WTC, is one our less to inform yourself about the real life stuff which is going on right under our collective noses, with the constant erosion of civil rights, the cutting of our social systems, the deep bowing to crony capitalism, injustice in general - one hour less to protest against it. I have 2 friends who also fall for some of this stuff, so, yes, I also have a personal agenda if you will so, as I am a little shocked how all this mind-garbage could become so influential over the past decade.

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

I read what all the others of your party have to say about CTs, about their totally critic support for the official declarations and about the 9/11 truthers stupidity.

sorry, the link to "my" party is in my signature, they are the only party I follow, as they are the party and hence always right. I couldn't even tell you about the political affilations of the other posters in this thread who don't believe in CTs - I consider myself a lefty.

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

And I read some common truths, some universal accepted statements on green cars or some buzz words like Ockham's Razor or Dawkins, CCC and Nostradamus.

My unintentional buzzwording came from speaking about the tools we have to check out certain claims. If you're not a direct eyewitness, you rely on other resources. Using professionals who focus on certain topics, are more helpfull to me than those universal geniuses on conspiracy sites. Looks like everyone's an expert on international law, the finance system, hostory, demolition, aviation, biology, chemistry, etc on there.

The Nostradamus example was used to show how claims are seen as true in hindsight. You can test it by picking a random paper from last week and read your horoscope: I am sure you'll find stuff that you experienced during that week being predicted by the astrologist.

However even direct witnesses should also never be the single proof. Ask any LEO who spoke to witnesses about the color a getaway car had and you could come to the conclusion that 99% of all getaway cars belong to the gay community because of the rainbow colors they are painted in. Interesttingly enough this goes for all kind of witnesses, regardless of their education or training – even for NYC firefighters

Just as experts are a tool for coming to your own conclusions, there is also the good ole rusty razor from Occam. Note that OR doesn't deny unlikely things to happen, but it's a tool to cut away many 'if' and 'when' scenarios.

For example the scenerao you created – I know it's not meant 100% seriously, but it's entertainingly written, so I refer to it:

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

How could someone get some plane parts into the construction area of the Pentagon, but doesn't fly an airplane into the building?
Maybe he has some (military) superiority to order new air conditioner installations for the wing. They have to be proved by the US Army to not contain any buging devices, they have to be sealed into wooden crates and they have to be delivered to the Pentagon. Only to be opened by authorized personnel. Crates A through P to be stored next to the outer wall for easy access. The other crates inside the building.
This superior may order some old airplane parts from Nevada (or wherever this huge parking area in the dessert is) for a shooting test at an army base in Maryland. Metal parts for checking the performance of the new yellow tracer bullets...

Park the two trucks overnight in Kansas next to each other, change the hauling papers and/or order two new drivers.
Now blow the Pentagon and collect the airplane parts and let the Army shoot the air condition.

You say there are too many people involved. I say who knew what he did?
We can go on and on and on.

I think the switching truck scenario by itself would work well for a drug deal. However for a plan to fake an attack on one of America's landmarks, there are too many ifs and buts involved in the whole construction.

For example would the time window to place the content of the crates onto the Pentagon's lawn be extremely short, from the impact, untill the first people reach the scene. If the crates would have been stored inside, you still would have to put out some stuff manually. In both scenarious you would still either hope that any remains of a crate would be blown to unidentifable pieces or have to make them disappear – still in the time window, before any rescue personnel walks through the scene. Also must the shooting of the parts resemble the same damage an airline crash with some hundred km/h into a building causes.

Your last point is true: too many people involved. And I am pretty sure than many members of the US military, who shot at some 767 parts, would have asked questions after the attack on the Pentagon. Same goes for truck drivers, airport graveyard managers, people who fake part numbers on the aircraft remains, basically anyone involved.

How to make people keeping their mouths closed? Either through fear, money, ideology or simply by offing them. The first 3 are extremely unlikely to work with 1000s involved, not on the long run – all three cannot substitute a conscience or morale. The last works, but also involves other people who kill them for you, you gotta keep them secret too, and the circle goes on and on....

I've got a new Pentagon theory: What if the parts of the airplane have been in the missile's payload? *Twillight Zone music silently fades in*

Another thing is the paper trail any government action involves. From buying parts, to transportation, over hundreds of other preparations, to the very concrete attack plans. We recently got the paper trail confimation how the CIA supported Saddam's chemical warfare against Iran by providing battlefield intelligence, available here: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article..._iran?page=0,3 Only a handfull of people involved here, hell they couldn't even keep a bj in the White House secret, an action which includes exactly 2 persons.

But you see how just one little part of the whole 9/11 operation would raise tons of questions, whens and ifs.

By the way this is what I have often noticed with the 9/11 truthers. They focus on small scale scenarious. Many of them not impossible, but what about the whole picture? I have yet to see one universal theory to include it all – the unversal theory what really happened 12 years ago, according to the truth movement. A scenario which includes launching a missile, remote controlling planes, killing airline passengers and draping their bodies on the scene, faking phone calls, blowing up a skyscraper, yada, yada, yada -and keeping everyone involved quiet over the course of more than a decade.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Michael Moore has himself been shown to be a liar, both about his films and about his personal life. This doesn't mean he's wrong about any particular thing, but it's a good reason not to take him at face value, and to double-check everything he says.

As a bleeding-heart Penguin, who is very smpathetic towards Moore's cause and intentions, I have to agree.
Just saying that the personal life shouldn't be a criteria, as that's not something he puts into the public spotlight.
Many people who done good deeds had been some rather disgusting persons in private, which doesn't take away any of their achievements.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Dread Knot

...
The argument is invalid because it establishes a binary choice. Either you believe the conspiracy theory 100%, or you believe the government 100%. There is no in-between. ...

Blah. Who defines that - you ?
It is not "binary" at all. I do not believe the truthers, and i do not believe the US or my government to a hundred percent. This is not about "right or wrong, my country", and it definitely is not either this or that.

There is always a reason for all that is happening. The US have massively supported Mr Laden, until the Russians left Afghanistan. You cannot say there is no connection. The data base run by the CIA was named Al Quaeda. Fact. Bin Laden was one of the resistance leaders fighting against the Russians, and being supported by the US. Fact.
The question is, why Mr Laden turned around and bit the hand which was feeding him, before.
The US also have massively supported Mr. Noriega, a notorious killer, torturer and dictator, they have supported Saddam Hussein and numerous other potentates violating everything the West stands for, officially, and they had their hands in killing Mr Allende and installing another dictator instead in Argentine, Mr. Pinochet. B.t.w. this happened at 9/11. 1973.

This all is, as mentioned before, desinformation. They feed us a few crumbs that are true, but not all facts, reason and background.
And it is always good to ask 'Cui bono?'.
They tell you Mr Laden was bad (ok, granted, but why exactly if they supported him all this time?), that Iran had weapons of mass destruction and stood behind the attack on the WTC (really?), and now that Mr Assad is 'bad'. He sure is, but why bother ? The US have supported worse dictators when it suited them.

This may be the first ever real humanitarian invasion of a country to remove a dictator, but i cannot help thinking if that is what it's all about why not go for North Korea? Ah, because of China=BIG THREAT and atomic bomb, ok. But aren't they godless communists as well ?
Godless commies, but everyone wants an iPhone assembled in China.
I have no high hopes, for mankind


P.S.: and Dread knot, it seems i misunderstood your post completely lol

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

You ask me why I doubt, you ask for valid questions concerning 9/11 and for my opinion on your comments and answers, but you are bored to answer "a truther's" doubts, questions and comments.

Sorry, but I haven't seen any questions you posted in this thread, only a "I question the whole official story", which is rather broad, as it could range from the date of the event to the shoe size of W.

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

It simply disqualifies you. You refuse to deal with the obvious and retreat into your comfort zone.
Mainstream is not stupid by default, but it isn't correct either. It's an easy chair, commonly provided by some interested party.

See, this is the kind of thinking Dread Knot addressed in his post. You're either one of us or one of them.
This argumentum a contrario is very prevailant among the conspiracy folks. If some entity profits from an event says nothing if they are behind it. For example, as an direct result of the 9/11 attacks, I had some days off, but I swear by the ghost of Elvis(*) that I didn't plan the attacks!

When I click on prisonplanet.com or similar sites, I get a comfy chair feeling. Hey, everything explained on this site, past and present events. Sit back and get everything taught with a few clicks, pretty comfortable if you ask me.

The conspiracy guys often ask the question: qui bono? - who profits? Well, as Dowly already pointed out, some people seem to profit from the content of these websites, just watching the ads on them which offer stuff you can buy in normal stores for a fraction of the price.
Or take Senor Glenn Beck: http://www.good.is/posts/glenn-beck-...scam-explained

(*) that was a joke, we all know Elvis is still alive