Fandom Forums - View Single Post - The 9/11 Conspiracy
View Single Post
Old 10-15-2009, 04:29 PM   #113
Deos Fortioribus Adesse
Miburo's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 3,546
Thanks: 34,399
Thanked 17,679 Times in 5,440 Posts
Miburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Originally Posted by SimonCP View Post
-It's not my responsibility to say what happened to the planes full of people. That responsibility lies with the people who told us that the planes/people ended up crashing into the WTC/Pentagon/Shanksville in the first place! The government and the newsmedia.
Actually, it is your responsibility, since you're making the claim that they didn't hit the towers. Therefore those people and those planes must be somewhere. If I ask the media or the government what happened to the passengers on those planes then they'll say that they died in a plane crash. It's not the government's or the media's job to prove your claims. It's your job. That's how logic works.
-Yes, saying "a plane wouldn't do that" is proof. If the government says that an apple is on Table IE, yet a photo shows an orange on Table IE, but no apple, then it is evidence that there is no apple. Similarly, when photographic/video evidence shows that the scene is completely inconsistent with an airplane, then we have to doubt the plane story. When video evidence contains clear signs of fakery, we have to conclude that it was fake footage.
No, it isn't. First off, your analogy is flawed since it doesn't represent what you're comparing it to. Saying an orange is an apple is entirely different than saying a crater wasn't caused by a plane. If you showed me a video of a missile hitting the towers and the government is saying that the missile is a plane, then your analogy would be accurate. I didn't see any pictures like that though.

Also, in logic, there are things called non sequiturs. It's when a conclusion doesn't follow the premises. Which is exactly what a lot of evidence consists of. Saying "people did not see planes," "there was no wreckage in the pictures that were taken," etc. simply do not directly support the conclusion: "There was no planes."

I know this is tough to understand if you're not well versed in logic, since they sorta look like they're supporting it. But they're not. Here's an analogy that will help:

-I eat fish raw from a raging river
-I live in the woods
-I'm covered in thick hair
Therefore, I am a bear.

Looks like those premises support the conclusion, yeah? Guess what? They don't. I'm just a really manly dude, not a bear. And that's with me giving you a huge benefit of the doubt and assuming all your premises are correct and not prone to error. Which they obviously aren't.
-Of course there should have been more smoke/heat damage in the crater. A person at the scene said they smelled no jet fuel in the area, the photos clearly show that the hole/grass was not severely burnt (Even when smaller plane crashes feature big fires/smoke-plumes), and EPA groundwater tests concluded that none of it was in the ground. Remember, we were told that the plane crashed with over 5000 gallons.
So in conclusion, there was no plane lololololol. Read above.

There are lots of possible conclusions that could follow those premises. Someone or multiple people might be wrong or have wrong information. If they weren't plane crashes, then what were they? Where are the planes? And where are the passengers? Actual proof please, not speculation based on people grasping for straws.

Instead of looking at it like that, I follow the evidence. Please check out September Clues. It clearly demonstrates evidence of video fakery.
No you don't. You try to, but it just leads you to a cliff edge. And beyond that is your conclusion. And you just jump right on over there.

And I googled september clues and found a bunch of debunkings for it too. Should I check those out as well? Nah, they're probably bullshit. = /

Ask the people who lied to you about it -- the government.
No. I'm asking you since you're the one making claims here. I'm not even saying the government is being totally truthful about everything, or that all the media and government information was all correct. You're saying there was no plane crashes. You're saying we were lied to about what happened to these passengers. PROVE THAT. That's your job, don't pawn it off. Where are these passengers? They must be somewhere.
Miburo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Miburo For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-15-2009)