Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Former President of Italy: 9/11 was an Inside Job

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Former President of Italy: 9/11 was an Inside Job
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:05 pm Post subject:

enns wrote:

yes, former president or not, he needs evidence to make such an assertion

232 architects and engineers? you sound like the creationists who list 600+ voting scientists and 150 PHDs in their "society". Find me a sizable number of peer-reviewed, globally respected within the scientific community architects, engineers or scientists(or your number means nothing) (http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-scientists.html)

And give me links to "non-truther" websites for your evidence, those that aren't supported by the aforementioned communities should not be regarded as credible. In the 9/11 debate, use the same sources that would be accepted by a western university for a master's thesis

Hating George Bush is fun and all, but without some credible evidence it's hard to take these "truthers" seriously. Loose Change was a joke in that it assumed to know more than the scientific community who do not believe in this conspiracy. People like those that stormed Bill Maher's show a few weeks back don't increase the integrity of your movement either(http://youtube.com/watch?v=iINxH8QObDE).

former president or not, he does need evidence. on that note, i find it interesting that he would make such a claim.

you wrote:

Quote:

Find me a sizable number of peer-reviewed, globally respected within the scientific community architects, engineers or scientists(or your number means nothing)

well, I've already shown you that 232 architects and engineers support controlled demolition theory. the number is growing. in fact their goal is to have 1000 members by 9-11-08 to march on Washington.

or you can visit this website. http://www.patriotsquestion911.com

Quote:

110+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
270+ Engineers and Architects
60+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
170+ Professors Question 9/11
200+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
110+ Entertainment and Media Professionals

follow the links to each individual.

you wrote:

Quote:

And give me links to "non-truther" websites for your evidence, those that aren't supported by the aforementioned communities should not be regarded as credible. In the 9/11 debate, use the same sources that would be accepted by a western university for a master's thesis

why don't you go to those websites and read their published articles.

then you can come back and tell me what is wrong with their science.

the day will come when controlled demolition theory is published in a mainstream journal. denial can be a long process to overcome.

you might want to check out this online journal that does have peer-review processes.

Journal of 911 Studies

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Although the above journal is not mainstream, it still follows the same process that guides all scientists doing honest research.

If you disagree with the above statement then make your charge and back it up with examples.

You wrote:

Quote:

Hating George Bush is fun and all, but without some credible evidence it's hard to take these "truthers" seriously. Loose Change was a joke in that it assumed to know more than the scientific community who do not believe in this conspiracy. People like those that stormed Bill Maher's show a few weeks back don't increase the integrity of your movement either(http://youtube.com/watch?v=iINxH8QObDE).

This isn't about hating George Bush.

I would argue credible evidence with you if your knowledge went beyond loose change and screw loose change.

Perhaps it does, so make your charge and lets talk about the evidence.

Until you make your specific charge, I will continue to remind you that a growing number of architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation into controlled demolition theory.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject:

Pluto wrote:

Some time back, the so called "truthers" were asked to present direct evidence. You know, the type of evidence a self-respecting judge would accept in their courtroom. But alas, they couldn't. All we saw were some photos of arrows and explosions. Then they come up with the names of some obscure engineers and architects who haven't got any connection to the WTC or 9/11. The only thing they've got in common is their hatred for Bush.

Click here to see what the world really thinks of the 'truther' brigade.

Screw Loose Change puts all of there arguments to rest, too.

direct evidence for what?

that is the question. In fact the OP didn't specify.

I assume he wanted direct evidence that a certain person or persons did it. that does not exist.

however there is PLENTY of evidence showing that a crime occurred.

as pointed out before, one doesn't need direct evidence linking a suspect to a crime to know that a crime occurred.

investigations go like this.

what happened? how did it happen? who did it?

not the other way around.

you posting screw loose change only demonstrates the very little knowledge you have on this subject.

in fact such demonstrates that you belong in the sheep pen with the majority of Americans at the moment.

the science stands up for controlled demolition theory.

if you don't think it does, make a charge and we'll talk about it.

until then get back to your hay.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:16 pm Post subject:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

Did the ex-pres submit any evidence for his assertion? That seems a reasonable first question.

Personally I don't think a simple appeal to authority is a very good argument.

i agree.

i haven't read a follow up.

this doesn't get ANY attention from the MSM just like everything else.

ex president of ITALY calls 9-11 an inside job and dubs it a well known fact in the intelligence agencies around the world and no one even bats an eye.

isnt this strangee?????

what are you implying? If you are implying that the MSM(mainstream media i assume) are ignoring stories that go against the consensus opinion on this, you would like wise need to provide evidence. Why would the media ignore a story that is corroborated with evidence? If it could be proven that the CIA planned 911, it would probably be the biggest story ever. It is extremely improbable that the story wouldn't come out or that the media would ignore it.

Quote:

It is extremely improbable that the story wouldn't come out or that the media would ignore it.

always?...or just this for this situation?

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:51 pm Post subject:

if anyone here is honest in their evaluation of 9-11 then read this (only one example of MANY journal articles) Revisiting 9/11/2001 --Applying the Scientific Method Dr. Steven E. Jones http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf use your brain and make a response to it. show me where he went wrong in his analysis. don't be lazy. make a charge against his use of the scientific method. be men, unlike mr. joo, and attack his argument instead of his character. Last edited by loose_ends on Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:04 pm; edited 1 time in total

enns

Joined: 02 May 2006

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:03 pm Post subject:

Quote:

well, I've already shown you that 232 architects and engineers support controlled demolition theory

yes, and I've shown you that hundreds of scientists support creationism. Also, 17 000 scientists reject the claim of global warming. And I could probably find some who believe the earth is flat too. I've click on some of those names, these are not the experts in the field that I am asking for. I'm guessing we can find scientists in any field that support any conspiracy theory.

And I've visited those websites in the past and viewed the publications. All that I have seen would not cut mustard in an academic environment. I want to see some peer-reviewed and credible research published before I can take anything seriously. An engineering prof from a 4th tier university will have trouble swaying me.

The bottom line is that we are not experts in physics, engineering or architecture. So we must trust those top experts in those fields for explanations. Read some of their answers to these 9/11 conspiracy charges, because they have them.

Once we start to dissect a subject that we know nothing about, the credibility of the debate, on both sides, diminishes. The top experts in the aforementioned fields attest that the building fell as it should, why would I choose to believe someone with less credibility on the subject?

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:06 pm Post subject:

enns wrote:

Quote:

well, I've already shown you that 232 architects and engineers support controlled demolition theory

your argument is meaningless until you attack CDT arguments instead of their characters.

don't you see the fallacy in your argument?

i will take you seriously when you make a charge against their theories, not their positions in society.

until then you are simply percieved as being ignorant, lazy, or uneducated.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:14 pm Post subject:

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:29 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

what is your charge joo?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:36 pm Post subject:

that the site will debunk you.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:40 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

that the site will debunk you.

make your charge joo.

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:44 pm Post subject:

I think he charged that you have no direct evidence?

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:59 pm Post subject:

cbclark4 wrote:

I think he charged that you have no direct evidence?

direct evidence for what exactly?

please be specific.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

Did the ex-pres submit any evidence for his assertion? That seems a reasonable first question.

Personally I don't think a simple appeal to authority is a very good argument.

Quote:

It is extremely improbable that the story wouldn't come out or that the media would ignore it.

always?...or just this for this situation?

always extremely improbable. A story of this magnitude is gold dust. To suggest that the mainstream media is being intimidated/bought off is just giving more power to the conspirators(an unlikely amount of power). Really you are telling me that President Clinton cannot keep head in the oval office a secret but that this admin can keep the whole of the mainstream media in line. that is plainly ridiculous. The problem with conspiracies such as this is that as they become more grand, more and more power has to be attributed to the conspiracy, whilst we are simutaneously expected to believe that they are stupid enough to leave all these 'clues' and 'evidence'. There is a definite contradiction at the heart of any grand conspiracy.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:30 pm Post subject:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

Did the ex-pres submit any evidence for his assertion? That seems a reasonable first question.

Personally I don't think a simple appeal to authority is a very good argument.

Quote:

It is extremely improbable that the story wouldn't come out or that the media would ignore it.

always?...or just this for this situation?

so what you are saying is that the media would never keep such a big story a secret from the public?

and this isn't just for 9-11, it is for anything of such magnitude?

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:38 pm Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

JMO wrote:

Did the ex-pres submit any evidence for his assertion? That seems a reasonable first question.

Personally I don't think a simple appeal to authority is a very good argument.

Quote:

It is extremely improbable that the story wouldn't come out or that the media would ignore it.

always?...or just this for this situation?

so what you are saying is that the media would never keep such a big story a secret from the public?

and this isn't just for 9-11, it is for anything of such magnitude?

I suppose it would depend on the context. In today's massive media age i suspect it would be nigh on impossible. Have you got an example you would like to share with us?

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 3 of 5

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe