9/11 Very interesting !

[Rkootknir]

> Improbable Collapse Trailer

> Loose Change Second Edition

> David Ray Griffin on the 9/11 Commission (author of two books on 9/11)

> Scholars for 9/11 Truth

For once I would like one of the doubters to actually watch one of these and then come back and say 'They said abc but that doesn't make sense because of xyz' instead of just making hot air. If you're so sure you're right then you have nothing to lose by informing yourself of the opposing view.

Can't view the videos ATM, sorry.

Those books were written by David R Griffin a professor of the philosophy of religion and theology, I don't see how his opinion is relevant (Unless you think God and the Church brought down the towers?)

The scholarsfor911truth looks like the only one that contains some actual research. Will take a looksee

 

[Nokkie]

interresting...

 

[Prometheus]

Interesting that we are expected to look at the the evidence and opinions of scholars and professors. But when it enforces the conspiracy theory belief then it is laughed at.

 

[fergus]

Those books were written by David R Griffin a professor of the philosophy of religion and theology, I don't see how his opinion is relevant (Unless you think God and the Church brought down the towers?)

So you discount David Ray Griffin's views because of his religion but you have no problem accepting what George W. Bush, a self-confessed born-again Christian, tells you. Somehow I don't quite think you're being fair.

Let me just add that David Ray Griffin's talent is for bringing together the research of many different voices and presenting it in a concise and easy to understand manner. This is what makes him one of the leading voices in the 9/11 truth movement. To have a look at a presentation he gave (video and audio files available) go to this site:

http://www.911blogger.com/2005/04/proper-release-of-griffin-in-madison.html

(This isn't his best talk. The one where he concentrates on the Twin Towers is better in my opinion. I'll see if I can find a link to the video. Meanwhile here's a transcript.)

 

[pupa]

Kids, kids, kids! It's a lot of BS! Do not believe everything you see or hear. It is easy to find info against and for it! as easy as it is to take snippets of events and put it together as the only truth! You have to use your brains and some logic at least!
Think all those PPL that lost love ones, are they brainwashed not to take Bush and the other conspirators to court? C'mon man grow up!

 

[Rkootknir]

So you discount David Ray Griffin's views because of his religion but you have no problem accepting what George W. Bush, a self-confessed born-again Christian, tells you. Somehow I don't quite think you're being fair.

Oh my word, what a massive misunderstanding of what I've been writing. If George Dumbf*ck Bush (imbecility be his name) wrote the official report I don't think there could be anybody that would accept its findings. Fortunately, he didn't write it.
[edit]
Anyway, I didn't ever imply that DRG was religious, I only wrote that his speciality seems to be the philosophy of religion. For the life of me I cannot see how that field would have been relevant in the 9/11 investigation, whatever its other merits may be.

Let me just add that David Ray Griffin's talent is for bringing together the research of many different voices and presenting it in a concise and easy to understand manner. This is what makes him one of the leading voices in the 9/11 truth movement. To have a look at a presentation he gave (video and audio files available) go to this site:

Concise and easy to understand usually means incomplete. I mean, if these people really had evidence of a conspiracy don't you think they would have let the world know by now? I'm sure the rest of the world would show some interest in such a finding. Instead all I find are articles on the internet and "research" by people not qualified in the relevant fields.

http://www.911blogger.com/2005/04/proper-release-of-griffin-in-madison.html
(This isn't his best talk. The one where he concentrates on the Twin Towers is better in my opinion. I'll see if I can find a link to the video. Meanwhile here's a transcript.)

I've read that article a while back, but if IIRC it was quite thoroughly debunked by Chip Berlet (this is my version of an appeal to authority )

 

[Highflyer_GP]

3 sides to every story...

 

[ettubrute]

...and that's without the truth, which seems to be the fourth side of the story!

 

[DigitalSoldier]

I didnt read through everything but that flash thing is fake imo. It was shown on National geographic where they inspected every part of the Pentagon and also got people to explain what happened.

 

[Prometheus]

Kids, kids, kids! It's a lot of BS! Do not believe everything you see or hear.

I thought that's what we're doing here, questioning the official version I mean!

I didnt read through everything but that flash thing is fake imo. It was shown on National geographic where they inspected every part of the Pentagon and also got people to explain what happened.

Is that the same National Geographic that tells us humans evolved from apes when the overwelming majority of evidence shows that's impossible.

 

[kilo39]

Is that the same National Geographic that tells us humans evolved from apes when the overwelming majority of evidence shows that's impossible.

Please tell! We didn't evolve from apes?

 

[kilo39]

Dear me, immediately alert the the scientific community and tell them that all research and studies will henceforth be carried out by me (because I can see it with my own eyes) and so my opinion is more relevant than theirs.

All I'm asking is for a bit of common sense - if it looks like a duck, quacks - I don't need a scientist to tell me it is a duck!

And related to an earlier post... latest footage and Moussawi trial - building collapses from the top down - and impacts the floor where the plane went in - surely was supposed to have collapsed down from the plane impact floor - and not the floors above collapsing first?

Witness to 9/11 was a good video - watch the basement blasts - feel the shockwave!

 

[Prometheus]

Please tell! We didn't evolve from apes?

Off course not, and the majority of scientists will say so. The scientists who belief that we evolved from apes are actually only a hand full. But because the majority can't give an explanation of how we came into being no one wants to give them the time of day.

The stories and "evidence" from the few who beliefs the evolution myth are so full of holes that they are continuously being proven wrong. Why haven't they found the missing link yet? Very often they find a creature who they say is the missing link only for it to be proven later as part human with mixed parts from actual apes.

They found every other link between different species, even though those remains are millions of years older. Yet they can't find the 'missing link', which is suppose to be a lot more recent. Why? Because it doesn't exist and has never existed.

I've gone somewhat off topic here, but this shows you that the widely accepted idea isn't always the right one.

 

[kilo39]

Mmm. Interesting. Last I heard chimp dna and ours was 98.6% the same... and movement to categorise chimps as human - no missing link required! Less than 2% is very little difference -. Me find it very difficult to believe we came from spacewoman! - or Eden!

 

[Prometheus]

Me and kilo39 dna 99.9% the same, less than 0.1% is very "little difference". Have I proven my point...

 

[-toady-]

Indeed u have Prometheus... and

*There is a growing trend to make people laugh at CTs as foolish people. The more this takes hold, the more difficult it is for conspiracies to be uncovered.*

This too hits the nail on the head

ToadTheFool
_____________
Downright Dangerously Dim-witted

*it is better to die standing up than to live on your knees

 

[Rkootknir]

Off course not, and the majority of scientists will say so.

You must be kidding.

The scientists who belief that we evolved from apes are actually only a hand full.

Really? I know that the amount of biologist who don't accept the TOE are vanishingly small.

But because the majority can't give an explanation of how we came into being no one wants to give them the time of day.

The TOE is a framework that follows all five steps of the scientific method:

1. Observe some aspect of the universe
2. Form a hypothesis that potentially explains what you have observed
3. Make testible predictions from that hypothesis
4. Make observations or experiments that can test those predictions
5. Modify your hypothesis until it is in accord with all observations and predictions.

Thus it can be used as a scientific theory. As soon as the detractors of the TOE construct their alternative theory, the world's biologists may be interested in listening.

The stories and "evidence" from the few who beliefs the evolution myth are so full of holes that they are continuously being proven wrong. Why haven't they found the missing link yet? Very often they find a creature who they say is the missing link only for it to be proven later as part human with mixed parts from actual apes.

Really? Please provide evidence of said holes. Why, I think it was just yesterday that the discovery of another "missing link" was announced. The whole "missing link" is a fallacious argument used by the Creationists, and to a lesser extent, the IDers, you surely don't fall into one of those groups?

They found every other link between different species, even though those remains are millions of years older. Yet they can't find the 'missing link', which is suppose to be a lot more recent. Why? Because it doesn't exist and has never existed.

Really? I refer you to Talk Origins.

I've gone somewhat off topic here, but this shows you that the widely accepted idea isn't always the right one.

Really? Please refer me to where you showed any such thing.

 

[kilo39]

I didn't reply to the creationist thing because it is so far off topic (my bad) - in terms of this: Me and kilo39 dna 99.9% the same, less than 0.1% is very "little difference". Have I proven my point... Erm, no. You are saying the difference is spirit??

There is no doubt we evolved from apes - not to deny there may be other forces in the universe - but apes it is.

 

[Moederloos]

I didn't reply to the creationist thing because it is so far off topic (my bad) - in terms of this: Me and kilo39 dna 99.9% the same, less than 0.1% is very "little difference". Have I proven my point... Erm, no. You are saying the difference is spirit??

There is no doubt we evolved from apes - not to deny there may be other forces in the universe - but apes it is.

rather let it be. No amount of scientific evidence can ever persuade a creationist that creationism is nothing more than a fairy tale.

After all, rigorous testing and study over many decades cannot hold up to a 5000 year old story created by superstitous peasants.

 

[kilo39]

After all, rigorous testing and study over many decades cannot hold up to a 5000 year old story created by superstitous peasants.

You on a roll Moederloos! Funny man.