What proof have you got that planes did indeed hit the twin towers.
Are you drunk?
What proof have you got that planes did indeed hit the twin towers.
You've comprehensively lost the argument if you've resorted to insulting people (as you have now me and readingstockport).
You state above that of course you don't have evidence 'because it's a conspiracy theory'. Isn't that the point? Conspiracy theories have no solid evidence - there is lots of conjecture. Otherwise it's simply called a theory. Theories tend to be much more widely accepted. I wonder why that is?
I always like to think that these arguments tend to stop when someone has reduced the argument to it's most ridiculous point, so as I'm about to bow out I figured I'd give it a go. I'd invite everyone who's interested in to check out The Flat Earth Society - Index It's a forum where a few 'enlightened' souls who believe the Earth is flat go to chat about what they 'know'. I'd hope we can all agree that they are a bunch of nutters. I'd then simply ask that you compare the two sides in their debate and work out which equivalent side of that debate you are on in this discussion.
Are you drunk?
You gave a definition of the (sort of) word "close-minded". I showed how it was wrong. Simple. I think an 8 year old could understand that.
So if I think a house is made of brick, does that mean I'm 'close-minded'?
I'm starting to think Falmer is just fishing and has caught you all. It's the only possible explanation.
Are you drunk?
I'm starting to think Falmer is just fishing and has caught you all. It's the only possible explanation.
I'm starting to think Falmer is just fishing and has caught you all. It's the only possible explanation.
Agree. Only just read the last few pages and Falmer's on a giant wind-up
That's quite an interesting statement. So for you to believe in some sort of conspiracy about 9/11 not being carried out by a bunch of pissed off Muslims, you would require proof that 'no planes' hit the WTC twin towers.
What proof have you got that planes did indeed hit the twin towers ?
that must of been the only way a plane would of hit a building in 'reality'
What the f***? You are now AGREEING with my point. It's like trying to talk to someone who barely speaks English. I'm sorry, I genuinely not trying to offend you but that is actually what it feels like.
Right, I'll try one last time. You said "Close-minded usually means someone who goes along with what common people think." I then explained that I didn't think that was the definition of close-minded, and gave an example as to why your definition didn't work (most common people think Messi is good at football, does that make them "close-minded? No, obviously not, so your definition doesn't work).
Please read the above 3 or 4 times if required.
The Pilot or the eye witnesses ?
Your correct. Well done.
No. The conspiracy theories mostly tend to agree that planes, or plane singular, hit the towers. Only they say they were radio controlled and not hijacked, that the towers were brought down by controlled explosions and not as a result of the inferno caused by the planes crashing.
As for proof that planes did hit. I think the hundreds of videos, from private individuals and from tv companies, tend to be just a little convincing for me.
Now I realise in la la land the whole population of new york who repoerted seeing the planes were in on this huge conspiracy, along with all the pentagon employees, all of US air traffic control - at least on the eastern seaboard, the entire US air force and one or two other people, but a I tend to think that the people who reported what they saw are more trustworthy than people who believe half the US population are in on the cover up.
It was pissed off muslims, and incidentally muslims who to an extent I think had some reason to be pissed off as well. I just don't agree with the way in which they demonstrated their 'pissed off ness' as it happens.
Your correct. Well done.