(cache) BenjaminJacobGrimm comments on A question for true skeptics.

The fact that this information has been available for years but you didn't bother to research it shows you are not a true skeptic but a believer. You have made up your mind on a conclusion first and try to find anything to fit it second while ignoring anything that contradicts it.

That kind of logic can make you believe ridiculous things which brings me back to my theory. I think you helped caused 9/11 to blame the government to make money. It just makes too much sense. Have you ever been investigated? No? What a coincidence hmmmmmmm? Prove me wrong and remember, someone who caused 9/11 would have incentive to lie about their involvement so if you deny it that shows you are guilty.

[–]someoldbullshit[S] -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 3 時間前

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]BenjaminJacobGrimm 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 3 時間前*

[–]someoldbullshit[S] -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 3 時間前*

edit: Wow, you actually edited your posts to point out that it's pay to publish and then in the next one you say "again" as If I had ignored you the first time when you had only posted the link without pointing that out. That's so weird. You're a weirdo. Is it that important to you to look soooooooo smart on reddit?

I link to a peer reviewed paper. You link to a forum post. I thought you guys demanded hard peer reviewed science. Speaking of, why is it that NIST has never released their data for peer review? Why are their models of the first ever collapse of a steel frame building due to fires classified? Why don't any of you have a problem with that? Why didn't NIST ever test for explosives? Why did some random professor have to do it? The government could have shut down this conpiracy talk real quick if they had tested for explosives in the first ever collapse of a steel frame building due to fire. 2 planes. 3 buildings. All straight down like controlled demolitions yet they never tested for explosives. And the one guy who did test for explosives found explosives. Hmmmmmm. Interesting, wouldn't you say?

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]Helen_A_Handbasket 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 3 時間前

[–]someoldbullshit[S] -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 3 時間前

[–]Helen_A_Handbasket 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 3 時間前

[–]someoldbullshit[S] -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 3 時間前

He deleted his comment after I called him a childish name caller. But there are plenty of other comments making light of my opinion and strawmanning talking about infowars and crap. But nevermind all that.

Simply telling you that we've already seen what you consider to be evidence and we want something that's actually substantial.

Have you? Have you really? I've dug deep on this shit. I've read books, documents, watched hours of documentaries, interviews with eyewitnesses. I've really spent a lot of time trying to convince myself that this couldn't be but after all the evidence I've seen the whole thing just screams inside job. At the very least you have to admit the official story is a fraud. Even the members of the 9/11 commission report said the whole thing was a white wash and set up to fail.

About how many hours would you say you've put in investigating this? How many books have you read on the subject?

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]BenjaminJacobGrimm 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 4 時間前

π Rendered by PID 7505 on app-02 at 2014-04-03 23:07:10.688631+00:00 running b7461b7.

skeptic

Before you post: Read the Rules

調停者

skeptic

Before you post: Read the Rules

調停者

この操作にはログインまたは登録が必要です

新しいアカウントを作る

privacy philosophy

ログイン