Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Questions for Nicepants; Pick one.
Topic Started: Jan 28 2008, 04:10 PM (674 Views)
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Which were the NOC witnesses closest to? The gas station or the face of the wall where the plane allegedly impacted? Based on that which detail would you say they got right, the north side approach or the alleged impact or are you trying to imply they could get both right? Pick one.

Based on the fact that they all saw the plane on the north side, is it safe to say that the plane was on the north side?
Edited by Aldo Marquis CIT, Jan 28 2008, 04:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Oh yeah, did I forget to tell you that the plane was on the north side of the Citgo? LOL
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nicepants

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Which were the NOC witnesses closest to? The gas station or the face of the wall where the plane allegedly impacted?


They were closest to the gas station.

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on that which detail would you say they got right, the north side approach or the alleged impact or are you trying to imply they could get both right? Pick one.


I think it would be easier for them to give a binary response to impact than it would to give an analogue representation of the flight path of a plane that flew by at several hundred miles per hour. (But that's just my opinion, I don't use that in my evaluation of the evidence)

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on the fact that they all saw the plane on the north side, is it safe to say that the plane was on the north side?


No, because we have to consider the possibility that the witnesses are wrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

nicepants
Jan 28 2008, 04:23 PM
Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Which were the NOC witnesses closest to? The gas station or the face of the wall where the plane allegedly impacted?


They were closest to the gas station.

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on that which detail would you say they got right, the north side approach or the alleged impact or are you trying to imply they could get both right? Pick one.


I think it would be easier for them to give a binary response to impact than it would to give an analogue representation of the flight path of a plane that flew by at several hundred miles per hour. (But that's just my opinion, I don't use that in my evaluation of the evidence)

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on the fact that they all saw the plane on the north side, is it safe to say that the plane was on the north side?


No, because we have to consider the possibility that the witnesses are wrong.
Quote:
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Which were the NOC witnesses closest to? The gas station or the face of the wall where the plane allegedly impacted?


They were closest to the gas station.

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on that which detail would you say they got right, the north side approach or the alleged impact or are you trying to imply they could get both right? Pick one.


I think it would be easier for them to give a binary response to impact than it would to give an analogue representation of the flight path of a plane that flew by at several hundred miles per hour. (But that's just my opinion, I don't use that in my evaluation of the evidence)


Come on, Nicepants. This is where you are not being honest with yourself. Why can't you be honest with yourself, nicepants? Do you realize how stupid you sound? I'm actually embarrassed for you.

Quote:
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Based on the fact that they all saw the plane on the north side, is it safe to say that the plane was on the north side?


No, because we have to consider the possibility that the witnesses are wrong.


"We"? "We" already did. That's why "we" went to Arlington and spoke with more witnesses.

You are trying to imply or suggest they are wrong and have nothing but your asanine, and mind you psychotic, OPINION to keep up the power of suggestion.

It's too late, the cat's out of the bag. The plane was on the north side of the Citgo.

I think it's safe to say you are done. There is no further need to continue "discussing" this with you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nicepants

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
Come on, Nicepants. This is where you are not being honest with yourself. Why can't you be honest with yourself, nicepants? Do you realize how stupid you sound? I'm actually embarrassed for you.


So no facts, no data just the "you sound stupid" argument?

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
nicepants
 
No, because we have to consider the possibility that the witnesses are wrong.


"We"? "We" already did. That's why "we" went to Arlington and spoke with more witnesses.


So, how were you able to determine that the witnesses were not wrong?

Agreement doesn't make your witnesses right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
You are trying to imply or suggest they are wrong and have nothing but your asanine, and mind you psychotic, OPINION to keep up the power of suggestion.


According to you, they have to be wrong, because they make mutually exclusive claims.


They can agree and still be wrong. That's fact, not "psychotic opinion".

Aldo Marquis CIT
 
I think it's safe to say you are done. There is no further need to continue "discussing" this with you.


Suit yourself. Anyone who approaches your theories logically will have similar questions. Sooner or later you'll have to start facing the answers instead of running away from them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Craig Ranke CIT
Member Avatar

There is no reason to go around in circles with you any longer. You refuse to accept the evidence as valid because of your clear confirmation bias. True critical thinkers/skeptics who are able to look at this evidence objectively do not agree. Thanks for the spirited debate, you've had your fun, but we will refuse to entertain you any longer as you are on CIT "ignore".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nicepants

Craig Ranke CIT
Jan 28 2008, 05:52 PM
There is no reason to go around in circles with you any longer. You refuse to accept the evidence as valid because of your clear confirmation bias. True critical thinkers/skeptics who are able to look at this evidence objectively do not agree. Thanks for the spirited debate, you've had your fun, but we will refuse to entertain you any longer as you are on CIT "ignore".
I refuse to accept your claim that eyewitness agreement proves their claims correct. Claiming such is a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad populum, which concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it.

CIT "ignore"? Does that mean you're backing down from the debate you wanted me to participate in?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic »
Add Reply