Petra Liverani
Registered Member
I am beginning to suspect that Petra is a young person who has no direct memory of 9/11 or its aftermath. She sounds like the sort of person who learned everything she knows about 9/11 by reading conspiracist web pages and watching youtube conspiracy videos.
Oh dear, James, you're simply talking in meaningless cliches that have zero to do with what I've presented. Virtually all the links I've presented for my irrefutable facts are to video or stories from the mainstream media and wikipedia. The only link that isn't to one of those sources is to an evaluation from Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret), former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority, on the website, Firefighters for Truth and Unity. Gonna rubbish the firefighters and a US Air Force aircraft accident investigator, James?
I've made my case with irrefutable facts unchallenged by anyone on this thread. No case has been made the other way except using claims that echo the mainstream narrative aka Argument from Authority, eg, "We know that two aircraft crashed into the World Trade Centre in New York," with no defence against the refutation of these claims found - among many other places - here:
https://www.consensus911.org/the-911-consensus-points/
You say you don't disagree with my rules for critical thinking:
1. Aim to prove your hypothesis wrong
2. Confine analysis to the irrefutable facts in the first analysis
and yet you don't seem to understand that you aren't following these two rules in any shape or form.
Because we were told that two aircraft crashed into the World Trade Centre in New York and we were shown images purporting to be of this occurrence doesn't make it an irrefutable fact. You get that, James, right? Being told something and shown images doesn't make something an irrefutable fact. And there are numerous angles from which this alleged fact has been attacked not just the absence of aircraft parts that I put forward - the fakery of the phone calls, the fact that the images are inconsistent with crash physics, the fact that the planes were reported flying at speeds inconsistent with their altitude, the anomalies in the reporting of the black boxes. But right off the bat, James, the notion of four planes flying around the best-defended airspace on earth unmolested by the breath of a single interceptor is so ludicrously against reality. Seriously, the complete nonsense one must accept to believe the mainstream narrative is just incredible.
All you're doing is regurgitating claims from the narrative with zero evidence and zero refutation of my points, it's all hot air. My goodness, are you so blind to how you have no argument? Really?
I've made my case and if you cannot see its validity and the fact that regurgitating claims from the mainstream narrative aka Argument from Authority does not a valid case make then so be it, I have nothing more to say.