veritas vos liberabit

[Fallious]

It's getting a bit busy round here with all Allys' BS being shovelled in, but I'm just wondering if any critic has ever been turned by discussion in here? Or vise versa I guess.

[flamesong]

Actually, I have often wondered if anybody has ever turned back.

I know of one person who somehow managed to put the genie back in the bottle because they couldn't handle it.

I know somebody who recently suffered a near nervous breakdown when the penny finally dropped.

[Patrick Brown]

I'm sure Chipmunk stew suggested he was once a truther but then realised there was no conspiracy! But munky boy is a shill so he doesn't really count does he?

[chipmunk stew]

I'm sure Chipmunk stew suggested he was once a truther but then realised there was no conspiracy!

Nope. I was never an Inside Jobber.

Several people at JREF have freely admitted to being former Inside Jobbers:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=69643

[Ignatz]

It's getting a bit busy round here with all Allys' BS being shovelled in, but I'm just wondering if any critic has ever been turned by discussion in here? Or vise versa I guess.

vice-versa in my case.

I was a fervent CTist for a crazy few months back in the summer.
I suspect it was fueled by a deep and powerful hatred of Bush and all his works, the WMD lies, Iraq invasion etc. And it was sparked off by a video whose name I now forget (mostly a bunch of bods on stage including Prof Jones spouting about CD, pyroclastic clouds etc)

I "researched" day+night. In retrospect all I was doing was reading the same bilge quoted and requoted as "fact" on dozens of different sites.

At the back of my mind there were still nagging doubts though -

Why pulverise the concrete in the towers with bonus explosives when just making them fall down would do fine?
Why bother with WTC7 at all?
Pyroclastic?? I knew what the word meant already.

There were a number of blows to my CT enthusiasm, such as
finally watching LC, which was so cheesy and melodramatic and contained obvious lies; and a long PM conversation with a fire technician over at a UK firefighting forum gave me a lot to think about

But mostly it was finally getting away from so-called "research" on the CT sites ( d'oh ) and into the world of facts that did the trick. Learning that thermite/ate is not actually used in CD - or even remotely suitable - was a major blow to the credibility of Prof Jones and, naturally, undermined the rest of his claims. Learning the truth about WTC insurance scotched certain lies about Silverstein - ditto the "pull" nonsense.

etc
etc
etc

[Patrick Brown]

I'm sure Chipmunk stew suggested he was once a truther but then realised there was no conspiracy!

Nope. I was never an Inside Jobber.

Several people at JREF have freely admitted to being former Inside Jobbers:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=69643

I was. Pretty hardcore too, but then I came over here about a month ago and read Gravy's thing and read Screw Loose Change blog and the Official Story all makes sense now. Now I'm not, but I still post over at LC and Pilots4Truth just to see what latest theories they are resorting to.

I actually came across this a few years ago on a gaming forum of all places. Some guy was going on about bombs inside the Towers.

I thought ´What the hell are you talking about? ´

I replied and got absolutely slaughtered because I had never even heard of this stuff before. So I decided to read up on it and take a look at exactly what was being suggested. I was just amazed at it all and still am, that so many people actually buy into it all.

The more I looked the more it became apparent that it is simply make believe, playing on peoples loathing of Bush and disastrous foreign policies.

Never. Lack of evidence aside, I never read or heard any 9/11 CT scenario that made any logical sense when one examines the 'big picture.' You'll find most 9/11 CTers usually tend to dwell on minutiae for this reason.

I considered it a possibility very briefly early on, but I never actually believed any conspiracy theory; once I did a little research, I pretty much realized there is no truth to any of them, and that most of the "holes" or "problems" with the "official" version are based on fallacies.

when i first joined this forum i admitted that I was a Cter until i started to look into the accusations/statements in Loose Change and saw that it was all bluster.

Yes, Loose Change caused me to "ask questions" , but I asked the right questions to the right people, and no longer believe the conspiracy kooks theories.

Yes I'm sure they looked really hard at ALL the evidence!

[Patrick Brown]

It's getting a bit busy round here with all Allys' BS being shovelled in, but I'm just wondering if any critic has ever been turned by discussion in here? Or vise versa I guess.

vice-versa in my case.

I was a fervent CTist for a crazy few months back in the summer.
I suspect it was fueled by a deep and powerful hatred of Bush and all his works, the WMD lies, Iraq invasion etc. And it was sparked off by a video whose name I now forget (mostly a bunch of bods on stage including Prof Jones spouting about CD, pyroclastic clouds etc)

I "researched" day+night. In retrospect all I was doing was reading the same bilge quoted and requoted as "fact" on dozens of different sites.

At the back of my mind there were still nagging doubts though -

Why pulverise the concrete in the towers with bonus explosives when just making them fall down would do fine?
Why bother with WTC7 at all?
Pyroclastic?? I knew what the word meant already.

There were a number of blows to my CT enthusiasm, such as
finally watching LC, which was so cheesy and melodramatic and contained obvious lies; and a long PM conversation with a fire technician over at a UK firefighting forum gave me a lot to think about

But mostly it was finally getting away from so-called "research" on the CT sites ( d'oh ) and into the world of facts that did the trick. Learning that thermite/ate is not actually used in CD - or even remotely suitable - was a major blow to the credibility of Prof Jones and, naturally, undermined the rest of his claims. Learning the truth about WTC insurance scotched certain lies about Silverstein - ditto the "pull" nonsense.

etc
etc
etc

Balls and Lies from a shill! Well we are in CC

[kc]

I was quite intersted in the topic until I saw the posts and ingrained bickering over here tbh. Quite simply if the theory was sooo obvious, there would be no need for people like Ally, TTTTit3 etc to scream "shill!" as soon as anyone disagreed with em.

Oh and the beam weapons/NPT malarkey REALLY doesnt help ;)

[marky 54]

ive been swayed from not sure to they are lieing a few times. ive heard things that make sense from both sides, but from critic's only on certain things and not enough to cover or explain all of the 9/11 coincidances and events. i mean they do explain but that dosnt mean i beileve whats being put forth as some of it was what raised my suspitions in the first place. so im kind of at a point where im opened minded that it was or wasnt a inside job but either way believe a reinvestigastion is very much needed regardless. and still can not beileve even if you didnt think it was a inside job how you would not want that investigastion as the first investigastion was a whitewash, and any hint of a conspiracy needs to be proved or disproved because if true these people are running our countries and thats just pure dangerous if they have nothing to hide then surely theres nothing to fear. if they do have things to hide then all of us have a lot to fear.

[Ignatz]

....
and any hint of a conspiracy needs to be proved or disproved because if true these people are running our countries and thats just pure dangerous ....

Any re-investigation - however independant - would be condemned way in advance by the CT'ists. Given that CTists can't even remotely agree on what the CT is, even an investigative panel of prominent CTists would be condemned. Who you gonna trust marky?

....
if they have nothing to hide then surely theres nothing to fear. if they do have things to hide then all of us have a lot to fear.

A dangerous line of argument. By that logic, all us peaceful law-abiding folks would have nothing to fear from CCTV and microphones in our living rooms. Politicians willingly revealing the truth on demand would make the world an extremely dangerous place.

[hampton]

so politicians should keep on lying?

and if you believe the press/politicians the world is already an extremely dangerous place with a terrorist around every corner.

interesting that the same people you think wouldn't be involved in 911 / 77 do want to watch us every minute of the day with cctv, microchips, etc.

with all the new laws, many justified by 911, are there any law-abiding people left?

if you remember the government didn't even want the 911 commission at all and then tried to install henry kissinger as chairman.

why doesn't the uk government want a 77 commission?
they wouldn't be hiding something would they?

[Ignatz]

so politicians should keep on lying?

Look more carefully. I didn't say that.

If ordinary people told the absolute truth on demand then I doubt if any relationship - e.g. marriage - would last 10 minutes. Politics is no different.

[hampton]

i can agree with you there.

it's interesting that in this current system we wouldn't last long if we all told the truth all the time.

or maybe the system wouldn't last long if we did.

it's also interesting that you don't try to respond to my other points.