Monday, December 13, 2010

The Argument of the 911 Truth Debunkers as Analogous to Denying the Existence of a Car.

These are some of the debunker "arguments" that have been made against the existence of the physical evidence proving nanothermite explosives, the freefall collapses of the towers, the evidence of melted steel etc:

"Your car has a poor choice of tires, no sensible person could call that thing a car with those tires"

"The colour is all wrong. No car of the type you describe is of that colour. You're not describing any car known to science."

"The engine in your car is not a known or standard type, your car therefore has no engine. It can't really be called a car."

"The windshield on this car doesn't exist, even though it might appear to exist, is solid, is see-through, and keeps the wind and rain out. A car without a windshield is not a car."

"Your car cannot possibly be found where you claim, even though there are pics, witness reports, scientific reviews etc. Because we deem it impossible, the car cannot exist. Everyone who says it does, no matter the evidence, is a wacko."

"Because of all these "proven" deficiencies you don't have a car at all. It's not a car."

"Furthermore, we have calculated (even tho the official investigators couldn't) what you may think is a fully functioning car is actually just a bicycle. Of course, being troofers, you will be unable to see or understand what we are pointing out to you. Just trust our brilliance and accept what we are saying."

Dear readers, if you can suppress common sense, the laws of physics, a multitude of credible eyewitness reports (many from trained observers), and the findings of independent researchers & scientists, then you can believe in anything.

If you can think for yourselves you will believe only what the established evidence tells you.

911 was an inside job. The evidence is clear cut. (