On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Alan Dayley <alandd@consultpros.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Joshua Zeidner <jjzeidner@gmail.com> wrote:Not-so-hypothetical situation:
>
> but the fact that these people haven't showed up would indicate to an
> objective mind that perhaps we don't have the full story. There have been
> quite a few credible stories of 911 witnesses being harassed and
> threatened. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rZ_K67OHWw
>
> this isn't a new take on this subject, but the fact that we have someone
> right here who claims to possess such evidence, but refuses to produce it is
> a bit disconcerting. His alibi: that people mock and deride him when he
> posts the pictures. If anything he will be mocked if he doesn't post the
> pictures.
A amateur photograph is presented. Taken in a room of any abandoned
house, there is an artifact of light to one side that looks remarkably
like a see-through woman in an old fashioned dress.
The believer will point out all the reasons, some very logical, why
this is a picture of a ghost. The skeptic will point out all the
reasons, some very logical, why it is some flare or flaw in the film
or something and therefore not a ghost.
Neither will convince the other, no matter how long they discuss.
Why? Because they each see through their own prejudices and beliefs.
They each see their own truth.
just a quick point... its an asymmetrical conflict. On one hand you have an 'official' investigation with a (semi) consistent story and credible official testimony. On the other hand you have a mob of angry theorists speaking at varying levels of anonymity, some which may be correct, all being considered as one group that shares the same level of credibility. I certainly feel there is some kind of subterfuge going on here, but that doesn't mean that I agree with every person who disagrees with the 911 Commission Report.
Now to the topic at hand: While I too question and wonder about all
the events surrounding 9/11/2001, I generally think the people on the
two extremes of the discussions will never reconcile. And, no matter
the evidence presented, including silly government actions like
confiscating video and film, very few will ever change sides or
convince one to believe the other story.
If Charles does or does not produce photos, it will do little to
decide the debate here or in the world at large.
Given that he did just post his pictures... the fact remains there is no compelling evidence of a plane hitting the pentagon. Any reasoning individual would question the fact that something as big as a plane would likely leave incontrovertible evidence if it struck such an important building in such a crowded area. Charles claims he did see a plane, and one interesting thing I just noticed on the CNN video- this person is saying the the plane 'stopped short' of the Pentagon, so does seem to agree that a plane was there as Charles corroborates.
The believers will
continue to believe and the skeptics won't. And if emotions run high
in an unproductive debate the only result will be broken
relationships.
There is a controversy, and there is a truth behind it. -jmz
--
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein
- http://www.joshuazeidner.com/