Nintendo Illuminati Confirmed

[o_O.Q]

sundin13 said:

o_O.Q said:

a. well there's various evidence out there here i'll give you a taste

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PY_qM28rnA

"It is illogical because there is far to large of a leap between the evidence and the conclusion. "

based on what? your own investigation or what you have been told?

 

b. fair enough that's true that's why i said with regards to the symbol, comic, 911 memorial that obviously i could not be sure that they really are connected

but i'm more inclined to believe they are but that's me

 

c. "Most of the evidence these illuminati supporters follow is propagated by youtube conspiracy theorists. If the Illuminati actually exists, I'd be willing to bet that it is nothing like what most people think. "

 

i personally don't claim to understand how this whole thing works all i'm saying is that there is evidence that shows that what we are led to believe is false

 

"most of this "evidence" is strung out of context"

 

can you give an example?

 

d. "Most of these conspiracy theorists are making tremendous leaps of logic and as a self proclaimed "critical thinker", that just isn't logical. "

 

looking at evidence and deriving a conclusion based on the evidence is logical

you may not always reach the right conclusion but imo its the right process

A. Based on the evidence that I have been presented in this thread I find the conclusions illogical. 

Heres a pretty definitive article about Building 7 citing the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) who is a pretty big deal in the scientific community:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874

"Spurred by conspiracy theorists' questions, investigators did look specifically at the possibility that explosives were involved. "Hypothetical blast events did not play a role in the collapse of WTC 7," the report states, adding that investigators "found no evidence whose explanation required invocation of a blast event." Moreover, the smallest charge capable of initiating column failure "would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB [decibels] to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile." Witnesses did not report hearing such a loud noise, nor is one audible on recordings of the collapse. "

 C. Just look up. You can see a few cases where someone posts a quote out of context which someone else provides context to. If fact, you just posted a quote not too long ago, which someone pointed out was in the context of the cold war. People see these quotes and say "oh, it must be a conspiracy!" and pass them around without validating their own facts. 

D. Looking at a twinkling light in the sky and concluding "it must be aliens" is not logical. I don't see much of a difference between a lot of these claims. There needs to be a logical continuance between the evidence and the conclusion and a lot of times with this type of thing, that just isn't there. Additionally, you have people passing around these "undisputable facts" without looking at the other side. 

a. well ultimately i guess it comes down to which engineers you choose to believe and i can already point out lies in the report

the main premise with this report is that 

"Witnesses did not report hearing such a loud noise, nor is one audible on recordings of the collapse"

and therefore no explosions occured, however, the video i posted for you does show people who reported hearing loud explosions

if they are willing to lie about that why would you trust the report?

 

even you can look with your own eyes and see that the collapse is anomalous and comparable to controlled events

all of these videos are around 2 minutes long

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWorDrTC0Qg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nco5hmi3OmU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qyYZe-R3p4

 

and what do they report as the cause of the collapse?

 

d. "There needs to be a logical continuance between the evidence"

yes i agree

but ultimately evidence is not enough for some people some people have to hear information from their authority figures in other to consider it as being true

this even extends to events that they experience themselves

you did the same thing yourself assuming that you watched the video i posted because if you did you would have seen numerous people talking about hearing explosions or seeing their effects on 911 yet because an authority figure told you that you are mistaken you overrided what you experienced and chose to be controlled by the authority figure

if you did not actually watch the video i retract what i said and apologise

i'm quite sure that had CNN come out tomorrow and told everyone that indeed it was done by the governemnt most people would be swayed even if they weren't provided with adequate evidence to corroborate the claim