Petra:
It's just so simple, James. Everything put forward for the moon landings is consistent with expectations considering the unique lunar conditions...
I would say that everything put forward about the events of 9/11 in the generally-accepted narrative is consistent with expectations, too. Another expectation of mine is that conspiracy theories about 9/11 will turn out to be bunk, and the evidence I have seen has supported those expectations every time.
Clearly, our expectations can differ about things.
Do you think that your prior expectations are alway a reliable guide to deciding what is true?
There are simply no signs of fakery and all is consistent with expectations.
There are no signs of fakery in 9/11, either.
But notice, in
both the case of the moon landings
and 9/11, there are lots of people (still a tiny minority of the general population, and almost devoid of any actual experts on the subject matter) who claim that there's a ton of evidence of fakery.
Somebody is right here, and somebody is wrong, in both cases. Either the moon landings were real, or they were faked. Either 9/11 happened as described by the official investigations and mass media, or it didn't. Different people expect different things, but there's only one truth, in each case.
You say you believe in the 9/11 psyop because you have evidence of it. Some other conspiracy theorists say they believe the moon landings were faked because they have evidence of it. You say the moon landing conspiracy evidence doesn't withstand critical scrutiny. But you also say that your 9/11 evidence can withstand such scrutiny, and indeed that you spent 4 years trying your best to probe all the evidence and
disprove the conspiracy hypothesis.
It sounds like you're very sure of yourself about both the moon landings and 9/11. And yet, despite your 4 years of investigation, already some of the evidence you have posted here in support of the 9/11 conspiracy theory has been shown to be ludicrously fragile and unconvincing as evidence of what you allege.
Is it possible that you've just done a really bad job of analysing the 9/11 evidence? Maybe you simply lack the expertise to make sense of some of it. Maybe you have overlooked simple explanations, because you've been too focused on your "expectation" that it was all faked. Maybe you've put too much trust in untrustworthy sources of data and/or analysis.
Catastrophic failure of the world's mightiest military and intelligence infrastructure, however, four times in one morning is simply completely against expectations and every other piece of evidence put forward can be seen to be pseudo-evidence and doesn't conform with expectations in any shape or form.
But
was there a catastropic failure of the world's mightiest military? And, if so, could it
only be due to a grand conspiracy that the military participated in (how many people would have had to be in on it, and keep silent all these years afterwards)? Or could there be other reasons why the military response was inadequate on 9/11? What explanation did the official inquiries give for the failures of the military? Were those explanations manifestly inadequate?
I am furious with moonhoaxers because they undermine people like me trying to tell the truth about the real lies.
Think about this. Maybe you can start to see why your family and friends might be furious at you for undermining the victims of 9/11 or Sandy Hook.
When I worked out the moon landings were real and then tried to tell my identical twin sister (who's still convinced they were fake) and other disbelievers and found it was like talking to a brick wall I realised there was a profile of people who just disbelieve no matter what ...
So you know what it's like to try talking to somebody who has been captured by a conspiracy theory you don't accept. That's what talking to
you is like for the 99% of people who accept the official accounts of 9/11 and Sandy Hook. You're going to just disbelieve no matter what, as far as they can tell. There's no reasoning with you, because if one piece of your evidence for the conspiracy is knocked down, you have another 1000 pieces ready to put up in defence. Who is going to have the patience to dismantle them one by one?
There is an answer to this, by the way. The answer is that lots of different people have
already taken apart your 1000 pieces of conspiracy theory, and posted their reasons and analysis all over the web - a lot of it conveniently located in discussions with conspiracy theorists just like you. But there's always the possibility that any or all of those debunking are fake, too, and all the people doing the debunking are part of the conspiracy. You can find lots of reasons to ignore the debunkings or to say they are fake, too. You'll be a brick wall unless you're willing to accept that, just maybe, people don't always have hidden agendas and form hidden cabals to distribute false propaganda.
If the conspiracy was true, ask yourself: what
else would have to be true? How many thousands of people would have to be in on it? How many would have to stay silent for 20+ years, with none ever breaking ranks and spilling the truth? Where did all the missing people go? It is really possible to invent 3000+ fake people and then plant whole families of fake relatives who will act exactly as if their fake relatives really died in 9/11, but only lie about this and otherwise live completely normal lives? There are so many reasons why a conspiracy theory this vast just makes no sense.
... those in power understand us so well, James, they understand us so much better than we understand ourselves ...
You seem to be very confident that "those in power" - those mysterious faceless men - have almost superhuman abilities. Admittedly, they would need them to perpetrator any fraud as vast as the one you allege for 9/11.
My own opinion when I look at government or the military or the CIA is that they look to me like organisations run by average human beings, just like you and me. The President of the United States has power, but he isn't superhuman. He can't read your mind. He can't click his fingers and disappear 3000 people. He can't understand you better than you understand yourself. He's just an ordinary man who got elected by a bunch of people. All organisations are made of people. Grand conspiracy theories always require a belief in magic to make them work properly, but people aren't that magical. They are fallible and flawed and petty and ordinary, just like you and me.
.... I certainly noticed it because I'm a psyop analyst and I know what to look for.
How does one become a psyop analyst? Does it pay well? Does it make you superhuman?
