All of You, Who Once Believed in 9/11 Truth, Share Your Experiences

[chrismohr]

This is an egotistical question, but I am looking for someone who was a 9/11 Truth believer and who then watched my YouTube video rebuttals and changed their mind because of them! That would make my day...

[Orphia Nay]

I've requested that this thread be made a "Sticky", since it's our longest one of ex-truther stories.

Just in case that doesn't happen... bump! Let's hear others' stories!

[uglypig]

I saw Loose Change, didn't believe it. Then I saw Jones giving his lecture on the molten metal drip and microspheres, that looked reasonable. I looked through the internet and I discovered achimspok, he persuaded me.

To this day I stand by the fact that the cores in those buildings gave way (the911forum) before the perimeter. I believed in CD because I thought the core had DCR close to 0.2 (some sources on the internet sad so) before the impact and I saw no way it could have initiated the collapse without some artificial weakening (i.e. inner core columns cut at the base - overloading the perimeter of the core)

Then I found out that the core had DCR of about 0.5 and that WTC7 stood on only three trusses.....

I have never bought into Gage's nonsense.

Currently I believe in a small LIHOP (LIHOI plus).

[DGM]

Originally Posted by uglypig

I saw Loose Change, didn't believe it. Then I saw Jones giving his lecture on the molten metal drip and microspheres, that looked reasonable. I looked through the internet and I discovered achimspok, he persuaded me.

To this day I stand by the fact that the cores in those buildings gave way (the911forum) before the perimeter. I believed in CD because I thought the core had DCR close to 0.2 (some sources on the internet sad so) before the impact and I saw no way it could have initiated the collapse without some artificial weakening (i.e. inner core columns cut at the base - overloading the perimeter of the core)

Then I found out that the core had DCR of about 0.5 and that WTC7 stood on only three trusses.....

I have never bought into Gage's nonsense.

Currently I believe in a small LIHOP (LIHOI plus).

Welcome. If I can assume that LIHOI (the "I" being ignorance) I can only add that arrogance would most likely be better. I'm not sure what the "plus" would be.

[Orphia Nay]

Welcome, uglypig!

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

I've requested that this thread be made a "Sticky", since it's our longest one of ex-truther stories.

Just in case that doesn't happen... bump! Let's hear others' stories!

My request was denied. So, let's keep this bumped!

[woppadaq]

Originally Posted by ref

a) How did you once become a truther? I am not looking for answers, like "watching Loose Change".

b) What convinced you back from truther to non-truther? Once again, I hope you do not respond something like "truthers are dumb", but a bit more specific.

c) What are your thoughts nowadays about your time as a truther? What mistakes you made back then? Were you 100% convinced, agressively promoting the truth? Whatever comes to your mind.

a) The first 2 years after 9/11 I believed the "official conspiracy theory" (OCT) cause I had no reason to think any different. Anyway, it wasnt the truther sites making me a truther, but the way anybody who investigates a bit deeper into the 9/11 case and begin to question that official theory was called a "conspiracy theorrorist".

It was that I once read a funny article where somebody suspected that a book by Gerhard Wisnewski (German truther) was a fake done by Henryk M.Broder (German ex-SPIEGEL columnist and champion in calling other people "anti-Semite") only to rant about it and about CT's in his abusing manner. Then I read Henryk M. Broder's rant about Wisnewski and other truthers. And I was disappointed as his only argument against Wisnewski was calling him "anti-Semite", despite Wisnewski is married with a Jewish wife.

This was the moment when I took a look at the other side. And when I saw the big photos of the Pentagon crash, I began to doubt for sure. Because the SPIEGEL once tried to debunk the "not enough damage for that big plane" theory with only small photos from the top of the Pentagon, never showed the front side.

A bit later, the SPIEGEL brought an article that claimed to "debunk all that conspiracy theories". The truth was that they really tried to put every kind of conspiracy theory, calling it "garbage" and the believers "failed existences who don't want to face the truth", and while the half of the article was written that way, the only things they could debunk were things nobody could prove. Well, the SPIEGEL is something like the holy grail of German investigative journalism, and I never watched the Kennedy assassination as a conspiracy theory but as a non-closed case with a lot of never answered questions. This try to get rid of any truth seekers was way too obvious. One more reason to question everything in the 9/11 case.

b) I'm still a truther. In the way that I REALLY want to know what REALLY happened. I'm proud to call me a truther instead of "conspiracy theorrorist". That's why I look at every explanation of what happened.

I have to say that Chris Mohr's respectful debunking explanation really made me give up the CD theory I thought was holding water. To me, it's the only way to make questioning people keep things real and not fall into the arms of real whacko conspiracy theorists explaining 9/11 as "the Mega ritual of the Illuminates".

c)Watching back the last 8 years, I faced such an amount of dis- and misinformation on both sides, claiming to hold the only truth and abuse disbelievers, it seems to me more than a quadruplication of the Kennedy assassination. This goes deeper. People begin to question science and scientific methods, and in the end, there will be a power play whether creationism will be teached at school or not. That's why I think, to be a truther - which means to look for the truth and nothing but the truth - is a political question. Not left, not right. It's past against today and future.

[chrismohr]

Hi woppadaq,

I would have to say that your term of calling yourself a "Truther" at this point will cause confusion. I'm more inclined to call you a 9/11 Truth-seeker, perhaps, but the common understanding of the term Truther is someone who believes that the WTC buiildings were brought down by some kind of controlled demolition (thermite, bombs, mininukes, death rays, missiles or whatever) and not by planes and the subsequent fires. It's a little like calling yourself "gay" as in happy and cheerful; it's just not understood that way any more.

I'm thrilled my YouTube videos influenced you to give up the ideas of CD!

By the way, I just heard about a study around cognitive dissonance. That's our tendency to block out information that contradicts our belief system. The study was around the question of blaming the President for high gas prices. Most economists say the President has little control over gas prices. In 2007-8 when gas prices were high, something like 3/4 of Democrats and 1/4 of Republicans blamed Bush for high gas prices. Now that gas prices are high again, something like 3/4 of Republicans and 1/4 of Democrats blame Obama! And BTW, when people are confronted with information that contradicts their beliefs, they are more likely to change their minds if they are feeling good about themselves. This gas-price example was used: people who blame Obama for high gas prices were given evidence that he doesn't control prices, and for the first group, most stuck to their beliefs and rejected the new evidence. However, a second group was first asked to talk about ways in which they are "good people." People would say "I helped my gramma shop for groceries yesterday" or something. People in this group were praised for their goodness, and THEN a significantly higher percentage would be able to accept evidence about gas prices that contradicted their beliefs!

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by chrismohr

Hi woppadaq,

I would have to say that your term of calling yourself a "Truther" at this point will cause confusion. I'm more inclined to call you a 9/11 Truth-seeker, perhaps, but the common understanding of the term Truther is someone who believes that the WTC buiildings were brought down by some kind of controlled demolition (thermite, bombs, mininukes, death rays, missiles or whatever) and not by planes and the subsequent fires. It's a little like calling yourself "gay" as in happy and cheerful; it's just not understood that way any more.

I'm thrilled my YouTube videos influenced you to give up the ideas of CD!

By the way, I just heard about a study around cognitive dissonance. That's our tendency to block out information that contradicts our belief system. The study was around the question of blaming the President for high gas prices. Most economists say the President has little control over gas prices. In 2007-8 when gas prices were high, something like 3/4 of Democrats and 1/4 of Republicans blamed Bush for high gas prices. Now that gas prices are high again, something like 3/4 of Republicans and 1/4 of Democrats blame Obama! And BTW, when people are confronted with information that contradicts their beliefs, they are more likely to change their minds if they are feeling good about themselves. This gas-price example was used: people who blame Obama for high gas prices were given evidence that he doesn't control prices, and for the first group, most stuck to their beliefs and rejected the new evidence. However, a second group was first asked to talk about ways in which they are "good people." People would say "I helped my gramma shop for groceries yesterday" or something. People in this group were praised for their goodness, and THEN a significantly higher percentage would be able to accept evidence about gas prices that contradicted their beliefs!

I am a seeker of the truth, particularly about 9/11.

If 9/11 was as easily explained away as Obama's influence over fuel prices, this forum would have passed away a month after it started.

MM

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

I am a seeker of the truth, particularly about 9/11.

If 9/11 was as easily explained away as Obama's influence over fuel prices, this forum would have passed away a month after it started.

MM

I wasn't aware this actually happened. Is this a Canadian thing?

ETA: Have you picked up your "hearings" DVD yet?

[woppadaq]

Originally Posted by chrismohr

Hi woppadaq,

I would have to say that your term of calling yourself a "Truther" at this point will cause confusion. I'm more inclined to call you a 9/11 Truth-seeker, perhaps, but the common understanding of the term Truther is someone who believes that the WTC buiildings were brought down by some kind of controlled demolition (thermite, bombs, mininukes, death rays, missiles or whatever) and not by planes and the subsequent fires. It's a little like calling yourself "gay" as in happy and cheerful; it's just not understood that way any more.

Well, I know that, but I have to say that I was a truther long before the term came up.

Todays "truther" are making money out of questions a truther like me had in the past - and getting insults instead of answers. They called me "conspiracy theorist" in the beginning, now they call me "truther", but I always was a truth seeker. What about tomorrow ? Will "truth seeker" mean something offending then?

I mean, I'm not going through every CT site and feeding my doubt about the OCT. Instead, I was reading both sides, and in general, I read a lot in historycommons.org, which leads me to the conclusion that even when most of the official story is true, something MUST be wrong, simply watching the way information was spread over the media.

I can live with the fact I'm wrong in some points. But as I never was a CT believer, don't expect me to become an OCT believer that fast.

Quote:

By the way, I just heard about a study around cognitive dissonance. That's our tendency to block out information that contradicts our belief system.

Yes, I know that term, but my cognitive dissonance works a bit different, as after the "Wende" (East German Change) I lost any belief at all, and the way the media worked against truth seekers remembered me the way the communists talking about dissidents.

[BasqueArch]

Originally Posted by uglypig

I saw Loose Change, didn't believe it. Then I saw Jones giving his lecture on the molten metal drip and microspheres, that looked reasonable. I looked through the internet and I discovered achimspok, he persuaded me.

To this day I stand by the fact that the cores in those buildings gave way (the911forum) before the perimeter. I believed in CD because I thought the core had DCR close to 0.2 (some sources on the internet sad so) before the impact and I saw no way it could have initiated the collapse without some artificial weakening (i.e. inner core columns cut at the base - overloading the perimeter of the core)

Then I found out that the core had DCR of about 0.5 and that WTC7 stood on only three trusses.....

I have never bought into Gage's nonsense.

Currently I believe in a small LIHOP (LIHOI plus).

Not so. From the moment the fires heated the TT floor trusses and perimeter and core columns they were all giving way (failing) by buckling and creep. The initiating global collapse was caused by the perimeter columns. We know this because had the core columns initiated the collapse the collapse would have continued inward through the core (as in WTC 7) before the perimeter.

Instead the perimeter columns and top block on both TT tilted more than the core sank by creep and buckling. While the core columns were sufficiently braced to each other at each floor, the perimeter columns were not. As the heat progressively damaged the perimeter columns and floor trusses, the perimeter gave way first by being unsupported over multiple floors due to the buckling of the floor trusses. (Euler's buckling which has nothing to do with DCR).

To pull in the perimeter columns by the core columns instead of by the sagging trusses as was measured, the perimeter core columns would have had to drop 23 feet, an observed impossibility.
The perimeter columns initiated the collapse, not the core columns.

[derchin]

a) How did you once become a truther?

I was fourteen or so when I started looking at some 9/11 videos and feeling sad about that day. On the side, it had a bunch of related videos. And one said that the collapse made absolutely no sense. So I looked at it and it mentioned that the plumes ejecting from the towers during their collapse and how they could only equate to a controlled demolition. Made sense to me. More delving of the topic and I viewed more videos. And some even contained mathematical equations, fancy quotes and I concluded that they knew what they were talking about (Who uses it in their videos anyway?) I smiled in respect and admiration as I saw the truthers go on for paragraphs debunking their skeptics.

I started to connect the dots and realized that the 9/11 attacks were fake and that the government was behind it. I messed on forums of how the twin towers were destroyed in a controlled demolition. I remember watching the documentary "New World Order," by Alex Jones and how it all made sense. I despised Builderberg after hearing Jones preach on how they planed 9/11, along with the economic crisis, the war in Iraq, and the peak oil crisis. It was my mission to gather what people I knew and to storm the place.

I went to school and preached Jones and the Truther message, but no one believed nor listened to me. I assumed they were brainwashed by the media and the government. With them out of the equation, I turned to my parents who equally thought I was crazy. With no one else, I went back on the internet and chatted with other truthers.


b) What convinced you back from truther to non-truther?

I was a truther for a few years after that. I used to watch Loose Change and Alex Jones videos almost all the time. I believed the truth movement when they said that the Sept. 11 attacks were set up by the government. I joined multiple websites devoted to the truth movement and stayed up in a somewhat paranoid fashion talking to myself of how cruel and maniacal our government was. It almost got to the point where I went out and protested with all the truthers.

School got in the way and I took a break from the truth movement. I was still affirmed to the movement, but my knowledge was dulled. I began watching some videos on Evolution and Atheism and they made sense. This made me go back to the truth movement to re-evaluate my position. It was, about a year ago when I first watched a rebuttal to the movement (forgot the video's name). Like any truther, I was angry and stubborn, but it began to make sense. One video, turned into three, then five and then I began to look into websites devoted to debunking conspiracy theories. I was a whole lot smarter than I was then and I was hooked instantly. It was then that I disconnected my truther stance.

c) What are your thoughts nowadays about your time as a truther?

I always look back and say "Damn. Why the hell did I ever become one in the first place?"

I was so naive and stupid back then.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by derchin

I was so naive and stupid back then.

Blame it on youth. I can't really remember back that far * but, I'm told I was a (male) slut. I could picture myself falling for internet crap (if it was invented). Instead, it was girls.


* (I won't get into this, it produces flashbacks.)

[cjnewson88]

In my opinion, going by the grammar, spelling, sentence structure and general language used by 'truthers' posting on Youtube, most are in their early teens. This would explain a lot.

[KevinCanada]

Originally Posted by chrismohr

This is an egotistical question, but I am looking for someone who was a 9/11 Truth believer and who then watched my YouTube video rebuttals and changed their mind because of them! That would make my day...

I second this in this case there is some good break down video's on youtube. There is one that puts the trajectory of the pentagon plane into a computer simulation model.

Then when it runs, damage to the pentagon, landscape (street lamps and what not) and the plane itself all balances out to show how the damage happen the way it happen. competely debunking the missle and bomb myths.

[cjnewson88]

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

I second this in this case there is some good break down video's on youtube. There is one that puts the trajectory of the pentagon plane into a computer simulation model.

Then when it runs, damage to the pentagon, landscape (street lamps and what not) and the plane itself all balances out to show how the damage happen the way it happen. competely debunking the missle and bomb myths.

This?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

One thing this doesn't mention is the trees Flight 77 trimmed..

[KevinCanada]

While this reply is purely skeptical. If we assume the sizing of the plane and location of items is accurate.

We also judge the pentagon to being roughly 40 feet in height and the black smudge being roughly 25 high and the clipped tree being 15 feet high base on the distance up the light pole.

would i be to far off to say the outside tip of the place slightly nicked the light pole and the engine under the right wing clipped the top of the tree.

[KevinCanada]

yes there is another youtube video of a building collapsing. I don't recall which one it was, but the first 4 seconds of the collapse was edited out.

without the first 4 seconds it looks like the building blew up. What happen when the miss piece of the video clip was re-added, you can see that the building collapsed from the top down floor after floor.

The explanation from the fire department was we left the one building alone as we simply did not have the resources to deal with it at the time. In turn the temperature raised to high inside the structure which caused a structural failure. The fire was sparked from flying debris from the WTC which took down at least one of the secondary buildings. As in the case of this one I a mentioning.

I do not have sources as I am going off of information from memory going back years ago. i could verify if needed and dig it up again.

[cjnewson88]

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

would i be to far off to say the outside tip of the plane slightly nicked the light pole and the engine under the right wing clipped the top of the tree.

From my understanding, that is correct.

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

yes there is another youtube video of a building collapsing. I don't recall which one it was, but the first 4 seconds of the collapse was edited out.

without the first 4 seconds it looks like the building blew up. What happen when the miss piece of the video clip was re-added, you can see that the building collapsed from the top down floor after floor.

The explanation from the fire department was we left the one building alone as we simply did not have the resources to deal with it at the time. In turn the temperature raised to high inside the structure which caused a structural failure. The fire was sparked from flying debris from the WTC which took down at least one of the secondary buildings. As in the case of this one I a mentioning.

You sound like you are describing building 7?
Although slightly off topic, if it is this may be helpful -

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[uglypig]

Quote:

Not so. From the moment the fires heated the TT floor trusses and perimeter and core columns they were all giving way (failing) by buckling and creep. The initiating global collapse was caused by the perimeter columns. We know this because had the core columns initiated the collapse the collapse would have continued inward through the core (as in WTC 7) before the perimeter.

Instead the perimeter columns and top block on both TT tilted more than the core sank by creep and buckling. While the core columns were sufficiently braced to each other at each floor, the perimeter columns were not. As the heat progressively damaged the perimeter columns and floor trusses, the perimeter gave way first by being unsupported over multiple floors due to the buckling of the floor trusses. (Euler's buckling which has nothing to do with DCR).

To pull in the perimeter columns by the core columns instead of by the sagging trusses as was measured, the perimeter core columns would have had to drop 23 feet, an observed impossibility.
The perimeter columns initiated the collapse, not the core columns.

Not true, the core failing first is proven beyond a reasonable doubt on the911forum.

In both cases the core failed and overloaded the adjacent perimeter, the (little bit) sagged trusses than helped to create the inward bowing. Remember, in the case of WTC1 NIST was able to produce only about 40% of inward force to cause the observed inward bowing.

[KevinCanada]

You have peaked my interest in the subject again. I am at work. I do not have the free time to find the info. WTC7 was not the building.

I will find it and post it this evening.

[cjnewson88]

Originally Posted by KevinCanada

You have peaked my interest in the subject again. I am at work. I do not have the free time to find the info. WTC7 was not the building.

I will find it and post it this evening.

Sounds good, perhaps create a new topic thread regarding it as posting it in here is off topic

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by derchin

a) How did you once become a truther?

I was fourteen or so when I started looking at some 9/11 videos and feeling sad about that day. On the side, it had a bunch of related videos. And one said that the collapse made absolutely no sense. So I looked at it and it mentioned that the plumes ejecting from the towers during their collapse and how they could only equate to a controlled demolition. Made sense to me. More delving of the topic and I viewed more videos. And some even contained mathematical equations, fancy quotes and I concluded that they knew what they were talking about (Who uses it in their videos anyway?) I smiled in respect and admiration as I saw the truthers go on for paragraphs debunking their skeptics.

I started to connect the dots and realized that the 9/11 attacks were fake and that the government was behind it. I messed on forums of how the twin towers were destroyed in a controlled demolition. I remember watching the documentary "New World Order," by Alex Jones and how it all made sense. I despised Builderberg after hearing Jones preach on how they planed 9/11, along with the economic crisis, the war in Iraq, and the peak oil crisis. It was my mission to gather what people I knew and to storm the place.

I went to school and preached Jones and the Truther message, but no one believed nor listened to me. I assumed they were brainwashed by the media and the government. With them out of the equation, I turned to my parents who equally thought I was crazy. With no one else, I went back on the internet and chatted with other truthers.


b) What convinced you back from truther to non-truther?

I was a truther for a few years after that. I used to watch Loose Change and Alex Jones videos almost all the time. I believed the truth movement when they said that the Sept. 11 attacks were set up by the government. I joined multiple websites devoted to the truth movement and stayed up in a somewhat paranoid fashion talking to myself of how cruel and maniacal our government was. It almost got to the point where I went out and protested with all the truthers.

School got in the way and I took a break from the truth movement. I was still affirmed to the movement, but my knowledge was dulled. I began watching some videos on Evolution and Atheism and they made sense. This made me go back to the truth movement to re-evaluate my position. It was, about a year ago when I first watched a rebuttal to the movement (forgot the video's name). Like any truther, I was angry and stubborn, but it began to make sense. One video, turned into three, then five and then I began to look into websites devoted to debunking conspiracy theories. I was a whole lot smarter than I was then and I was hooked instantly. It was then that I disconnected my truther stance.

c) What are your thoughts nowadays about your time as a truther?

I always look back and say "Damn. Why the hell did I ever become one in the first place?"

I was so naive and stupid back then.

Great story. Thanks for sharing.

Sounds like you learned about critical thinking in one subject, and it spread to other beliefs. Well done for questioning your own beliefs. How did you end up here?

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by uglypig

Currently I believe in a small LIHOP (LIHOI plus).

And who LIHOP? Who are you accusing of mass murder?

[Zelenius]

I used to believe that Pee-wee Herman was behind the September 11th attacks, but now I believe that Elvis(who is still alive but in hiding) was behind the attacks.

Does this make me a Truther?

The logic that lead me to believe Herman was behind the attacks:

Paul Reubens was arrested in Florida for public masturbation, and the 9/11 terrorists took flight-training classes in Florida! Coincidence? Please!! As logical as this was, I realized it wasn't the case and it could only be Elvis, since if you play some of his records backwards, he announces his intention to bring down the Towers many decades before it happened! And we all know he faked his death so he could work full-time for the CIA.

[TSR]

He'd been foreshadowing it for years, and apparently had an affinity to fire:

"Wise men say, only fools rush in. But I can't help falling in a semicontrolled demolition brought about by space based foamifiers --- AGAIN", that last an obvious reference to the second tower.

He was, after all, a hunkahunka burning love -- and never even considered dialling 911...

[UNLoVedRebel]

So what did uglypig do exactly?

And how come I didn't get one PM asking me where I was after not logging in for 9 months?

And is Travis still a virgin?

[AJM8125]

Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel

So what did uglypig do exactly?

And how come I didn't get one PM asking me where I was after not logging in for 9 months?

And is Travis still a virgin?

1. Dunno. All but two of his posts are in deep storage (last time i looked) so it must've been quite a tear he went on.

2. You're not a hot girl.

3. I haven't done him so dunno.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Originally Posted by AJM8125

1. Dunno. All but two of his posts are in deep storage (last time i looked) so it must've been quite a tear he went on.

I'm sorry I wasn't here to see his meltdown. I hope he didn't beat the legendary FloydGoethe's record. Darat had to fumigate the one thread he posted in. That guy was a monster.

Do the Homeland Insurgency Sockpuppets still pop up from time to time?

[LSSBB]

Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel

I'm sorry I wasn't here to see his meltdown. I hope he didn't beat the legendary FloydGoethe's record. Darat had to fumigate the one thread he posted in. That guy was a monster.

Do the Homeland Insurgency Sockpuppets still pop up from time to time?

I never saw a meltdown from him. He just went *pop*, and disappeared.

[thedopefishlives]

Originally Posted by LSSBB

I never saw a meltdown from him. He just went *pop*, and disappeared.

He did actually have a meltdown. It was pretty substantial. He essentially went nuclear on a poster (can't remember who or where) and then decided he was going to continually abuse everyone in the thread until the mods banned him.

[hadabusa]

Originally Posted by ref

I am looking for written experiences from people who used to be on the truther side, but are not anymore. I know there are many on this board. What I'd especially like to know are follows:

a) How did you once become a truther? I am not looking for answers, like "watching Loose Change". If possible, I'd like you to write in a bit more detailed manner, like "I watched Loose Change, and started surfing the internet. All I could find were more truther sites, which further reinforced my truther status... etc" or something like that.

b) What convinced you back from truther to non-truther? Once again, I hope you do not respond something like "truthers are dumb", but a bit more specific.

c) What are your thoughts nowadays about your time as a truther? What mistakes you made back then? Were you 100% convinced, agressively promoting the truth? Whatever comes to your mind.

1]
it somehow all started for me with bouncing into that clown on youtube called "antiterrorist" and his fmotl claims.this led me to the david icke forum, a cesspit of lunatics.
it was a long journey, i remember watching september clues and actualy believing it, going as far as bothering other people to watch it"have a look for yourself"
i also remember when some peopluar youtube guy claime the jesuits run everything and history agrees with him, then eventualy i came across the claims that jews run it all, even the jestiut order.
its too much to list it all really.

2]
i realised that truthers woulds listen to reason when facing evidence totaly debunking some of their beliefs, thats where i started to suspect, some might be lies, it went very quick from there, i soon concluded its all paranoid ramblings.

3]
i feel bad for the time ive wasted on conspiracy things and these days i will immediately laugh anyone off who tries to talk about any of it to me.ive wasted enough time on this as it is.
my fault was, for a long time, to not look at both sides of arguments.

yes, life isnt always a walk in the park, governments and politicians and bankers care for themselves first and foremost, wars are dirty business, tv outlets are twisting everything barring the weather and sport results.

but all this doesnt make the holocaust a hoax, or doesnt mean man havent been to the moon.
maybe some conspiracys are true, i dont know nor do i care anymore.

[Orphia Nay]

Thanks for sharing your story, hadabusa.

Don't feel too bad about the time you wasted as a truther. Focus instead on the amount of firsthand knowledge you gained in psychology, science and human nature.

These experiences remind me of this quote (which someone here uses as a signature):

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman.

[comixman]

Originally Posted by ref

a) How did you once become a truther? I am not looking for answers, like "watching Loose Change". If possible, I'd like you to write in a bit more detailed manner, like "I watched Loose Change, and started surfing the internet. All I could find were more truther sites, which further reinforced my truther status... etc" or something like that.

b) What convinced you back from truther to non-truther? Once again, I hope you do not respond something like "truthers are dumb", but a bit more specific.

c) What are your thoughts nowadays about your time as a truther? What mistakes you made back then? Were you 100% convinced, agressively promoting the truth? Whatever comes to your mind.

Interesting survey you have going here. Just a comment that I think there are instances where questioning the conventional wisdom is a valid point of view. Or as William Burroughs once put it: "Paranoids may just be aware of the facts."

a) I've always been a liberal, atheist who questions the motives of government and actually believes politicians may possibly lie about things or have hidden agendas. Prior to 9/11 I was peripherally involved in UFO groups. Went to a couple of conventions etc. UFOlogists have a lot of "it's a government cover up" beliefs. When the truther propaganda started coming out I was ripe for joining the cause. I did not share my beliefs with friends or family much, which in retrospect was probably a good thing.

b) I started reading more of the debunker literature over time. I think over time I just started seeing how flawed the truther logic was. I also applied the Carl Sagan principle of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." The thought that put the nail in the coffin of my truther beliefs is that it would of taken great government competence and organization to prepare the twin towers to be wired for demolition. It would of had to involve hundreds of people working thousands of man hours all in secret without a single person leaking information.

I still have friends in the UFO movement. I just remind them that the key word is Unidentified. Doesn't mean it's alien. But I'll need extraordinary proof before I believe in a 9/11 conspiracy cover up or alien visitation.

c) I still think it's good to be skeptical of conventional wisdom. After all belief in God is still conventional wisdom. I was never a passionate truther and it didn't dominate my life. I would talk about it only if asked. It didn't impact my life too much. Perhaps I always had a seed of doubt.

[Justin39640]

Originally Posted by comixman

Interesting survey you have going here. Just a comment that I think there are instances where questioning the conventional wisdom is a valid point of view. Or as William Burroughs once put it: "Paranoids may just be aware of the facts."

Agreed. But you have to be prepared to accept an answer that doesn't agree with what you believed prior to asking.

[Orphia Nay]

Originally Posted by comixman

Interesting survey you have going here. Just a comment that I think there are instances where questioning the conventional wisdom is a valid point of view. Or as William Burroughs once put it: "Paranoids may just be aware of the facts."

a) I've always been a liberal, atheist who questions the motives of government and actually believes politicians may possibly lie about things or have hidden agendas. Prior to 9/11 I was peripherally involved in UFO groups. Went to a couple of conventions etc. UFOlogists have a lot of "it's a government cover up" beliefs. When the truther propaganda started coming out I was ripe for joining the cause. I did not share my beliefs with friends or family much, which in retrospect was probably a good thing.

b) I started reading more of the debunker literature over time. I think over time I just started seeing how flawed the truther logic was. I also applied the Carl Sagan principle of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." The thought that put the nail in the coffin of my truther beliefs is that it would of taken great government competence and organization to prepare the twin towers to be wired for demolition. It would of had to involve hundreds of people working thousands of man hours all in secret without a single person leaking information.

I still have friends in the UFO movement. I just remind them that the key word is Unidentified. Doesn't mean it's alien. But I'll need extraordinary proof before I believe in a 9/11 conspiracy cover up or alien visitation.

c) I still think it's good to be skeptical of conventional wisdom. After all belief in God is still conventional wisdom. I was never a passionate truther and it didn't dominate my life. I would talk about it only if asked. It didn't impact my life too much. Perhaps I always had a seed of doubt.

Good post. Thank you for giving us an idea of your journey. I hope you enjoy it here at the JREF Forum.

[BabyLion]

A) I grew up without a father, my best friends dad is the closest thing i ever had. We live in Austin Texas the home of Alex Jones and my friends dad was obsessed with him. As an angry teen ager even before 9/11 we were listening about black helicopters stealing your babies and so on and so on. Straight out of high school i worked at a concrete plant that my friends dad owned. We three would just listen to Alex all day every day believing everything he said. We pretty much only hung out with each other in a small town so we just sat around preaching to our own choir if you will. When Loose Change hit the internet we burned it and passed it out hundreds of copies.

B) My uncle who i don't see much is a very educated dude. He has a PHD in philosophy and is a great thinker. He started a seed of doubt by challenging me to think for myself, up to this point i was using Alex Jones and infowars.com for all my info. That started a ball rolling. From there i left my job at the concrete plant aka CT headquarters and got a job in the real world. Once i was outside of the little bubble i had been in for so long my truther house of cards began to fall. I matured as a person and as a thinker and just grew up. The bottom line is no matter how hard you believe the facts just aren't there.

C)I definitely still have a question everything mindset if anything, getting brainwashed (for lack of a better term) for that time that i was sold on 9-11 CT's has strengthened that. I regret spewing non-sense for those years and regret allot of the arguments i got into with friends and family. Especially the ones in the military.

[Orphia Nay]

Thank you, Baby Lion. It's great to hear another story of someone waking up from their dream of being down the rabbit hole.

Your uncle sounds like a cool guy.

[LashL]

Interesting thread, deserves a bump.

[cjnewson88]

I cannot remember if I posted theses here before, but these are a couple of youtube users who were once truthers explaining their shift in opinion;

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE