Request to move WTC Collapses thread from Pseudoscience to Arch. and Engineering

Thank you, I take that as a compliment.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Though I haven't been around as long (not even close) as Oph, he and I do often agree on most things. One of the main ones being that we both despise people who post nonsense - and that is usually caused by sheer stupidity and/or a lack of a decent education. Both of which are MAJOR personality flaws!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's pretty high class though. A good arguement behind it.

If you had to compare most theories posted in the psuedoarea, they would look like the kind of prostitutes you would have standing at the red light district in Leeds. When compared, his arguement is like a Giesha of Japan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sure. There are a few conspiracy nuts that can put a good spin on their story. The world has never had a complete shortage of con artists, snake oil salesmen, lawyers or politicians.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(But the majority of them are just plain stupid fools. I don't think any names are needed - they're easy to spot in these 9/11 threads. Hint: they START the threads.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So let's see how this works:
1- Rev up the personal attacks. Moderators are lax if they're not the one's being attacked, you'll probably get away with it. This tactic is bound to either get the opponent to go down to your level, which you're a pro at. Once the debate is down to that level, the moderators will probably shut down the thread post haste, which is what you wanted from the beginning anyway. If the opponent -doesn't- go down to your level, continued personal attacks will probably aggrivate your opponent into silence.
2- Spend no time actually debating your opponent; clearly you are right.
3- Tell your opponent he's not valued and that you'd kick him out if you could.
4- Say the proof that he is wrong is out there somewhere; in a thread with over 1000 posts, say. This way, one doesn't need to present any evidence to support one's case. If all else fails, tell your opponent he/she wouldn't understand your (hypothetical) rebuttals and/or tell your opponent that he/she wouldn't pay attention anyway.

I must admit your approach makes it so that you don't have to present any evidence at all

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Oh yeah, I remember someone talking about that lame excuse for removing the WTC 7 debris post haste. Thanks for the info

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

See? You can figure out very simple things if it keeps hitting you and you think about it LONG enough. (Good thing you aren't graded on speed...)

 

Thank you, I take that as a compliment.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Though I have been around somewhat longer (so far) than Read-Only, he and I do often agree on most things. One of the main ones being that we both despise people who post nonsense - and that is usually caused by sheer stupidity and/or a lack of a decent education. Both of which are MAJOR personality flaws!

 

Why don't you compiment each other from now on? It seems that these personality skills are best used perhaps in this area?

 

Because it's unnecessary and would be unneeded effort. Thing is, when either (or both of us) spot that type of idiocy displayed here, we WILL always challenge it.

 

Laugh

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So you.. agree with me. Well, I admit that really takes the cake. I'm beginning to think that perhaps Tony was right; that you're simply not worth the time.

 

Nope, to the contrary - it's YOU that isn't worth the time nor effort. You are SO, SO slow to figure things out that you're practically worthless.

And never fear - I fully intentend to stay right on you ignorant, silly back until you finally decide to take your foolishness with you and leave this place!!!!

 

Tell me, Scott,does the admission of guilt by these two men:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28735610/

look to be something just for the publicity, even though they will prbably be executed for it?

Their "casual admission" - as it's being reported - sure makes all you 9/11 conspiracy nuts look like blathering idiots!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please. These people were tortured; nothing they say can be taken at face value. Read what you casually link to next time will you? I'll provide a relevant passage for you:

So you take the word of 2 guys who have been tortured and who have perhaps been offered a quick death instead of perhaps yet more torture, in exchange for lying their heads off about 9/11 instead of all the careful research done on sites such as the Journal of 9/11 studies which makes it clear that the WTC buildings were taken down by controlled demolition. Well, in the end, I guess they can only make you believe what you want to believe

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I dont think he is much different from most manipulative little boys. That is my own observation.:shrug:

 

Sigh. What makes you think I'm like a 'manipulative little boy'?

 

nowhere does jonathan say he was prevented from photographing and examining the evidence at WTC 7. nowhere does jonathan say he was prevented access to the debris field.

 

Obviously an attention whore too.
:mufc:

But isnt that the biggest problem facing the world today?

The child suffers from abandonment issues mixed with a dose of narcissism. Reminds me of myself when i was about 17 but growing up is when it all changed.

 

Yeah. Right. Anything to hold on to your ridiculous fantasy. You might as well hang it up, you and your ideas will never amount to anything more than sheer nonsense.

Incidentally, are you mentally disabled or something? The reason I ask is because at your age you should have a job - and yet you are HERE at practically any hour of the day OR night. That would certainly fit with your inablilty to understand the most simple things that have been explained to you over and over again.

 

if these sites were so objective then why don't they list the possible reasons for the explosions that were heard?
why haven't you been able to answer my question about what would explode on the ground floor when the fire that caused it was on the 50th?

get a clue scott, seriously.