Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think as a construction worker, your opinion carries the same weight as a physics professor, architect or engineer.
9/11 Truth: Thermite & The Case for Controlled Demolition on Yahoo! Video (http://video.yahoo.com/watch/182627/960424 - broken link)
I am not a construction worker, don't know where you pulled that out of. I'm not an engineer, either, but I work closely with the engineers who actually were in the building on 9/11 and then worked at GZ for the next nine or ten months.
I don't think a professor, architect or engineer on a YouTube video carries the same weight as their personal hands-on experience, analysis and observation.
Popular Mechanics consulted with building and engineering experts. You would know that if you had read the article. If you haven't, you seriously need to do so.
A lot more credible than a youtube video!
Or you could read the statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
1) I'm not trying to get you to do anything..well..except maybe close mouth and engage brain. I mistakenly took the time to explain one possible reason why the other poster might have made reference to a past military conspiracy. I see now that I was trying to have a discussion "with a kitchen table"
Yes you told me that its reasonable to assume that the Bush administration is capable of something because an entirely different entity almost did the same thing. Great point there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
2) I have come to no conclusion whatsoever, but merely asked probing questions. Clearly you don't even know how to read.
Yeah great point, I don't know how to read despite making and responding to posts. Show me where in my last post that I said you HAVE come to a conclusion. Looks like you definitely know how to read, but have a little problem with COMPREHENSION. And really, if you're as old as you make yourself out to be, why don't you be a little more mature and keep the insults at least reasonable, if not abolish them at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
3) Trust me - I am a lot less easily swayed than you are. It is clear that you are very quick to jump to the most foolish conclusions.
And how exactly do you know this? This is the post where you go from possibly a respectable poster to just another ignorant E-hater. I haven't even stated what I believe, but you feel that you know enough about me to say that I am quick to jump to conclusions. Hard to say that when I haven't even posted any conclusions, no? Were you just hoping I wouldn't respond to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
4) It takes a lot evidence to convince you of something? You've offered evidence to the contrary.
Prove it. You keep insulting me and making assumptions about me with absolutely NO evidence to back it up. Seems like you just got your panties in a bunch and just had to get your shots in. Well if it makes you feel better, just repeat all this nonsense again and I will not reply, giving you the last word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
5) I made no claims. GOT IT? You are very, very confused.
Show me where I said you DID make claims. Now you can laugh WITH me about you saying I'm the confused one. All I said is that its stupid to assume that Bush is a suspect in the 9/11 attacks because there is absolutely no evidence to say he is. Show me some evidence of his involvement to prove me wrong. But I know you won't because there isn't any.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
Little wonder I keep hearing about the ignore list. End of discussion.
Hey now you're getting dangerously close to a typical Republican argument, the way you just say whatever nonsensical, made up stories you want and then refuse to listen to any response.
If you want to actually discuss this in a mature, intelligent fashion then I am game. I would like to hear what you ACTUALLY believe since you have sort of problem with posting that online. But if you want to keep up your lame attempts at baseless insults, along with the straw man arguments you spewed all over your post, hey I'm down for that too.
Davin of Popular Mechanics magazine said that at the pulverized towersthey were able to collect DNA EVIDENCE of ALL the hijackers. (Which is absurd.)
When Davin was asked what DNA they compared the gathered DNA to, (which is necessary for identification) he had absolutely NO ANSWER.
This calls into question the truth of the entire PM article.
No it doesn't. Davin isn't responsible for all of the information in the article about 9/11, there were hundreds of experts and scientists that gave him that information, so if he says something wrong, it does nothing to discredit the work of the people ACTUALLY responsible for that article.
Well seeing as how Popular Mechanics didn't use their own knowledge to describe what happened in the 9/11 attacks, rather they collected it from hundreds of experts in their respective fields, debating with them doesn't really mean much. Now while some of the points made about popular mechanics have been refuted by many sources, nothing of importance has been shown to be wrong. Not to mention.... YOU STILL HAVEN'T SHOWN ANY EVIDENCE OF GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT. Which is exactly what this thread is about. Popular Mechanics is still a good way to learn about the actual physics of how the buildings went down, but no one said it was perfect.
Obnviously you don't know anything. You keep pointing to other 'sources' and that 'nothing of importance has been shown to be wrong'
So tell me, how did building 7 collapse?
You say that 'Popular Mechanics didn't use their own knowledge' to explain what happened. Obviously you didn't listen to the interview. They said that they were shown classified photos of building 7, that were denied to be seen by the general public.
In other words, you don't really have a reply to my post?
I watched the video. Nothing in there I haven't seen or read before.
Building and engineering experts gave credible and accurate answers as to how the WTC buildings collapsed, including tower 7. You seem to want to ignore the facts I posted about tower 7. Don't believe wackos like Rosie O'Donnell who says "fire doesn't melt steel!"
The fact is that terrorists, at least one whom was seen on a security camera shortly before the 9/11 attacks, hijacked 4 airplanes and used them as cruise missiles and crashed them into the WTC towers and the Pentagon (and the one that crashed into rural Pennsylvania).
It wasn't an inside U.S. government job, it wasn't done by space aliens or bigfoot. It was done by foreign-born terrorists.
And hopefully, no one will bring up the other wacko conspiracy theory... it was a "missile" which hit the Pentagon. We've had enough crazy conspiracy claims for one day!
Since you and nickel seem to think that there are 'credible and accurate answers as to how tower 7' collapsed' why don't you tell me what they are?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
