|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2006 : 11:25:13 [Permalink]
|
Because you answered my question with a question (or not at all).
And to illustrate the minutia you (and) others focus on--like challenging how one defines "complete collapse" when the resulting pile of rubble was clearly a level of destruction never seen outside of a controlled demolition.
You seem to defend this focus on minutia as adherence to scientific protocol. But you are missing the bigger picture by doing so.
You simply are not going discover the truth of what happened on 9-11-01 by sticking to the info released in NIST or other government reports, because they do not cover the actual collapse.
I fail to see how a bunch of skeptics have failed to see that. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 10/14/2006 : 16:20:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
And to illustrate the minutia you (and) others focus on--like challenging how one defines "complete collapse" when the resulting pile of rubble was clearly a level of destruction never seen outside of a controlled demolition.
I've never seen that level of destruction with a controlled demolition, either, so I don't see how the "level of destruction" is even relevant.quote:
You seem to defend this focus on minutia as adherence to scientific protocol. But you are missing the bigger picture by doing so.
No, I was ridiculing your invention of entirely new definitions solely to defend your poor word choice.quote:
You simply are not going discover the truth of what happened on 9-11-01 by sticking to the info released in NIST or other government reports, because they do not cover the actual collapse.
Good thing that nobody is doing that here, then.quote:
I fail to see how a bunch of skeptics have failed to see that.
I see that you've failed to see that we haven't failed to see that. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 01:29:24 [Permalink]
|
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
Enough said. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 04:10:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
Enough said.
Yes, if there's no evidence for it, it is indeed not relevant. Your proposition that the WTC was brought down by controlled demolition has no evidence in favor of it. Hence, it is indeed an irrelevant position. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 06:32:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
Enough said.
Yes, if there's no evidence for it, it is indeed not relevant. Your proposition that the WTC was brought down by controlled demolition has no evidence in favor of it. Hence, it is indeed an irrelevant position.
So if you haven't seen it, there is no evidence for it? Not too ego-centric...! |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 07:53:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
That's not at all what I said. You are sooo Fred.quote:
Enough said.
Actually, you said enough for us to know that you're not at all serious many pages ago. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 08:52:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
quote:
That's not at all what I said.
Here is what you said: "I've never seen that level of destruction with a controlled demolition, either, so I don't see how the "level of destruction" is even relevant." That pretty much says you don't see the level of destruction as bein relevant because you not see that kind of destruction before...
quote:
Enough said.
quote:
Actually, you said enough for us to know that you're not at all serious many pages ago.
And yet you all continue tp comment... Why do you think that is? |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 12:33:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Here is what you said: "I've never seen that level of destruction with a controlled demolition, either, so I don't see how the "level of destruction" is even relevant." That pretty much says you don't see the level of destruction as bein relevant because you not see that kind of destruction before...
You are soooo good at reading what you want to hear right into peoples posts. What he said was (as though it was not typed out right above). He has never yet seen a CD that matches the level of destruction seen with the WTC. So (an implied please ) show how the level of destruction is in fact relevent. |
Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson
[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink
Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.] |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 12:44:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Here is what you said: "I've never seen that level of destruction with a controlled demolition, either, so I don't see how the "level of destruction" is even relevant." That pretty much says you don't see the level of destruction as bein relevant because you not see that kind of destruction before...
You are soooo good at reading what you want to hear right into peoples posts. What he said was (as though it was not typed out right above). He has never yet seen a CD that matches the level of destruction seen with the WTC. So (an implied please) show how the level of destruction is in fact relevent.
You are soooo good at reading what you want to hear right into peoples posts. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 13:06:04 [Permalink]
|
ergo(liar)123 said:
quote:
Here is what you said: "I've never seen that level of destruction with a controlled demolition, either, so I don't see how the "level of destruction" is even relevant." That pretty much says you don't see the level of destruction as bein relevant because you not see that kind of destruction before...
Yet more evidence that all you can do is generate an endless stream of poorly constructed straw-men.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 13:24:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Ahh, I see. If you haven't seen it, it isn't relevant.
Enough said.
Yes, if there's no evidence for it, it is indeed not relevant. Your proposition that the WTC was brought down by controlled demolition has no evidence in favor of it. Hence, it is indeed an irrelevant position.
So if you haven't seen it, there is no evidence for it? Not too ego-centric...!
No, you haven't presented any evidence for us to see. There's a difference. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 13:39:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
And yet you all continue tp comment... Why do you think that is?
Because watching you flounder in half-baked rationalizations trying desperately to justify the nonsense that you spew is somewhat amusing. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 14:17:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
And yet you all continue tp comment... Why do you think that is?
Because watching you flounder in half-baked rationalizations trying desperately to justify the nonsense that you spew is somewhat amusing.
That's a sad commentary on your personality Dave. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 15:31:40 [Permalink]
|
| Nobody forced you to do what you're doing to yourself, ergo, and nobody is making you remain. I have no empathy for someone who gets himself into a jam he could quite easily extricate himself from, but refuses to do so. If you were actually a victim here, I wouldn't find this amusing at all, but you're in complete control of the situation in which you find yourself. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 15:31:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
And yet you all continue tp comment... Why do you think that is?
Because watching you flounder in half-baked rationalizations trying desperately to justify the nonsense that you spew is somewhat amusing.
That's a sad commentary on your personality Dave.
Actually, it's a very accurate comment. Best thing I've seen since the "Surface of the Sun" thread. |
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
|
|
 |
|
NIST Report Deserves Skepticism
Topic Locked
