|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
 Posted - 10/15/2006 : 18:07:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
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.
But none the less, it is a sad commentary on you.
And what jam do you see me in, anyway.
I see that I'm in a learning process. I've learned a lot about the official conspiracy theory. I've learned that the NIST Report doesn't deserve skepticism as much as it deserves ignoring if what one wants to understand is the mechanics of the actual collapse of the 3 towers. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 18:22:08 [Permalink]
|
This thread will be locked soon due to leangth. Just a heads up for those who might take it personally to not do so…
Kil
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 18:23:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
But none the less, it is a sad commentary on you.
Why is that, do you think?quote:
And what jam do you see me in, anyway.
What kind of jam do you think I would think you're in?quote:
I see that I'm in a learning process.
I see no evidence of that.quote:
I've learned a lot about the official conspiracy theory.
I see no evidence of that, either.quote:
I've learned that the NIST Report doesn't deserve skepticism as much as it deserves ignoring if what one wants to understand is the mechanics of the actual collapse of the 3 towers.
Only if one can posit a mechanism whereby the momentum of the tops of two of the towers could be arrested before they collapsed... uh... "completely." |
- 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 : 19:11:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
But none the less, it is a sad commentary on you.
quote:
Why is that, do you think?
You probably weren't held enough as a child.
quote:
And what jam do you see me in, anyway.
quote:
What kind of jam do you think I would think you're in?
I have no idea what kind of jam you think I'm in--hence my inquiry...
quote:
I see that I'm in a learning process.
quote:
I see no evidence of that.
That's because your bias prevents you from seeing it.
quote:
I've learned a lot about the official conspiracy theory.
quote:
I see no evidence of that, either.
That's because your bias prevents you from seeing it.
quote:
I've learned that the NIST Report doesn't deserve skepticism as much as it deserves ignoring if what one wants to understand is the mechanics of the actual collapse of the 3 towers.
quote:
Only if one can posit a mechanism whereby the momentum of the tops of two of the towers could be arrested before they collapsed... uh... "completely."
How do you know that is an issue? The NIST model does not say the buildings will collapse. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
| Edited by - ergo123 on 10/15/2006 19:12:27 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 19:35:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
You probably weren't held enough as a child.
What would that have to do with my amusement at your desperate rationalizations?quote:
I have no idea what kind of jam you think I'm in--hence my inquiry...
Are you sure that you're not just playing at being naive?quote:
quote:
I see that I'm in a learning process.
quote:
I see no evidence of that.
That's because your bias prevents you from seeing it.
What bias would prevent me from seeing that you're "in a learning process?"quote:
quote:
I've learned a lot about the official conspiracy theory.
quote:
I see no evidence of that, either.
That's because your bias prevents you from seeing it.
What bias would prevent me from seeing that you've learned something about what you call "the official conspiracy theory?"quote:
quote:
Only if one can posit a mechanism whereby the momentum of the tops of two of the towers could be arrested before they collapsed... uh... "completely."
How do you know that is an issue?
The downward kinetic energy must go somewhere, don't you think?quote:
The NIST model does not say the buildings will collapse.
Oh, that's right: you said that you don't know what the authors meant by "unstable," but you went ahead and fabricated this idea that the NIST report doesn't conclude anything about the actual collapse. How silly of me to have forgotten what you have "learned." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 21:06:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergoman
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
Originally posted by ergoman
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.
I love how you ignore the request of, not only me, but everyone here. And respond to my example of you reading into a post by accusing me of the same thing minus any example. I even had an implied please. |
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.] |
| Edited by - Neurosis on 10/15/2006 21:08:06 |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 21:29:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
Originally posted by ergoman
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
quote:
Originally posted by ergoman
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.
I love how you ignore the request of, not only me, but everyone here. And respond to my example of you reading into a post by accusing me of the same thing minus any example. I even had an implied please.
That's just it. It was your implied please. How do you know the original poster was implying that? |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Neurosis
SFN Regular
USA
675 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 21:44:41 [Permalink]
|
| Oh, I am sorry for the confusion. I was not meaning to imply that. I was asking. Should have shifted it to the next line I guess. I want to know the relevance. Although, I believe he did respond similarly later on in the post. |
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 : 21:54:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
You probably weren't held enough as a child.
quote:
What would that have to do with my amusement at your desperate rationalizations?
Everything. Read anything by Freud or Jung.
quote:
I have no idea what kind of jam you think I'm in--hence my inquiry...
quote:
Are you sure that you're not just playing at being naive?
Yes, I am sure.
quote:
quote:
I see that I'm in a learning process.
quote:
I see no evidence of that.
That's because your bias prevents you from seeing it.
quote:
What bias would prevent me from seeing that you're "in a learning process?"
You're the one with the bias--you tell me...
quote:
quote:
Only if one can posit a mechanism whereby the momentum of the tops of two of the towers could be arrested before they collapsed... uh... "completely."
How do you know that is an issue?
quote:
The downward kinetic energy must go somewhere, don't you think?
Indeed. Too bad NIST didn't model where it went. It's possible that the rest of the building absorbed the energy.
quote:
The NIST model does not say the buildings will collapse.
quote:
Oh, that's right: you said that you don't know what the authors meant by "unstable," but you went ahead and fabricated this idea that the NIST report doesn't conclude anything about the actual collapse. How silly of me to have forgotten what you have "learned."
I had a lot to drink last night and was very unstable--yet I did not collapse, or even fall down. Where did all that kinetic energy go! |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 22:03:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis
Oh, I am sorry for the confusion. I was not meaning to imply that. I was asking. Should have shifted it to the next line I guess. I want to know the relevance. Although, I believe he did respond similarly later on in the post.
I wish I could figure out what you were saying or asking... |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2006 : 22:58:42 [Permalink]
|
This thread is now locked due to length. Please continue the discussion (such as it is) here.
Kil
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
NIST Report Deserves Skepticism
Topic Locked
