If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II

Wait, what?
The standard truther line, and I'm assuming your as well, is that the collapses looked like CD, which is highly suspicious. Now you're saying that they were carried out in a way completely (100%) different from other controlled demolitions, yet they ended up looking exactly the same.
How does that work, exactly?


To my utter lack of surprise, this is a pitifully inadequate response.
I invite you to refute the growing chorus accusing you of trolling, and post a more detailed, useful and productive reply.
 
You're and idiot and you know it Johnathan Cole,
You're an idiot, and you know it and you really have to show it,
Do an experiment where you blow it.
Jonathan Cole.

You're an Idiot and you know it,
To the whole world you want to show it.
How in physics class you blowed it,
Johnathan Cole. Johnathan Cole.
 
Last edited:
Guys.... the contraction of you and are is you're

your is a possessive PRONOUN.

you are an idiot

should be

you're an idiot

NOT

your an idiot
 
Guys.... the contraction of you and are is you're

your is a possessive PRONOUN.

you are an idiot

should be

you're an idiot

NOT

your an idiot
:thumbsup:
Noted and corrected, using talk to text, and didn't correct the machine, pad's mistake.
It was early before coffee.
 
Guys.... the contraction of you and are is you're

your is a possessive PRONOUN.

you are an idiot

should be

you're an idiot

NOT

your an idiot

Unless we're talking about his an idiot, where "an idiot" is someone's nickname.
 
Unless we're talking about his an idiot, where "an idiot" is someone's nickname.

Wouldn't "your an idiot" simply refer to a third party who is not an idiot, possessed or referenced by the person whom one is addressing, and with a randomly inserted spacebar after the style of a certain well-known poster in these forums?

Dave
 
OK. Post the emails and redact their names and emails. Let's see.
Reading comprehension isn't your forte.

So lets see the evidence that you've went outside of your little e-bubble to prove to yourself that your interpretation of Cole's experiments are correct.

Or are you just not that interested in the truth (no scare quotes).

Oh and the engineers I sent links to are effectively, lurkers.
 
FalseFlag said:
...snip...
Edited by jsfisher: 
Moderated content redacted.


For perspective, I've counted 16 engineers with expertise in the relevant fields and 5 architects in this forum that don't believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories. Several of them have participated in this thread and told you that Cole's video is nonsense. Why don't you start to consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you're accepting Cole's video only because it fits your view of the world but that he may be trying to con people with his "experiments"?

The fact that Cole is spewing propaganda against the 9/11 Commission Report should be a big red flag. He's not neutral. Try asking actual engineers who are neutral, if you think the ones here aren't. Do some leg work for a change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now you are acting childishly obtuse.

You know full well that you will reject any evidence for their credentials which does not have their names.

Your childish games are all you have left, aren't they.
Try me. Post the emails and see what my reply is. Of course you won't, and no one else will, because the emails don't exist.
 
Try me. Post the emails and see what my reply is. Of course you won't, and no one else will, because the emails don't exist.
You already showed you will dismiss anything that does not support your belief. rwquinn's credentials are not hard to verify, you dismissed them with a handwave. You will do the same with anyone else that doesn't support your belief.

Face it, you toe the party line without question (your post history is proof).
 
Last edited:
You already showed you will dismiss anything that does not support your belief. rwquinn's credentials are not hard to verify, you dismissed them with a handwave. You will do the same with anyone else that doesn't support your belief.

Face it, you toe the party line without question (your post history is proof).
No, I did not use a hand wave to dismiss rwguinn's credentials. I used brainwaves. It was easy. You might want to try it, too.
 
Would that be the brainwaves of a person that admits to have no training or formal education in the subject in question (you)?
No. I said I won't submit myself as an "expert" to the members of this forum. I have said nothing about my education and background.
 
Are you sure Cole is not neutral? If he's not neutral, why did he test the government's theories first? I mean, if either test had been successful, he would not have had to continue. Right?
It was, and yet he did. Remember the pizza stands experiment? That one was successful in replicating the motions in the WTC. Yes, I'm sure Cole is not neutral.
 
Prove it. Please post your emails and their replies. Redact whatever you think you need to in order to preserve their anonymity.
Reading comprehension isn't your forte.

So lets see the evidence that you've went outside of your little e-bubble to prove to yourself that your interpretation of Cole's experiments are correct.

Or are you just not that interested in the truth (no scare quotes).

Oh and the engineers I sent links to are effectively, lurkers.

Again, it's not required and as others have pointed out, you've hand waved away every relevant professional who's attempt to explain why you're wrong.

The point is you have no compulsion to check the veracity of your claims by going outside of your little e-bubble here on the internet so I've challenged you to go the nearest university with an engineering and/or physics department, show them Cole's video then give them your explanation for why you believe Cole has proven...?...something.

Lack of doing so pretty much supports many posters who believe you to be nothing but a troll.
 

Back
Top Bottom