Tony Szamboti vs. tfk Debate

[Oystein]

...
Those new to the debate did indeed get a lesson, ...

Who and how many are those?
Do you have evidence those are more than no one?

Hello Lurkers! Are any of you "new to the debate", and did tfk's abandoning the debate educate you in any way, shape or form? Do speak up, please!

 

[jaydeehess]

I suppose remaining silent rather than trolling the discussion for someone in your position is a sign of some intelligence - "some" meaning relevant to your buddies here. Seeing the clueless non-responses from some of your fellow "debunkers" are good for a laugh though.

For the record, the red word #educational was a reference to the following text, specifically the hilited part:



Those new to the debate did indeed get a lesson, albeit not the one TFK had so pompously set out; quite the opposite. It could be argued that TFK taught himself a hard lesson as well, along the way.

Further non-responses to a direct question. Typical truther behaviour.

I invited you to spoon feed this to us, in response to you asking if you needed to do so.

Yes, your posts are cryptic, alluding to ,,,, something.

Go ahead, spell it out in detail.

It should be good for a laugh.

 

[Ziggi]

There is no change in the trend that is the downward spiral of you and your subforum of so-called "debunkers" being flushed down the toilet. The last remnants of you still try to deny this in public but you guys can no-longer successfully maintain and project your illusions. A few of you still try to deny this but the only thing objective readers will see and hear is a lot of flatulence and denial.

So much smelly Flatulence and denial!

Have another drink guys, you are doing a wonderful job!

 

[HSienzant]

I'll just note for the record that Tony has yet to even acknowledge my invitation to debate the JFK assassination. My understanding is he considers himself an expert on that as well.

This one: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11614003&postcount=570

Hank

 

[jaydeehess]

Further non-responses to a direct question. Typical truther behaviour.

I invited you to spoon feed this to us, in response to you asking if you needed to do so.

Yes, your posts are cryptic, alluding to ,,,, something.

Go ahead, spell it out in detail.

It should be good for a laugh.

So much smelly Flatulence and denial!

Have another drink guys, you are doing a wonderful job!

Sooo, not gonna spoon feed an explanation to us. You'd rather flatulate non-responses.
got it !

 

[LSSBB]

So much smelly Flatulence and denial!

Have another drink guys, you are doing a wonderful job!

Per the ancient wisdom of my old neighborhood :

He who smelt it, dealt it.

Can't answer the question, admit it.

 

[Mark F]

So much smelly Flatulence and denial!

Have another drink guys, you are doing a wonderful job!

This pretty well sums up why the 9/11 CT forum needs to be folded up.

That is the best CT's can do. No doubt Ziggi patted himself on the back for that one, thinking he was being clever rather than hopelessly pathetic.

 

[skyeagle409]

This pretty well sums up why the 9/11 CT forum needs to be folded up.

That is the best CT's can do.

Here we are in the month of December 2016 and preparing to enter 2017, and after all of the years since the 9/11 terrorist attack in 2001, the 9/11 CT camp has failed to provide a single shred of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. They have also failed to provide CD evidence as well.

 

[skyeagle409]

9/11 truth has no evidence for the lies they spread. Got it, 15 years of no evidence false claims.

Undeniable evidence to date debunks 9/11 CT claims, which explains why they have failed to provide any evidence supporting their conspiracy theories.

 

[jaydeehess]

Per the ancient wisdom of my old neighborhood :

He who smelt it, dealt it.

Can't answer the question, admit it.

My, probably overly optimistic, faith in human nature leads me to believe that Ziggi may be simply trolling for responses, pushing our buttons.

OR

He really cannot articulate the fuzzy thoughts that drove his reference to TFK's "#educational".
The fact is that even if TFK had completely owned TSz in the debate, it would still remain, as this forum itself is, a small internet community involved in a fringe issue.
Ziggi cannot answer these two very simple questions:

EXACTLY how has the cause been advanced by having tfk withdraw from an internet forum debate?

EXACTLY how has tfk withdrawing from debate increased the technical veracity of the claims of AE911T?

He cannot answer them because to do so honestly would be admitting to the abject failure of AE911T in having their cause recognized by any significant percentage of either the public at large, or more importantly, the relevant professional community.

It is telling that despite continually touting their 2000+ engineers and architect experts, AE911T has advanced nothing in the way of any report even coming close to being of the scope and breadth of the NIST reports, or for that matter the Nordenson reports on WTC7, or the Purdue University simulation of aircraft impact.

Certainly 2000+ is enough of a pool of expertise to draw on even if one only includes those with relevant training and experience. Yet it hasn't happened.

Of that 2000+, as Oystein has showed, a large percentage do not have relevant training or experience and even if all 2000+ did, that this would be a tiny percentage of the total of practising professionals in those fields.

All this is EXACTLY why Ziggi cannot answer these questions, it would be admitting the insignificance of, and failure of, the truther cause.

 

[skyeagle409]

I'll just note for the record that Tony has yet to even acknowledge my invitation to debate the JFK assassination. My understanding is he considers himself an expert on that as well.

This one: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11614003&postcount=570

Hank

If Tony was knowledgeable on demolition implosion operations and thermite, he would have understood why it would have been impossible to properly prepare WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7 for demolition in secret.

To sum it up, Tony is not knowledgeable at all in regard to preparations required to bring down steel framed buildings with explosives and Tony doesn't understand that thermite would not have been effective in bringing down those buildings as well, and to prove my point, I posted a story where thermite failed to collapse a steel framed roof on the first attempt, which
was already heavily damaged by bomb and artillery attacks during WWII. In other words, Tony was empty-handed even before the debate.

 

[Ziggi]

This pretty well sums up why the 9/11 CT forum needs to be folded up..

A co-author of a Bazant paper backing up the original Bazantian official story for the collapse of the Twin Towers you all so love to defend actually summed it up quite nicely several years ago. About you "skeptics" he had this to say:

...the JREFers appear to be fixated only on smothering scientific debate under a blanket of NIST, FEMA, Kean, Fox and CNN “Truths”!...Indeed, I find the JREFers more often than not coming across as dogmatic followers of a creed.

http://911debunkers.blogspot.is/2014/08/the-jref-is-getting-rid-of-its-own.html

The only thing that could have been more embarrassing for you "skeptics" at the time would have been a scientist working directly for NIST or the 911Commission lambasting you for looking like "dogmatic followers of a creed."

That you ended up having an actual minister of faith, Reverend Chris Mohr, leading your "debunking" effort after that should have told JREF to pull the plug then and there, but much to our amusement they let it drag on for a few more years. You guys continued on even after JREF finally booted you and then after the good Reverend also left the building.

And you guys never learned anything.

Another good summation, from someone that should also be on your side, of why this subforum needs to be put out of its misery comes from one of your fellow "debunkers" on this subforum and one of those that, just like TFK, thinks he is the real creme du la creme, Ozeco41. Of his fellow skeptics and engineers that think they are here debunking us truthers he has this to say:

I'm gradually accumulating a list of "out of their depth" alleged debunkers at ISF. Their primary mission is to lie and/or personally attack anyone who understands aspects of WTC collapse better than they do.

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/duplicitous-blowhard-tfk-at-it-again-t726-30.html#p23815

Don't miss "not being able to construct a reasoned argument" and even worse "Not able to follow a reasoned argument when it is spoon fed to them".

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/duplicitous-blowhard-tfk-at-it-again-t726-30.html#p23823

The comment about the spoon feeding is especially fitting now given recent comments.

So, to sum up remarks about you "debunkers" of Truthers, from members of your own team:

..out of their depth" alleged debunkers at ISF.
... dogmatic followers of a creed
,,fixated only on smothering scientific debate
...Their primary mission is to lie and/or personally attack
,,,Not able to follow a reasoned argument when it is spoon fed to them

 

[skyeagle409]

December 2016: 15 years and counting and still no 9/11 conspiracy evidence.

 

[Mark F]

A co-author of a Bazant paper backing up the original Bazantian official story for the collapse of the Twin Towers you all so love to defend actually summed it up quite nicely several years ago. About you "skeptics" he had this to say:

I believe you have been asked - more than once - a simple and direct question.

Are you:
A. Incapable of answering?
B. Unwilling?

If B then please explain why. A obviously requires no explanation.

Or you could just answer. But you and I and everyone else knows you won't and why.

 

[jaydeehess]

Bazant is "official" ?

My gawd, and here all along I have been disputing Bazant's papers being taken as literal descriptions of what happened.
Does that make me a truther?(shudders)

,,, how does Bazant being official story jive with NIST being official story if dogma is to follow NIST?

 

[jaydeehess]

JREF "booted" the 911 conspiracy subsubforum? How clever to do so by booting all the forums.

 

[jaydeehess]

And how vould I forget....


EXACTLY how has the cause been advanced by having tfk withdraw from an internet forum debate?

EXACTLY how has tfk withdrawing from debate increased the technical veracity of the claims of AE911T?

 

[beachnut]

A co-author of a Bazant paper backing up the original Bazantian official story for the collapse of the Twin Towers you all so love to defend actually summed it up quite nicely several years ago. About you "skeptics" he had this to say:

The only thing that could have been more embarrassing for you "skeptics" at the time would have been a scientist working directly for NIST or the 911Commission lambasting you for looking like "dogmatic followers of a creed."

That you ended up having an actual minister of faith, Reverend Chris Mohr, leading your "debunking"... JREF finally booted you and then after the good Reverend also left the building.

And you guys never learned anything.

Another good summation, from someone that should also be on your side, of why this subforum needs to be put out of its misery comes from one of your fellow "debunkers" on this subforum and one of those that, just like TFK, thinks he is the real creme du la creme, Ozeco41. Of his fellow skeptics and engineers that think they are here debunking us truthers he has this to say:

The comment about the spoon feeding is especially fitting now given recent comments.

So, to sum up remarks about you "debunkers" of Truthers, from members of your own team:

Some projection and BS, again? Why did Tony fail to produce evidence for CD? Means he lost the debate before it started.
You have the fantasy of CD, Chris Mohr had to debunk nothing; your claims are BS fantasy based woo. It was interesting seeing Chris as a layperson lay waste to the fantasy based world of lies and false claims. Chris confirmed, 9/11 truth have no valid claims, never will.

Tony comes to ISF/JREF can can't post their lies and BS in science, current events, news... stuck with the lies from 9/11 truth in the "9/11 Conspiracy Theories" sub forum because you don't have evidence for any 9/11 truth claims.

Tony needs evidence, and you post another weak attack on Chris, who debunked "you"... Chris Mohr beat 9/11, and moved on. Everyone has moved on, but you and a those unable to use science to discover 9/11 truth is a fraud movement based on the ignorance of those who believe the lies of CD and the failed inside job, with no coherent storyline.

The pathetic leaders of 9/11 truth lie, claiming to have overwhelming evidence... they never produce. Did the leaders fool Tony.

When will Tony team with a newspaper and get the pulitzer prize, the biggest one since Watergate, for CD and the inside job... OOPS, you got fantasy, guess the story line was not up to winning a Pulitzer in fiction. Bob Dylan beats 9/11 truth with a Pulitzer, where is 9/11 truth's ... Where is the Special Awards and Citations for spreading idiotic lies of CD and the paranoid fantasy of an inside job? 15 years of nonsense. Where did all the truthers go? They gained education and left 9/11 truth.


http://911debunkers.blogspot.is/2014/08/the-jref-is-getting-rid-of-its-own.html

Love it, Frank who can't figure out why fires burned to December... Frank has no clue fires buried in ruble of the WTC would burn much longer than fires in the open, where the fuel is free to burn with lots of "air"... If I leave my wood stove open and don't shut down the air and slow down the exhaust, my full load of wood burns up in less than an hour, if I shut down air to min and limit the exhaust, the burn goes on for 10 hours at high temperature.
Greening loved to BS. His collapse time work match the momentum... Frank debunked 9/11 truth, and you use him as your expert on what? Fire burn time? strike one - what does Frank's inability to understand fire have to do with Tony's CD fantasy?

Frank likes to BS, and can't figure out iron microspheres occur when you burn iron bearing stuff... strike two - How did Frank help Tony with CD?>

Where is Frank now? Does he support your fantasy of CD, thermite and the silly inside job junk? He liked to stir the pot, and make up BS. I wonder if he knows how to keep a wood stove burning for 10 hours on one load... science, why did Frank speculate?

15 years... no Pulitzer from the debunking the debunkers, the anti-science blog spot spreading weak attacks and false information for the gullible.

darn this M.2 pci-e thingy is fast... Did you tweet trump yet to see if he will investigate 9/11 truth and stop the lies from 9/11 truth?

Is 9/11 truth the biggest "fake news story" for 1.5 decades of woo? Debunking the debunkers, the best Fake-News-Outlet for internet paranoid CTers... why do you spread fake news?

Where is your evidence to help Tony and the inside job of CD?

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

A co-author of a Bazant paper backing up the original Bazantian official story for the collapse of the Twin Towers you all so love to defend actually summed it up quite nicely several years ago. About you "skeptics" he had this to say:



The only thing that could have been more embarrassing for you "skeptics" at the time would have been a scientist working directly for NIST or the 911Commission lambasting you for looking like "dogmatic followers of a creed."

That you ended up having an actual minister of faith, Reverend Chris Mohr, leading your "debunking" effort after that should have told JREF to pull the plug then and there, but much to our amusement they let it drag on for a few more years. You guys continued on even after JREF finally booted you and then after the good Reverend also left the building.

And you guys never learned anything.

Another good summation, from someone that should also be on your side, of why this subforum needs to be put out of its misery comes from one of your fellow "debunkers" on this subforum and one of those that, just like TFK, thinks he is the real creme du la creme, Ozeco41. Of his fellow skeptics and engineers that think they are here debunking us truthers he has this to say:



The comment about the spoon feeding is especially fitting now given recent comments.

So, to sum up remarks about you "debunkers" of Truthers, from members of your own team:

Hey Ziggi thanks for killing the truth movement with thermite poisoning, best way it could have ever died.

Why don't you show Where Tony admitted on the 9/11 Forum that the collapse of the interior structure of building 7 and the debris raining down and kicking out the columns would induce the observed Collapses?

In other words Tony admitted building 7 could have fallen just as observed!

 

[BasqueArch]

I read the debate rules and there is no definition, no test, to determine who “wins” this debate.
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/debate-on-the-collapses-of-wtc-1-2-and-7-t768.html

If one judges “the winner” by who makes the last post, then TS is the winner.

If one judges “the winner” by who provides evidence, facts in support for CD or not CD then TFK is the winner.

The top professional specialists from many nations who have studied these collapses favor judging “ the winner” by the corroborated evidence TFK presents that fire and damage, not government conspiracy CD caused the collapse of the Towers.
True Believer Truthers favor judging “the winner” by believing mistaken claims, repeatedly proven false yet obstinately reasserted as true (i.e. lies) because as psychology studies show that’s how their minds work. They can’t help it.