Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD

[bob_kark]

It sure could, if you like just making crap up, which seems to be the case. Please cite an insult I have made in this thread.

How about I make a deal with you? You provide a satisfactory explanation and I won't think you're talking out of your ass.

Actually, both quotes seem very insulting to me. Now, did you get his name so that we can move on?

 

[Dazed]

When you're talking out of your ass, its not an insult to state so. I could easily get his name, but I won't because you're using it as an excuse to derail my argument.
Do you or do you not believe that floors were collapsing independently, prior to global failure, without causing global failure?

 

[WildCat]

Dazed, how do you know that man didn't escape from WTC 3?

 

[Dazed]

I'll gladly answer your question once you've answered the one I asked first.

 

[WildCat]

Do you or do you not believe that floors were collapsing independently, prior to global failure, without causing global failure?

Forget the floors failing. On the second viewing of that video I noticed he said he started on the 21st floor. He should have had plenty of time to get out of WTC 1 or 2 from there, which makes me think he actually escaped from WTC 3, the Marriott Hotel.

 

[Dazed]

Very well, you made a claim to support your argument, and when I point out an apparent contradiction in that claim, you distance yourself from it.

Wild Cat: There were floors collapsing throughout the building prior to the catastrophic global collapse.

Dazed: Okay great, this is what I wanted to hear. You're saying that floors were collapsing prior to global catastrophic failure.

So, on the one hand, the tower collapsed so quickly, because when a floor fails, all the top floors crashing down could not be resisted by the lower structure, yet when it comes to accounting for explosions, we have all sorts of floors collapsing independently of the rest of the structure, without triggering catastrophic failure. Is this a reasonable summation of your argument?

Wildcat: Forget the floors failing.

 

[bob_kark]

When you're talking out of your ass, its not an insult to state so. I could easily get his name, but I won't because you're using it as an excuse to derail my argument.

What exactly do you not understand about people in the stairwell on the lower floors of the North Tower surviving? Please explain to me how stating this = talking out of my ass?

Do you or do you not believe that floors were collapsing independently, prior to global failure, without causing global failure?

I have no clue. I'm not a civil or structural engineer.

 

[WildCat]

Very well, you made a claim to support your argument, and when I point out an apparent contradiction in that claim, you distance yourself from it.

Yes, I adjusted my claim as I learned more facts. Can you do the same? Did that man actually escape from the Marriott Hotel, and the explosion that knocked him off his feet was a 110 story building falling on the building he was in?

 

[Dazed]

Very well, you made a claim to support your argument, and when I point out an apparent contradiction in that claim, you distance yourself from it.

Wild Cat: There were floors collapsing throughout the building prior to the catastrophic global collapse.

Dazed: Okay great, this is what I wanted to hear. You're saying that floors were collapsing prior to global catastrophic failure.

So, on the one hand, the tower collapsed so quickly, because when a floor fails, all the top floors crashing down could not be resisted by the lower structure, yet when it comes to accounting for explosions, we have all sorts of floors collapsing independently of the rest of the structure, without triggering catastrophic failure. Is this a reasonable summation of your argument?

Wildcat: Forget the floors failing.

Okay.

Yes, I adjusted my claim as I learned more facts.

No you abandoned your claim and decided to attack the credibility of the witness once you realized that you were also talking out of your ass. I think I'm done with this thread.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

No you abandoned your claim and decided to attack the credibility of the witness once you realized that you were also talking out of your ass. I think I'm done with this thread.

how is wondering where the witness actually WAS an attack on his credibility?

 

[bob_kark]

Very well, you made a claim to support your argument, and when I point out an apparent contradiction in that claim, you distance yourself from it.

Okay.

No you abandoned your claim and decided to attack the credibility of the witness once you realized that you were also talking out of your ass. I think I'm done with this thread.

Translation:

LA LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!

 

[WildCat]

No you abandoned your claim and decided to attack the credibility of the witness once you realized that you were also talking out of your ass. I think I'm done with this thread.

BS Dazed. I never once questioned the credibility of the witness!

Now I'm going to ask you again: Did the man in your video actually escape from WTC 3, the Marriott Hotel?

 

[Dazed]

I don't know.

Now you answer my question, do you actually believe this statement you made:

Wildcat:There were floors collapsing throughout the building prior to the catastrophic global collapse.

 

[WildCat]

I don't know.

So how does this witness support your contention that there were explosions in WTC 1 or 2? Once again, a CTer uses a cherry picked quote - the context of which he knows nothing about - and uses it to support his pet theory.

Now you answer my question, do you actually believe this statement you made:

Wildcat:There were floors collapsing throughout the building prior to the catastrophic global collapse.

I have no doubt that some floors collapsed prior to the global collapse, yes. Once they reached critical mass the global collapse initiated.

Do I think the man in your video was in WTC 1 or 2? No.

 

[Dazed]

I'm sorry, but you saying he was in WTC3 is just as unsubstantiated, nay, moreso, than the claim he was in the towers, you're cherry picking context that doesn't even exist.

And for those who felt it an ad hominem, "Talking out of your ass" is a colourful way of saying "Making stuff up."

 

[Dazed]

Let's just clarify.

The only contention I made, is that Hawk One's assertion that pop cans and aerosol could account for the large nature of these described explosions, is ludicrous. The witness statements I provided just to demonstrate that these explosions were larger than that would account for.

You took it upon yourself to come in and volunteer an alternative, and say, "actually it was the floors collapsing prior to failure."

When I said, if collapsing floors is what caused the tower to come down, why did these special floors not pancake the ones below them?
You shifted the topic to the witness statement, the only purpose of which was to establish that were indeed large explosions. If you don't like that witness there's lots more.

 

[WildCat]

I'm sorry, but you saying he was in WTC3 is just as unsubstantiated, nay, moreso, than the claim he was in the towers, you're cherry picking context that doesn't even exist.

No, you used the man in that video to support your contention that there were explosions in WTC 1 and/or 2. Meanwhile, you have no idea where he actually came from! The fact that he was barely able to escape from the 21st floor suggests that he was actually in the 22 story Marriott Hotel, not WTC 1 or 2 as nearly everyone below the impact floors of those towers escaped.

And for those who felt it an ad hominem, "Talking out of your ass" is a colourful way of saying "Making stuff up."

You mean like using a video of a man who most likely did not come from WTC 1 or 2 to support your contention that there were explosions in WTC 1 and/or 2?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Let's just clarify.

The only contention I made, is that Hawk One's assertion that pop cans and aerosol could account for the large nature of these described explosions, is ludicrous. The witness statements I provided just to demonstrate that these explosions were larger than that would account for.

i dont think hawk one claimed pop cans and hairspray account for the larger explosions, he was simply offering it as a possible explanation for some of the explosions that were heard

 

[Dazed]

Please provide evidence that he was in WTC3.
This is a completely unfounded assertion.

You're now operating under the assumption that he was not in the towers. And why? Because you made it up and liked the ring of it.

 

[Dazed]

i dont think hawk one claimed pop cans and hairspray account for the larger explosions, he was simply offering it as a possible explanation for some of the explosions that were heard

That's fine, but he didn't offer any explanation that would account for the larger explosions that are indicated by the witness statements. Is that me saying there was bombs? No. Is that me saying there was a conspiracy? No.

That is me saying the explanation he provided is not complete.