He said thermite did it? lie, false, not true, just junk, take your pick
Some simple Tower 7 questions
- Thread starter Submersible
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 911 conspiracy theory wtc wtc7
He said thermite did it? lie, false, not true, just junk, take your pick
Again, it's an opinion not a lie.
Arus808
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,204
HE states it as fact...
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
does it change circumstances if the opinion is continually presented as fact?
could you call the comission report an opinion?
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
he stands idly by while allowing others to present his "hypothesis" as proven fact and never lists a finger to correct this
if its not a lie its downright dishonest
My, my, you're just full of excuses, aren't you? Maybe a word stronger than excuses might apply here, even.
And the 9/11 Commission Report doesn't need fixing. They were lied to, not liars themselves.
Given your bias and your refusal to back up your own claims, I really fail to see what you have to gain here. It's clear that we have nothing to gain arguing further.
Not in my book - he makes up stuff to mislead others, it is enough to count as a lie, or what ever.
His paper is just one big lie; why would he have to make up his own online journal to publish his paper and lie about being "peer" reviewed?
Lie number 2;
Fine by me
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,927
Dr. Jones claims finding sulfur was proof of thermite. Nobody could be that dumb. He was hoping to string along the rubes.
Dr. Jones sais the 2nd law of thermodynamics means 'Things topple over'. He lied about that to make a fake point in his paper and his video.
I have his very first paper, I have his new paper, he keeps changing it!
What dolt! He tells lies all through his presentations.
I have copy of his presentations, do you?
If you believe on thing in his paper and presentations you are not very good at science, engineering, or just basic thinking.
Thermite used to bring down WTC = lies by Jones
Simple - I say someone making up this junk is telling lies since he should know better!!!!!!!!!!!
Lies
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
yes
you seem to be drawing a very thin, jagged line as to whats a lie a what isnt
the 9/11 comission unwittingly presents false information and they are liars never to be trusted again
loose change unwittingly present false information and its a simple error
loose change refuses to correct 90% of their most glaring errors but it still isnt a lie
alex jones presents opinions as fact on a daily basis, and is almost always wrong, still not a liar
steven jones allows others to misrepresent his work (often in his presence) and never steps in to correct them (essentially lying through somneone elses mouth) but no, HES not the liar
NobbyNobbs
Gazerbeam's Protege
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2006
- Messages
- 5,617
You know it's a lie. But you won't refute it until you have the full story. Sounds like you're already refuting it, by calling it a lie.
Perhaps it's not a lie. Perhaps it's just an omission, an opinion, an exaggeration, a misstatement.
Speaking of complete stories, we have yet to hear one from the CT point of view. From start to finish, how did the whole thing work?
See, here's how science works. You make an observation. You come up with a theory that explains as much of what you observed as possible. You test that theory through experiement, modeling, peer review, etc. If there are competing theories, they must be able to not only show where the original theory falls flat, but they must also be able to explain more than the original theory does.
For example:
--Ancient cultures observe the sun move across the sky. They theorize that a god pulls it in his chariot.
--Ptolemy makes more observations. Theorizes that the sun moves around the earth. This explains not only the viewed movement, but also the lack of a chariot.
--Copernicus et al make more observations. Theorizes that the earth moves around the sun in a circle. This not only explains the viewed movement and the lack of a chariot, but also the movement of moons seen through a telescope and the progressionof seasons.
--Kepler makes better observations. Theorizes that planets move in elliptical orbits.....
etc.
Now, in order for you to refute the official theory, it is necessary for you to provide an alternate theory that explains all the observable facts, plus any holes you think the official theory has. Your theory should be able to explain, among other things...
--how explosives were planted
--why the buildings were demolished
--who had motive, opportunity, and means to do it
--why Bin Laden took credit
--what the witnesses who watched the crash at the Pentagon actually saw.
--how the light poles were damaged
--how explosives could be detonated after being struck by an airliner
--how this could all remain covered up after all this time
--why worldwide groups of scientists and engineers have not voiced their outrage at what you think is obvious to the layperson.
And so on. Now, do you or do you not have a theory that does this?
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
Well Wizard, since you are sticking around, let's get to know each other. I'm 53 and a senior project manager with a major technology company. I'm responsible for services contracts worth multiple millions of dollars per year. My job requires precision in financial and technical matters. There is no room in my job for speculation, conjecture or opinions not based in a solid foundation of facts. My recommendations must be backed by the expert analysis of subject matter experts and bear the scrutiny of customers who hire expensive consultants to analyze my data. Think of it as a peer review by a hostel audience.
One of my greatest attributes is knowing I'm not smart enough to thoroughly evaluate the technical recommendations of the experts, yet I need to make decisions based on their analysis. I need to evaluate their educational background. I need to understand their profession experience. I need to evaluate their resumes. I then consult with their peers for their evaluation of the analysis. If I were to present a conclusion or recommendation solely based on my observation of some event, I would be at best laughed out of the office. At worst, I would be fired.
That ramification is for a technology solution which may affect the purchase of sweater. You are talking about the murder of 3000 human beings. Yet you, 28IQ, Merc, Light Head, Avery and the others show now qualms about reaching conclusions based on your amateur evaluations of videos. You ignore primary sources. You wave off expert analysis. It's no wonder you tin hatters make DVDs and youtube videos instead of taking your case to the police, DA's, Insurance Company's etc.
Now, Wizard, tell us about yourself.
I already reported an abusive post from you and yet again you call me a tin hatter. I am not going to respond to rude abusive people
Are you a tin hat fool like star war bob? (tin foil hat = someone who says things but offers no proof and/or misleads others)
Facts on anything? Some evidence, on anything you support?
You post Bob the fighter pilot, but then his facts are as elusive as Charlie Sheen's facts. Simple facts like this would be indicative of tin foil hats of CT 9/11 misleaders. (you offer opinions as your evidence?)
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Yes, Jones lies outright, repeatedly. Read the WTC 7 paper that's linked in my signature for a taste (use the index). Jones is a poster boy for academic fraud.
If I'm wrong, present your facts.
He doesn't claim thermite is fact though, I have never seen him call it anything other than a hypothesis he is testing. I have seen his lectures and I like his style, especially what he says about his detractors.