Truthers...what is your best piece of evidence ?

Hey RedEyE, how does column 79 support your theory that a secret shadow government tried to pass off a controlled demolition as a fire-induced progressive collapse?
 
RedIbis said:
Exactly. Just like NIST.
Click to expand...

Not just like NIST: NIST is not saying that a lack of this column is proof, YOU ARE. You are committing an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Seriously, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves, here?

And, as a point of fact: you have just admitted that your best piece of evidence does not exist. So not only are you making yourself look silly because you are pretending to be "no better than NIST" (when you claimed earlier to have a theory which is better than NIST- a theory which you cannot post), but you're pissing on your own feet and admitting that your theory is completely void of any evidence.

Way to go.

:dig:
 
Totovader said:
Not just like NIST: NIST is not saying that a lack of this column is proof, YOU ARE. You are committing an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Seriously, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves, here?

And, as a point of fact: you have just admitted that your best piece of evidence does not exist. So not only are you making yourself look silly because you are pretending to be "no better than NIST" (when you claimed earlier to have a theory which is better than NIST- a theory which you cannot post), but you're pissing on your own feet and admitting that your theory is completely void of any evidence.

Way to go.

:dig:
Click to expand...

If Column 79 doesn't exist, it's far more damaging to NIST's claims than it is to the exercise I'm engaging in, which you are incapable of recognizing.
 
Quotation by Dictator Cheney (in another thread):

no one has evidence about what exactly happened to WTC7.
Click to expand...


At last! A truther speaks the truth. Of course, Alex Jones, and a greater part of the self-named truth movement, will never accept this altruism because they know...via Google searches and YouTube videos...that WTC 7 was purposefully demolished by a mysterious "rogue element" of the U.S. Government.


RedIbis, have you worked out your conundrum yet? You imply the NIST investigation is faulty because they lacked physical evidence. But then you call for another investigation...that would lack physical evidence. What gives?
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
If Column 79 doesn't exist, it's far more damaging to NIST's claims than it is to the exercise I'm engaging in, which you are incapable of recognizing.
Click to expand...

You mean the one where you pretend a supposedly non-existent column is your evidence, because according to you that's what NIST has done?

Yeah, that little "exercise" was kind of obvious.

But what you seem incapable of recognizing is that it was also retarded and based on your complete ignorance of scientific investigation.
 
Why anyone bothers with the proven liar RedIbis I have no idea. He's obviously lyinbg about having a theory beter than NISTs, he can't produce what he doesn't have, so why keep feeding the troll?
 
johnny karate said:
You mean the one where you pretend a supposedly non-existent column is your evidence, because according to you that's what NIST has done?

Yeah, that little "exercise" was kind of obvious.

But what you seem incapable of recognizing is that it was also retarded and based on your complete ignorance of scientific investigation.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up for us.
 
RedIbis said:
If Column 79 doesn't exist, it's far more damaging to NIST's claims than it is to the exercise I'm engaging in, which you are incapable of recognizing.
Click to expand...

Since NIST isn't the topic of discussion, you have just proven why red herrings are your favorite scapegoat.

YOU were asked for YOUR best evidence. Whatever you think about NIST and it's "lack of evidence" is irrelevant at this point- the FACT that you have presented your "best piece of evidence" and then admitted that it does not exist, and that's your evidence means you have committed an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Lack of evidence is not evidence. And- completely off topic: NIST doesn't claim that is is- YOU DO. By claiming that NIST does- you are committing a strawman.

So I ask again- since you continually ignore it- is logic a proper method for understanding the world around you, or do conspiracy theories offer something more reliable than science and critical thinking, Red?
 
Totovader said:
Since NIST isn't the topic of discussion, you have just proven why red herrings are your favorite scapegoat.

YOU were asked for YOUR best evidence. Whatever you think about NIST and it's "lack of evidence" is irrelevant at this point- the FACT that you have presented your "best piece of evidence" and then admitted that it does not exist, and that's your evidence means you have committed an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Lack of evidence is not evidence. And- completely off topic: NIST doesn't claim that is is- YOU DO. By claiming that NIST does- you are committing a strawman.

So I ask again- since you continually ignore it- is logic a proper method for understanding the world around you, or do conspiracy theories offer something more reliable than science and critical thinking, Red?
Click to expand...

Any thoughts, Red?
 
RedIbis said:
You really want me to address your convoluted, rhetorical question?
Click to expand...

BTW, when have you last actually answered any question here?
I have noticed that you have left unanswered questions in many threads. And still you demand answers from others.

Why are all you truthers this difficult to communicate with? Every "debunker" here bends over backwards to answer all your mundane and silly questions, but you can't answer even simple questions that would shed some light on your tought processes and beliefs.
Doesn't your behaviour bother you? Are you the same way in person also, and this doesn't bother the people around you?
 
RedIbis said:
You really want me to address your convoluted, rhetorical question?
Click to expand...
This is your best evidence. Talk?

Got any physics, math, or real evidence to present? No? How long have you been evidence free? 7 years? This was your chance, and you failed to provide evidence.
 
beachnut said:
This is your best evidence. Talk?

Got any physics, math, or real evidence to present? No? How long have you been evidence free? 7 years? This was your chance, and you failed to provide evidence.
Click to expand...

Hey, just askin' questions, unlike you sheeple/believers/gubmint shills!
-- RedIbis contribution for the last seven years
 
Red- did NIST pick Column 79 totally at random or did they have a reason to do so?
 
bynmdsue said:
Red- did NIST pick Column 79 totally at random or did they have a reason to do so?
Click to expand...

I'm sure that after all of their computer modeling, this was the one column, that if by some miracle is weakened just enough, could in some hypothetical scenario, cause the complete collapse of the building.

Not that they ever bothered to present this evidence. It's entirely hypothetical.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm sure that after all of their computer modeling, this was the one column, that if by some miracle is weakened just enough, could in some hypothetical scenario, cause the complete collapse of the building.

Not that they ever bothered to present this evidence. It's entirely hypothetical.
Click to expand...


Ah, the plot thickens! Now, we've established that NIST, an agency tasked with discovering why structures fail, has become, for unfathomable reasons, part of a gigantic, mathematically-impossible conspiracy designed to transfer control of both houses of Congress from the Republicans to the Democrats. It is safe to say that absolutely none of us are interested in learning why any human capable of feeding himself and crossing the street without getting killed would talk himself into swallowing such idiocy. Restrict yourself to accounting for the soundless explosives. What were they and how did they get there?

And you thought I was going to ask you why no physicists or structural engineers anywhere in the world are refuting the bogus science in NIST's report.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom