Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
bill smith said:
I don't have to tell any critical reader what's going on here Dave.
Click to expand...

You're correct. Anybody with a properly functioning brain can tell that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and that you're just making **** up.
 
bill smith said:
I don't have to tell any critical reader what's going on here Dave.
Click to expand...

No, you don't. And there's no point trying to tell you.

bill smith said:
One point though- didn't Bazant essentially theorise a floating upper block in his desperate hypothesis ?
Click to expand...

And so the carousel comes back to its starting point. You're back to your delusion that, if you can somehow cast doubt on the absurd suggestion that Bazant's model is an accurate depiction of the detailed events of 9/11 (which it was never meant to be), then you have somehow cast doubt on the certainty that the collapses were due to the fire and impact damage. And you don't have the first vestige of the means to understand why that is not, and can never be, the case.

Continually going round in these circles may give the impression of distance covered, but will never actually get you a significant distance from your starting point.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, you don't. And there's no point trying to tell you.



And so the carousel comes back to its starting point. You're back to your delusion that, if you can somehow cast doubt on the absurd suggestion that Bazant's model is an accurate depiction of the detailed events of 9/11 (which it was never meant to be), then you have somehow cast doubt on the certainty that the collapses were due to the fire and impact damage. And you don't have the first vestige of the means to understand why that is not, and can never be, the case.

Continually going round in these circles may give the impression of distance covered, but will never actually get you a significant distance from your starting point.

Dave
Click to expand...

Well if you are rejecting Bazant's hypthesis as the valid one which other government hypothesis is here ? If there is in fact NO government explanation for how the collapse initiated and progressed I can tell you that WE definitely DO have one that we would like to test. So what about that new and independent investigation into 9/11 Dave ? Can we count on your support ?
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Well if you are rejecting Bazant's hypthesis as the valid one which other government hypothesis is here ? If there is in fact NO government explanation for how the collapse initiated and progressed I can tell you that WE definitely DO have one that we would like to test. So what about hat new and independent investigation into 9/11 Dave ? Can we count on your support ?
Click to expand...

Your level of ignorance is staggering.
 
bill smith said:
Well if you are rejecting Bazant's hypthesis as the valid one which other government hypothesis is here ? If there is in fact NO government explanation for how the collapse initiated and progressed I can tell you that WE definitely DO have one that we would like to test. So what about that new and independent investigation into 9/11 Dave ? Can we count on your support ?
Click to expand...

Round and round in circles you go. All this has been answered ad nauseam. Since you didn't take any notice last time, there hardly seems any point in talking to you any more.

Dave
 
bill smith said:
Shields up Mr. Rogers ?
Click to expand...

That's not a phaser you're holding. It's a water pistol.

Really, nobody is going to spend millions of dollars on a new investigation into 9/11 on the basis that an anonymous poster on an Internet forum is incapable of understanding and unwilling to try to understand basic physics and engineering. If there were one thing the truth movement should have learned from the last eight years, that's it.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
That's not a phaser you're holding. It's a water pistol.

Really, nobody is going to spend millions of dollars on a new investigation into 9/11 on the basis that an anonymous poster on an Internet forum is incapable of understanding and unwilling to try to understand basic physics and engineering. If there were one thing the truth movement should have learned from the last eight years, that's it.

Dave
Click to expand...

I put up three important questions/statements in the last two pages. With the most charitable disposition in the world I don't think it could be said that you adressed any of them in a way that is convincing. Anything but. So if readers are interested it is a simple matter to quickly read those pages and decide for yourself.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I put up three important questions/statements in the last two pages. With the most charitable disposition in the world I don't think it could be said that you adressed any of them in a way that is convincing. Anything but. So if readers are interested it is a simple matter to quickly read those pages and decide for yourself.
Click to expand...

I've read them. It is my opinion that Dave has adequately explained everything and that you are not even remotely interested in finding the truth. Your questions are not important. They are nonsense. You should take a long hard look at yourself and realise that you are nowhere near as smart as you think you are.
 
I guess my example of a plywood nose cone penetrating a steel car door means squat. Just when I think there could be something positive to come from engaging truthers in conversation, I realize it's a complete waste of time, and effort.
 
Brainache said:
I've read them. It is my opinion that Dave has adequately explained everything and that you are not even remotely interested in finding the truth. Your questions are not important. They are nonsense. You should take a long hard look at yourself and realise that you are nowhere near as smart as you think you are.
Click to expand...

I don't claim to be smart and I never have. You can demonstrate your own aptitude by providing the example called for in the statement below. Try to give a real example other than 9/11 itself..

When I am told that one tenth of a structure crushes down the other nine-tenths of the same structure by gravity alone.I don't need any engineer to tell me that something is hideousy skewed and I am being sold a crock.

So you can explain all you like but until you can come up with any other structure, big or small in the entire history of this Planet in which the top and lightest one-tenth crushed the other and stronger nine-enths down flat on the ground by gravity alone all the explanations of 9/11 debunkers will be 100% disregarded.
 
dtugg said:
bs likely has one of the most severe cases of the Dunning-Kruger effect of anybody in the world. I am not being hyperbolic.
Click to expand...


bill smith said:
But at the point of impact- the interface- the physics would be the same regardless of which body was moving.

So the 450,000 tons would srike the stationary 50,000 tons (or vice versa if you prefer to see it that way). So which will be destroyed ?

I say both parts will suffer local damages but the smaller part will be gone first.
Click to expand...
1) Incompetent individuals tend to overestimate their own level of skill

bill smith said:
I don't have to tell any critical reader what's going on here Dave.

One point though- didn't Bazant essentially theorise a floating upper block in his desperate hypothesis ?
Click to expand...

2) Incompetent individuals fail to recognize genuine skill in others.

bill smith said:
I don't know where you are getting freefall from unless you are trying to confuse the issue. I theorised a stationary upper block of 10% floating in the sky at two miles altitude being struck by the 90% of the lower block travelling at an arbitrary 800 mph. (400 mph if you like)

You are not being very convincing so far Dave. Don't forget the readers.
Click to expand...
3) Incompetent individuals fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy.

bill smith said:
I don't claim to be smart and I never have. You can demonstrate your own aptitude by providing the example called for in the statement below. Try to give a real example other than 9/11 itself..

When I am told that one tenth of a structure crushes down the other nine-tenths of the same structure by gravity alone.I don't need any engineer to tell me that something is hideousy skewed and I am being sold a crock.

So you can explain all you like but until you can come up with any other structure, big or small in the entire history of this Planet in which the top and lightest one-tenth crushed the other and stronger nine-enths down flat on the ground by gravity alone all the explanations of 9/11 debunkers will be 100% disregarded.
Click to expand...
4) If they can be trained to substantially improve their own skill level, these individuals can recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I don't claim to be smart and I never have. You can demonstrate your own aptitude by providing the example called for in the statement below. Try to give a real example other than 9/11 itself..

When I am told that one tenth of a structure crushes down the other nine-tenths of the same structure by gravity alone.I don't need any engineer to tell me that something is hideousy skewed and I am being sold a crock.

So you can explain all you like but until you can come up with any other structure, big or small in the entire history of this Planet in which the top and lightest one-tenth crushed the other and stronger nine-enths down flat on the ground by gravity alone all the explanations of 9/11 debunkers will be 100% disregarded.
Click to expand...
Remain in ignorance it is the only thing you get right being delusion magnet posting lies to disrespect those who died on 911. It is disrespectful to make up lies and or spread them without proof or evidence. Your moronic ideas on 911 are totally based on your own failed opinions. Keep up the great work being all you can be a spreader of lies and false information.

Getting an engineering degree must be beyond your capabilities as is understanding 911. After 7 years this is the best you can do; be a evidence free repeater of lies unable to verify your sources and posting lies without thinking.

Steel fails fast in fire you can't gain knowlege fast enough to overcome your posting of lies.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
I don't claim to be smart and I never have. You can demonstrate your own aptitude by providing the example called for in the statement below. Try to give a real example other than 9/11 itself..

When I am told that one tenth of a structure crushes down the other nine-tenths of the same structure by gravity alone.I don't need any engineer to tell me that something is hideousy skewed and I am being sold a crock.

So you can explain all you like but until you can come up with any other structure, big or small in the entire history of this Planet in which the top and lightest one-tenth crushed the other and stronger nine-enths down flat on the ground by gravity alone all the explanations of 9/11 debunkers will be 100% disregarded.
Click to expand...

Here

Try one of these

 
Mythbusters Jamie and Adam talking about their show.

h t t p : / / fora.tv/2009/08/06/MythBusters_Just_the_Facts#fullprogram

Could some kind person please fix the link for me. :)

They briefly chat about 9/11 conspiracy theories about one hour into the talk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom