Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[tmd2_1]

Its not just that one passpprt that survived the crash (it was picked up before the collapses).

For example... Luggage, a airline itineray, a letter from a passenger and a crap load of other perishable stuff you'd find in a plane all ejected from it. You'd have to imagine little ninjas running around planting the stuff in broad daylight.

And I gave you a link to another time a perishable item survived a plane crash.

You are quite right...it was picked up before the collapse, I am sorry for that. Look I said it before, we'll just have to agree to disagree, this is a total non issue.

 

[dafydd]

As for dafydd, you have an awful lot of nerve. Why should anything, you ever say be taken remotely seriously. You are a proven liar. I ask you how
.

I know what happened on 911. You don't. What did I lie about?

 

[uke2se]

You are quite right...it was picked up before the collapse, I am sorry for that. Look I said it before, we'll just have to agree to disagree, this is a total non issue.

No, it's not a "non-issue", and it's not a question of "agreeing to disagree". You are wrong, and you have been proven wrong.

 

[Edx]

You are quite right...it was picked up before the collapse, I am sorry for that. Look I said it before, we'll just have to agree to disagree, this is a total non issue.

I dont want to agree to disagree, i want to know why you continue to believe that the passport is evidence it was planted. I want to also know why you think people reporting molten steel is remarkable in a fire, when this has happened in the exact same way many times before and since in other fires. I gave you a list with quotes from news reports, its hard to miss.

 

[tmd2_1]

You mean the tactic of making you evidence the crap you're spewing? The tactic of actually looking at the truth, as opposed to the twoof?



You should ask yourself this question.



No, but you are.

As I said I am not going down this road. All the evidence is in the initial post. It clearly is a tactic here focus and fixate and one thing repeat over and over again. Forgetting about all the information in the initial post. Driving threads to no where so anyone that really wants to find useful information will have a hard time doing so. I will not do this.

 

[TJM]

It certainly is. Nothing there including Jet Feul gets hot enough to melt steel. So what did it?

What melted "steel"?

The imaginary melted steel in Trutherworld.

We are not getting started on this again. Everything you need to see is in the original post. I will speak no more about this. This is clearly a tactic of yours(meaning members of the site)

As for dafydd, you have an awful lot of nerve. Why should anything, you ever say be taken remotely seriously. You are a proven liar. I ask you how
I did and you say what test? Your positions, as if you ever gave any anyway, you are just a cheerleader, have absolutely no meaning It is quite obvious you are not here to debate what so ever.

Hey Counselor, you asked the question and now because nobody bought it, you're pulling it off the table? How very truthy of you.

 

[tmd2_1]

I know what happened on 911. You don't. What did I lie about?

You continue to lie and deny. You asked me to pick Molten steel out of 4 pictures. I did correctly. I asked you how I did on that little test. You say what test? But I guess that never happened.

 

[tmd2_1]

Hey Counselor, you asked the question and now because nobody bought it, you're pulling it off the table? How very truthy of you.

Pull what off the table? By saying go look at my initial thread?

 

[Edx]

It clearly is a tactic here focus and fixate and one thing repeat over and over again.

Sorry but every single claim you made has been done to death a billion times before on the forum.

The only way to get you truther spammers to accept you're wrong (ie . ones who who spam a whole load of points in one go) is to nail you down on specific points until you accept you are wrong about it, then move to the next. Winning an argument with a truther is already a foregone conclusion, getting them to realise they are wrong is reason we keep arguing with them.

When we have cleared up a specific claim we can move to the others. The "big picture" is made up of lots of specific facts, so if all your specific facts are nonsence then you have no case. Now, please explain why reports of molten steel are remarkable in a fire since I showed you plenty of times where people have reported this in other fires before and after 911.

 

[uke2se]

As I said I am not going down this road. All the evidence is in the initial post.

Lie. There is no evidence in the initial post.

It clearly is a tactic here focus and fixate and one thing repeat over and over again.

It is a tactic we use with everyone who uses the tactic of throwing muck at the wall to see what sticks. We look at each point in turn, debunking as we go.

Forgetting about all the information in the initial post.

There was no "information" in the initial post. Just crap.

Driving threads to no where so anyone that really wants to find useful information will have a hard time doing so. I will not do this.

You will not do it because having to stick to one subject and defend your position is impossible for you, and you know it. Dishonesty like this is common among all kinds of conspiracy believers, but is especially common with twoofers and creationists.

 

[uke2se]

You continue to lie and deny. You asked me to pick Molten steel out of 4 pictures. I did correctly. I asked you how I did on that little test. You say what test? But I guess that never happened.

You're the only one here who's lying, bud.

 

[BStrong]

Tmd's agenda didn't work out any better in the deleted thread than it's working here - here's my explanation of truthbots:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7429999&postcount=10511

 

[tmd2_1]

I dont want to agree to disagree, i want to know why you continue to believe that the passport is evidence it was planted. I want to also know why you think people reporting molten steel is remarkable in a fire, when this has happened in the exact same way many times before and since in other fires. I gave you a list with quotes from news reports, its hard to miss.

Listen, the passport is a non issue in terms of my initial thread. According to experts on both sides, you can look through threads here...molten steel will cast serious doubts to the official story. As it shouldn't have gotten hot enough to melt steel. Don't take my word for it, go look through other threads on this site.

 

[TJM]

Pull what off the table? By saying go look at my initial thread?

No, by saying "We're not getting started on this again". Your stock answer seems to be "go back and look" or "look at the link I posted".

It's the same debunked garbage, and your just going in circles.

 

[uke2se]

Listen, the passport is a non issue in terms of my initial thread.

No, it's not a non-issue in this thread. You have been proven wrong. Do you accept that the passport could have survived to be found or don't you?

According to experts on both sides,

There are no twoofer "experts".

you can look through threads here...molten steel will cast serious doubts to the official story. As it shouldn't have gotten hot enough to melt steel. Don't take my word for it, go look through other threads on this site.

It most likely wasn't molten steel.

 

[tmd2_1]

Lie. There is no evidence in the initial post.



It is a tactic we use with everyone who uses the tactic of throwing muck at the wall to see what sticks. We look at each point in turn, debunking as we go.



There was no "information" in the initial post. Just crap.



You will not do it because having to stick to one subject and defend your position is impossible for you, and you know it. Dishonesty like this is common among all kinds of conspiracy believers, but is especially common with twoofers and creationists.

No it is clearly a tactic I get asked the same question over and over, see the initial thread, it's all there.

 

[Edx]

Listen, the passport is a non issue in terms of my initial thread. According to experts on both sides, you can look through threads here...

Which means you cannot argue against my points, yet you believe you're right anyway.

molten steel will cast serious doubts to the official story. As it shouldn't have gotten hot enough to melt steel.

The point is that reports of molten steel is expected in a fire, i showed you plenty of other times people have reported molten steel in fires so how can you tell me that on 911 reports of molten steel mean something more than they did every other time its happened?

From that long list I gave you:

Massive fire engulfs several blocks of Ybor City
Boca Raton News (Associated Press) - May 20, 2000

Several blocks of historic Ybor City went up in flames Friday, wiping out a $30 million luxury apartment complex under construction and destroying a post office.

The massive six-alarm blaze, caused by a construction accident, melted steel girders on nearby construction projects and sent construction workers and postal employees fleeing from the inferno.

http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers...girders+on+nearby+construction+projects&hl=en

Don't take my word for it, go look through other threads on this site.

uuuh, if you had done that you'd have come away with a totally different impression to what you have

 

[tmd2_1]

No, it's not a non-issue in this thread. You have been proven wrong. Do you accept that the passport could have survived to be found or don't you?



There are no twoofer "experts".



It most likely wasn't molten steel.

I haven't been proven wrong of anything. I said there was such a small chance it was hardly quantifiable. Not impossible though. It's a non issue because i never mentioned it in my initial thread.

 

[uke2se]

No it is clearly a tactic I get asked the same question over and over, see the initial thread, it's all there.

I just told you it was a tactic:

It is a tactic we use with everyone who uses the tactic of throwing muck at the wall to see what sticks. We look at each point in turn, debunking as we go.

 

[tmd2_1]

No, by saying "We're not getting started on this again". Your stock answer seems to be "go back and look" or "look at the link I posted".

It's the same debunked garbage, and your just going in circles.

Why repeat myself?