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

tmd2_1 said:
You clearly are...in the first I say possibly molten steel...then all of a sudden it became I said it was found weeks later...how does that happen?
Click to expand...
So now you no longer believe Robertson saw molten steel?
 
tmd2_1 said:
You clearly are...in the first I say possibly molten steel...then all of a sudden it became I said it was found weeks later...how does that happen?
Click to expand...

You're referring to statements made claiming observations of molten steel weeks after the collapses. These are your source for the allegations that molten steel was present at the WTC, apart from the material seen falling from one of the towers that we are completely certain (because we have a working knowledge of thermal emission of hot metals) was not molten steel. You don't get to pretend that those accounts were made whenever you want them to have been made.

Dave
 
WildCat said:
You don't get it at all, do you? You are simultaneously arguing for massive amounts of thermite, and small amounts.

Have you ever heard the phrase "cogntive dissonance"? Because it describes you perfectly.

There are no such contradictions in The Official StoryTM, which is what makes it so much more likely than your impossible scenario requiring both massive amounts of thermite and small amounts at the same time.
Click to expand...

The official story has more contradictions, then I can even count. How am I arguing for both? I said I don't know. I would lean more towards less then more..but it's just a guess...see cole's video and what he was able to do. Don't bring up molten steel weeks later...I'm not saying that I clearly don't know...Robertson said that..so it up with him.
 
tmd2_1 said:
He uses exact WTC replicas.
Click to expand...

Notice how you ignored most of my post again? And that's the problem with people like you, reality is selective.

No he doesn't. He may get the overall proportional size correct, but he doesn't have teenie tiny bolts. He doesn't have teenie tiny trusses. He doesn't have a vast amount of materials used in the WTC. Do you know WTF a replica is?
 
Dave Rogers said:
You're referring to statements made claiming observations of molten steel weeks after the collapses. These are your source for the allegations that molten steel was present at the WTC, apart from the material seen falling from one of the towers that we are completely certain (because we have a working knowledge of thermal emission of hot metals) was not molten steel. You don't get to pretend that those accounts were made whenever you want them to have been made.

Dave
Click to expand...

You'd have to take that up with them. I don't know...simply saying IF there was...it could have been unreacted thermite.
 
tmd2_1 said:
What? you can watch the video..it is pouring out minutes before the south tower collapsed.
Click to expand...
So now we're back to massive amounts of thermite, thousands of pounds of it. You no longer support Cole's "small amount of thermite" theory, right? :rolleyes:
 
TMD:
How does that happen?
Click to expand...

WildCat said:
So now you no longer believe Robertson saw molten steel?
Click to expand...

Yeah...I think thats a problem TMD. We have all been asking that question of you for some time now.

WildCat said:
So now we're back to massive amounts of thermite, thousands of pounds of it. You no longer support Cole's "small amount of thermite" theory, right? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Told you!


grandmastershek said:
I can answer this. Its the one that suits a given premise at any given time.
Click to expand...

I think this may be a new form of cognitive bias. We can all it Gageria.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
The official story has more contradictions, then I can even count.
Click to expand...

Only because your fellow truthers keep making up new ones.

tmd2_1 said:
Don't bring up molten steel weeks later...I'm not saying that I clearly don't know...Robertson said that..so it up with him.
Click to expand...

Look, let me put this simply. There are accounts of people claiming to have seen molten steel weeks after the collapses. You can either argue that these are accurate, in which case you must be claiming that molten steel was present weeks after the collapses, or you can discount them as unreliable, in which case you can't claim there was molten steel there at any time. What you seem to be doing is saying you believe what they say they saw, but not when they say they saw it, which is just plain dishonest.

Dave
 
WildCat said:
So now we're back to massive amounts of thermite, thousands of pounds of it. You no longer support Cole's "small amount of thermite" theory, right? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Did you watch his video...look how little he uses and how much melts.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Only because your fellow truthers keep making up new ones.



Look, let me put this simply. There are accounts of people claiming to have seen molten steel weeks after the collapses. You can either argue that these are accurate, in which case you must be claiming that molten steel was present weeks after the collapses, or you can discount them as unreliable, in which case you can't claim there was molten steel there at any time. What you seem to be doing is saying you believe what they say they saw, but not when they say they saw it, which is just plain dishonest.

Dave
Click to expand...

Did you read this...You'd have to take that up with them. I don't know...simply saying IF there was...it could have been unreacted thermite.
 
tmd2_1 said:
The official story has more contradictions, then I can even count.
Click to expand...
Can you name a single one?

tmd2_1 said:
How am I arguing for both?
Click to expand...
You said Cole showed how a small amount of thermte can do the trick, and that's why no one noticed he thermite rections. Then you claimed the material flowing from the tower was steel melted by thermite, which requires a large amount. Then you claimed Robertson saw molten steel, a "little river" of it, 3 weeks after 9/11, once more requiring insanely huge amounts of thermite.

These claims cannot all be true.
 
tmd2_1 said:
What? you can watch the video..it is pouring out minutes before the south tower collapsed.
Click to expand...

I want the exact time of occurrence in meatspace, not your vague description of a recollection of when it happened relative to some other thing on an edited clip of some footage or another.

The time it happened. Please. This is your "case," your argument, you have to be prepared to defend your claims against cross examination.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Did you watch his video...look how little he uses and how much melts.
Click to expand...
The video you claim is molten steel shows a stream of it 5 feet wide or so and lasting for many seconds, more than Cole produces by an order of magnitude.

Do you know how much thermite it takes to melt 1 pound of steel?
 
WildCat said:
The video you claim is molten steel shows a stream of it 5 feet wide or so and lasting for many seconds, more than Cole produces by an order of magnitude.

Do you know how much thermite it takes to melt 1 pound of steel?
Click to expand...

See cole's video...lots of melting not much thermite.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Did you read this...You'd have to take that up with them. I don't know...simply saying IF there was...it could have been unreacted thermite.
Click to expand...

And we're trying to explain to you why it couldn't have been unreacted thermite, even if there was molten steel. The main reason is that it was too long after the collapse. That's the point you're continually trying to evade.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom