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

tmd2_1 said:
Because generally things like this happen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8
Click to expand...


Things like what, you post an irrelevant video to what i said as a dodge? You just illustrated my point.

This kind of tactic really doesn't help you any, in fact it sinks you further...

It's seems plain as day to me that if any of you 911 kooks really had all what you claim, you would actually be doing something about it through serious channels, not just trolling the internet like pompous fools, having little pathetic rallies, and passing out pamphlets on street corners, doing all sorts of things that cults do.
 
Last edited:
The Platypus said:
Things like what, you post an irrelevant video to what i said as a dodge? You just illustrated my point.

This kind of tactic really doesn't help you any, in fact it sinks you further...

It's seems plain as day to me that if any of you 911 kooks really had all what you claim, you would actually be doing something about it through serious channels, not just trolling the internet like pompous fools, having little pathetic rallies, and passing out pamphlets on street corners, doing all sorts of things that cults do.
Click to expand...

It's been ten years. If the twoofies really do have this devastating information,why are the 'real' culprits not in jail?
 
tmd2_1 said:
As far as Cole's work being shoddy I know of no one who has proved
Click to expand...

He tried to reproduce the conditions of the debris pile. If he experimented to do that, he needed to understand the conditions in the debris pile as clearly as possible; how hot were the fires, what fuels, how long did it burn, the atmospheric conditions surrounding the samples?

Did he get a similar result? What conditions were required for him to get a similar result? How long did it take? Under what conditions?

Physical experimentation seeking the same result needs to as accurately as possible simulate the conditions of the debris pile, something Cole only tries to meet part way and half-assed. Half-assed experimentation leads to half-assed results. If you want anyone to do an experiment to "prove him wrong" then first have him do his experiment right so that the results can be discussed.

Took me less than 30 seconds to understand what conditions need to be taken into account for any result to provide viable answers. You're Mr Cole" fails to account for more than half of them. Give me a reason to trust the results of an experiment that doesn't even consider the inputs required?
 
Grizzly Bear said:
He tried to reproduce the conditions of the debris pile. If he experimented to do that, he needed to understand the conditions in the debris pile as clearly as possible; how hot were the fires, what fuels, how long did it burn, the atmospheric conditions surrounding the samples?

Did he get a similar result? What conditions were required for him to get a similar result? How long did it take? Under what conditions?

Physical experimentation seeking the same result needs to as accurately as possible simulate the conditions of the debris pile, something Cole only tries to meet part way and half-assed. Half-assed experimentation leads to half-assed results. If you want anyone to do an experiment to "prove him wrong" then first have him do his experiment right so that the results can be discussed.

Took me less than 30 seconds to understand what conditions need to be taken into account for any result to provide viable answers. You're Mr Cole" fails to account for more than half of them. Give me a reason to trust the results of an experiment that doesn't even consider the inputs required?
Click to expand...

Do any experiment Frank Greening and Ryan Mackey said should be done. To my knowledge Cole is the only one who did anything. What about the flashes both the NIST report said was there and an eyewitness saw?
 
tmd2_1 said:
Do any experiment Frank Greening and Ryan Mackey said should be done. To my knowledge Cole is the only one who did anything. What about the flashes both the NIST report said was there and an eyewitness saw?
Click to expand...

You should be on the other side of the world by now,judging by the depth of the hole that you are digging. Stop. I am getting embarrased in your place,and that takes a lot of doing.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
To my knowledge Cole is the only one who did anything.
Click to expand...
And I give him credit for actually doing something. He gets a few very basic things right; and it beats Richard Gage's card board box "experiment" by a million fold. His experiment however is still shoddy as he doesn't accurately represent the series of conditions that the sample experienced, and his result thus does nothing to confirm or deny the best explanation put forward, which has nothing to do with thermite.
 
Last edited:
I don't see any significance in the "flashes" either. If those are supposed to be explosives going off, then there will a huge set of evidence accompanying those reports, i.e. barotrauma, shrapnel injury, blast trauma of varying degrees, symptoms that generally match with close proximity to explosive detonations and were not part of any injury documented during the entirety of the event.

This was an uncontrolled environment, with no precautions in place there is no way you could have had explosives going off in the middle of an urban setting without seeing some form of injury to match. There are documented incidents of bystanders being seriously injured or killed in controlled demolitions, albeit rare, when the safety precautions were inadequate.

Grizzly Bear said:
And I give him credit for actually doing something. He gets a few very basic things right; and it beats Richard Gage's card board box "experiment" by a million fold. His experiment however is still shoddy as he doesn't accurately represent the series of conditions that the sample experienced, and his result thus does nothing to confirm or deny the best explanation put forward, which has nothing to do with thermite.
Click to expand...


To add: If he'd matched the conditions more closely he could have established several things; he could have found that the sample was actually created by a eutectic reaction and intergranular melting (not thermite) and confirmed it is a feasible explanation. If he didn't get a similar result he could have done one of two things:

- found an alternative cause other than thermite that would have corrected the NIST, or added another possible cause
- found that the result cannot have been caused at all, requiring investigation into something else

The lack of proper procedure means his experiments do none of the above
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
I don't see any significance in the "flashes" either.
Click to expand...

Don't you get it? Intermittent flashes are signs of thermite. These quick varying flashes were due to the thermite that burned for weeks. Because while thermite is an explosive as per the water boy, it also burns forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom