• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated Continuation - Why a one-way Crush down is not possible

TruthersLie said:
You are SOOOOO right. The physics are the same.



I mean it was just a steel plate against another flat steel plate. The steel plates should be fine right? Just flat steel against flat steel... with a aluminum car in between.

what happened to the steel bill? What happened at the 2 minute mark? huh?

oh the steel was bent to crap by the impact with a FLAT steel plate... oh and the aluminum car in between them.

You bring up the truther strawman that the steel in the towers was severed... it wasn't. the connecting bolts broke on the outer facings. BIG DIFFERNECE
Click to expand...

I love that video...that's the same make and model that I drive.

But where's the "jolt"? It MUST be fake!
 
Dave Rogers said:
The idea of Frank being one of our guys - or, indeed, one of anybody's guys - is laughable. Frank is very much his own man.

Dave
Click to expand...

Somebody mentioned that Greening was the co-author of a paper with Bazant which from my point of view puts him right back on the suspect list. So I listened to the Barrett/Greening interview again with a more critical ear. I realised that although Greening appeared to talk down NIST he did not really tell us anything we did not already know, and for the rest he was more or less onside with the government.

So perhaps i was right about him being one of you guys all along.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Somebody mentioned that Greening was the co-author of a paper with Bazant which from my point of view puts him right back on the suspect list. So I listened to the Barrett/Greening interview again with a more critical ear. I realised that although Greening appeared to talk down NIST he did not really tell us anything we did not already know, and for the rest he was more or less onside with the government.

So perhaps i was right about him being one of you guys all along.
Click to expand...

I was going to reply in detail to bill on this one, but the very nature of the post makes it clear how futile that would be. Therefore, let's just preserve this in amber as a perfect example of confirmation bias and circular logic in action. To bill, the credibility of a commentator depends purely on whether he agrees with bill's predetermined conclusion and nothing else; therefore, in bill's eyes, all credible commentators agree with him.

Bill, you can find Frank Greening posting as Dr. G over at The 9/11 Forum. I suggest you join that forum and inform him that he is a member of the JREF debunking fraternity. His response promises to be the most entertaining thing I'll have read this year.

Dave
 
bill smith said:
Somebody mentioned that Greening was the co-author of a paper with Bazant which from my point of view puts him right back on the suspect list. So I listened to the Barrett/Greening interview again with a more critical ear. I realised that although Greening appeared to talk down NIST he did not really tell us anything we did not already know, and for the rest he was more or less onside with the government.

So perhaps i was right about him being one of you guys all along.
Click to expand...

You're in your own little world, aren't you?
 
Dave Rogers said:
I was going to reply in detail to bill on this one, but the very nature of the post makes it clear how futile that would be. Therefore, let's just preserve this in amber as a perfect example of confirmation bias and circular logic in action. To bill, the credibility of a commentator depends purely on whether he agrees with bill's predetermined conclusion and nothing else; therefore, in bill's eyes, all credible commentators agree with him.

Bill, you can find Frank Greening posting as Dr. G over at The 9/11 Forum. I suggest you join that forum and inform him that he is a member of the JREF debunking fraternity. His response promises to be the most entertaining thing I'll have read this year.

Dave
Click to expand...

The credibility of a commentator to me is measured by whether he is a Shill or not Dave. No more- no less. I am not one of those who is asking whether 9/11 was an inside job or not. I know that 9/11 was an inside job.
 
bill smith said:
It's not like I have't said it plenty of times before. I am surprised that you were still labouring under some kind of delusion about it.
Click to expand...

Incidentally do you have a link to the forum you mentioned where Frank Greening posts ?
 
bill smith said:
The credibility of a commentator to me is measured by whether he is a Shill or not Dave. No more- no less. I am not one of those who is asking whether 9/11 was an inside job or not. I know that 9/11 was an inside job.
Click to expand...

bill, in your expert opinion, what percentage of the world's scientists and engineers are actively shilling for the NWO? How many are too afraid to speak up? How many are honest?

BTW, it's impossible to know something that isn't true. One may delude himself enough to convince himself that it is true. Which is precisely the case with you and every other twoofer in the world.
 
dtugg said:
bill, in your expert opinion, what percentage of the world's scientists and engineers are actively shilling for the NWO? How many are too afraid to speak up? How many are honest?

BTW, it's impossible to know something that isn't true. One may delude himself enough to convince himself that it is true. Which is precisely the case with you and every other twoofer in the world.
Click to expand...

Kevin Barrett described a visit to a University in Madison I think t was where 1,000 invitatons were issued for a 9/11 debate with Barrett and Kevin Ryan. Everybody got one incuding all the engineering departments but nobody would appear to defend the governent fairy tale. So Ryan had to play the government side while Barrett layed the Truth side. What a loke. Apparently this happens everywhere.It's fascinating actually.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Kevin Barrett described a visit to a University in Madison I think t was where 1,000 invitatons were issued for a 9/11 debate with Barrett and Kevin Ryan. Everybody got one incuding all the engineering departments but nobody would appear to defend the governent fairy tale. So Ryan had to play the government side while Barrett layed the Truth side. What a loke. Apparently this happens everywhere.It's fascinating actually.
Click to expand...

1) You didn't answer the question, twoofer.

2) There is no reason whatsoever to believe a word Kevin Barrett says.

3) Even if it's true, all it means is that nobody felt like debated a couple twoofer whackjobs.
 
dtugg said:
1) You didn't answer the question, twoofer.

2) There is no reason whatsoever to believe a word Kevin Barrett says.

3) Even if it's true, all it means is that nobody felt like debated a couple twoofer whackjobs.
Click to expand...

You mean all those scientists are pouting ? lol
 
What the hell are you talking about? You have serious issues if you are actually like this in real life.
 
dtugg said:
What the hell are you talking about? You have serious issues if you are actually like this in real life.
Click to expand...

I forgot to mention that Barrett and Ryan got some private messages from some of the faculty scientists saying that it would be more than their jobs and careers were worth to appear. Interesting isn't it ?
 
bill smith said:
I forgot to mention that Barrett and Ryan got some private messages from some of the faculty scientists saying that it would be more than their jobs and careers were worth to appear. Interesting isn't it ?
Click to expand...

Again, there is no reason whatsover to believe a word that those whackjobs say.
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, bill, I have never suffered from the delusion that you are prepared to reconsider your conclusions in the light of available evidence.

Dave
Click to expand...

[Sigh]....Dave, you don't have any evidence. George Bushes's word is absolutely not enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom