Mark Roberts Interview on Skeptic Zone

[Gravy]

Ok, this thread should probably end. When a truther is making these statements:

then I think it's time to realize we are dealing with an irrational mind, and therefore argument is impossible.

That's a good realization, but the answer isn't to end the thread. Others may make positive contributions (I just posted a link that may be of interest to people).

The answer is to disengage with people who bring nothing to the table and who show no desire or ability to learn.

 

[Pardalis]

The answer is to disengage with people who bring nothing to the table and who show no desire or ability to learn.

I still think engaging them exposes their own lack of reasoning, like here:

And when building codes will be changed, alot experts will take a closer look at the theory where those changes are based on.

If the NIST has made recommendations which have been implemented, and more of them will be applied with the WTC 7 report, then this means that their findings have been accepted by the engineering community.

If there was a cover-up, it would instantly be known that the NIST's findings are flawed, and lies. If the NIST is part of a conspiracy, they wouldn't have made recommendations, because that would give them away.

The fact that DC can't see that contradiction shows his cognitive dissonance.

 

[Gravy]

I still think engaging them exposes their own lack of reasoning, like here:

I'm not familiar with DC's posting history. If you've seen improvement, great.

But in most cases truthers these days show themselves to be immune to reason within a very short time. Debunkers do them, and their conspiracy workshop, a great favor by continuing to engage with them. Starve them of attention and they wither and blow away.

 

[tomwaits]

I'm not familiar with DC's posting history. If you've seen improvement, great.

But in most cases truthers these days show themselves to be immune to reason within a very short time. Debunkers do them, and their conspiracy workshop, a great favor by continuing to engage with them. Starve them of attention and they wither and blow away.

Indeed. Before the days of the internet, the Conspiracy Theorist would be a Dale Gribble (ahem...Rusty Shackleford) type: sitting in a dark room posting newspaper articles all over his desk and reading books by Jim Marrs trying to "connect the dots". Once the internet became widespread, CTists from all over the world are able to get together and reinforce their beliefs.

 

[RedIbis]

Fair enough. You sure are no "RedIbis", you actually answer questions and have some thought in your messages
Now if I only could get e.g. RedIbis' answer to these same questions (it's safe to ask without fearing an OT discussion, because no discussion will ensue...)

Now what was this thread about again...

You seem to have forgotten this:

Originally Posted by RedIbis
NIST's WTC 7 collapse theory.

KTB:
Ok, thanks. Nice to get an answer.

 

[RedIbis]

The events of 9/11 were unique, and it's probably not feasible to design all tall buildings to cope with such extraordinary circumstances. The features of the new WTC 7 would probably prevent its collapse during circumstances like 9/11, but fly an airliner into it and all bets are off.

Fire Safety Engineering and the Performance of Structural Steel in Fires, Building Code Changes

I know you won't respond because you have me on ignore, and I wouldn't doubt you've sent PMs asking your friends to avoid quoting me, but I just can't let stuff like this go by without a comment.

Are you honestly suggesting that airplane impact is not a consideration when designing skyscrapers?

 

[dtugg]

If you ask me a direct, non rhetorical question, in which you are sincerely interested in the answer, I will respond in kind.

Around here, I get bombarded with disingenuous rhetorical questions, when there is little or no attempt to adress the questions I ask.

In another thread, you said that you have a theory about WTC7 that is better than NIST's. What is your theory and what evidence do you have to support it?

This is a direct, non-rhetorical question and I am sincerely interested in the answer. If you do not answer, or just ignore me, you are a liar.

 

[HyJinX]

I know you won't respond because you have me on ignore, and I wouldn't doubt you've sent PMs asking your friends to avoid quoting me, but I just can't let stuff like this go by without a comment.

Are you honestly suggesting that airplane impact is not a consideration when designing skyscrapers?

I don't believe that Mark is suggesting that at all (though I can't speak for him). It wouldn't be feasible or cost effective to design all tall buildings to cope with fully fuel loaded passenger airliners, cruising at 500+ mph, smash into them. In fact, I doubt there's even a way to design a building to cope with such force...and if there was...the costs would more than likely be astounding. Again...this is simply my opinion and my interpretation of what Gravy was implying.

 

[DavidJames]

Are you honestly suggesting that airplane impact is not a consideration when designing skyscrapers?

What you need to do (yes you)is find out if airplane impact is a consideration. Can you do that Red? Will you do that Red?

Edit. Please do not respond with a question or snarky answer. Just answer the questions with a yes or no answer, it's really that simple.

 

[RedIbis]

What you need to do (yes you)is find out if airplane impact is a consideration. Can you do that Red? Will you do that Red?

Edit. Please do not respond with a question or snarky answer. Just answer the questions with a yes or no answer, it's really that simple.

Yes.




Can you?

 

[mchapman]

I'm not familiar with DC's posting history. If you've seen improvement, great.
But in most cases truthers these days show themselves to be immune to reason within a very short time. Debunkers do them, and their conspiracy workshop, a great favor by continuing to engage with them. Starve them of attention and they wither and blow away.

If you have seen improvement great????


What exactly does gravy think this place is? Its a discussion forum, nobody here is any better than anyone else.

 

[DavidJames]

Yes.




Can you?

Yes, I could as well, but that's irrelevant as I'm not the one who believes the U.S. government is complicit in the murder of 3000 people, that would be you Red. YOU. If I was under such an impression, and asked the questions (two Red, I asked you TWO), I would have answered the second one Yes. I would not have blown it off, run away and hid, so to speak.

Here is one simple question Red.

Will you do research and find out if airplane impact is a consideration when designing skyscrapers?

 

[RedIbis]

Yes, I could as well, but that's irrelevant as I'm not the one who believes the U.S. government is complicit in the murder of 3000 people, that would be you Red. YOU. If I was under such an impression, and asked the questions (two Red, I asked you TWO), I would have answered the second one Yes. I would not have blown it off, run away and hid, so to speak.

Here is one simple question Red.

Will you do research and find out if airplane impact is a consideration when designing skyscrapers?

Yes I have. Have you?

This is truly one of the more bizarre exchanges I've had on jref.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

What you need to do (yes you)is find out if airplane impact is a consideration. Can you do that Red? Will you do that Red?

Edit. Please do not respond with a question or snarky answer. Just answer the questions with a yes or no answer, it's really that simple.

Yes.

There were two questions in DavidJames' post, RedIbis. Which one did you answer?

 

[WildCat]

Yes I have.

And did this "research" consist of actually contacting architects and engineers who design tall buildings, or did it comprise of surfing truther sites and asking friends and family about it?

If the former, what did you learn, and from who?

 

[RedIbis]

And did this "research" consist of actually contacting architects and engineers who design tall buildings, or did it comprise of surfing truther sites and asking friends and family about it?

If the former, what did you learn, and from who?

I didn't have to ask family members, but if I did, I'd ask my brother who is an architect or my cousin who was a contractor in the city for over 30 years and did work for Larry Silverstein. I mention this incidentally. I could not care less whether you believe me and I have zero intention of providing you with any information regarding my family.

That said, it's not that hard to find out if skyscrapers are designed to withstand the impact of airplanes. You could do it too if you'd only try.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I didn't have to ask family members, but if I did, I'd ask my brother who is an architect or my cousin who was a contractor in the city for over 30 years and did work for Larry Silverstein. I mention this incidentally. I could not care less whether you believe me and I have zero intention of providing you with any information regarding my family.

That said, it's not that hard to find out if skyscrapers are designed to withstand the impact of airplanes. You could do it too if you'd only try.

WildCat's question was pretty direct, RedIbis, and hardly rhetorical. Why did you not answer it?

ETA: You've claimed to have researched the likelihood of skyscrapers being designed with aircraft impact in mind. What sources did you consult, and for which buildings?

 

[WildCat]

WildCat's question was pretty direct, RedIbis, and hardly rhetorical. Why did you not answer it?

He's too embarrassed to admit all he did was read conspiracy web sites.

 

[RedIbis]

Seriously, you guys can't actually find out whether or not skyscrapers are designed to withstand airplane impact?

Seriously?

 

[DavidJames]

In the seven years I've been a member of this forum, I've never encountered a poster as disingenuous the RedIbis. I can deal with trolls, I can deal with the normal ignorant and arrogant CTist. I have never put anyone on ignore. I've always felt, despite my disagreement there was always potential to glean something.

Perhaps information, or perhaps it would be a nuanced perspective on a belief of mine.

Maybe it's simply enjoying the rhetoric or give and take of debate, even debates between the knowledgeable and the ignorant.

Sometimes it's simply to feel the grin and smile I get from the stundie level of discourse provided by the CTists.

But I'm done with you RedIbis. You provide zero value. You bring nothing to the debate. Heck, you don't even have the ability to produce a stundie.

Edit: Welcome to Ignore, long overdue.