Merged So there was melted steel

[abaddon]

Why?

Why indeed. Who needs to interview witnesses when you can simply make stuff up at your keyboard.

 

[ergo]

To find evidence to back the truther assertions, something tangible and hard, thing is that is not likely to ever happen because the truther position is a complete fantasy in the first place.

So you don't believe there was melted steel at the pile?

 

[LSSBB]

So you don't believe there was melted steel at the pile?

Do you believe there was, without any validation?

Being a skeptic doesn't pay well per se, however I assure you it does come with other benefits.

 

[DGM]

So you don't believe there was melted steel at the pile?

What difference would it make? We all agree there were high temperatures.

Nothing outside of a fire with plenty of fuel and air.

This is a prime example of the quote in my signature. Unless you can show how any of this supports your position, it's just playing games keeping the conversation alive (with no hope of end in sight).

 

[ergo]

Do you believe there was, without any validation?

Why would you doubt it?

 

[LSSBB]

Why would you doubt it?

Why not? What should I take at face value? NIST?

 

[ergo]

Why not? What should I take at face value? NIST?

Do you have any scientific basis upon which to doubt reports of melted steel at Ground Zero?

 

[LSSBB]

Do you have any scientific basis upon which to doubt reports of melted steel at Ground Zero?

I have a forensic basis. There is nothing to corroborate their story.

Why does it matter? We had a whole thread discussing where it was a given that there was rivers of melted steel, and what answers were supplied? What was the conclusion of that? If you'd like, go ahead and hop on that thread. I supplied the link earlier.

Right now, you have nothing to back up reports of melted steel, so you are beating a horse that was dead years ago. Por favor, no más.

 

[ergo]

I have a forensic basis. There is nothing to corroborate their story.

Lots of information about 9/11 is not available to the general public.

Why would you need the reports corroborated?

 

[beachnut]

Lots of information about 9/11 is not available to the general public. ...?

Source it, and give us a list. Make it relative to melted steel. Good luck. Does the simile of melted steel have you lost in the inside job fantasy?

 

[ergo]

Source it, and give us a list. Make it relative to melted steel. Good luck. Does the simile of melted steel have you lost in the inside job fantasy?

Lol. "Source" unavailable information. That's bedunker thinkin' for you.

 

[twinstead]

Lol. "Source" unavailable information. That's bedunker thinkin' for you.

Assume that there is evidence to support your position, but claim it's part of the 'secret' information that's unavailable, which explains why there's no evidence to support your position. That's truther thinkin' for you

 

[ergo]

There's lots of information not available to the public. That's the subject of a different thread.

Twinstead, why would you doubt the reports of melted steel at the pile? Are there eyewitness reports documented anywhere raising doubts about the presence of melted steel at the WTC?

 

[tsig]

Lots of information about 9/11 is not available to the general public.

Why would you need the reports corroborated?

If it's not available to the general public how do you know it?

 

[ergo]

Are there eyewitness reports anywhere that legitimately raise doubts about the presence of melted steel at the WTC?

 

[DGM]

Are there eyewitness reports anywhere that legitimately raise doubts about the presence of melted steel at the WTC?

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

 

[DGM]

If it's not available to the general public how do you know it?

There has to be, how else could he explain no evidence to support his conspiracies.

 

[LSSBB]

There's lots of information not available to the public. That's the subject of a different thread.

Twinstead, why would you doubt the reports of melted steel at the pile? Are there eyewitness reports documented anywhere raising doubts about the presence of melted steel at the WTC?

Yes, there are many angels in heaven. We just can't see them. Someone is holding out on us, undoubtedly.

 

[ergo]

Yes, there are many angels in heaven. We just can't see them. Someone is holding out on us, undoubtedly.

So you're equating beliefs about angels in heaven with reports of melted steel in the WTC rubble? Why?

Would you similarly doubt reports of burnt carpet or dismembered bodies? Would that be akin to claiming there were unicorns in the pile?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Got witness testimony? Good... I'm interested in verification. Got thermite in the debris pile melting steel 3 months after the buildings fell? Good... I'm interested in verification that it was involved in the collapse mechanism. I suppose if truthers want to bend over backwards one could argue to the extreme that the termite was SOMEHOW secretly planted inside the building despite all the oods against it and, it was "ready to be deployed" at any time... except then we have to go with the real collapse mechanisms that were present... That means... no columns from the impact zone were found with cuts to the structure consistent with thermite, or trauma from explosives... and no building occupants were injured by the detonation of anything...

Take the case to court to convict someone of covertly planting devices and you're going to lose because all you have is quote mined testimony, and specious conjecture that eve if "true" doesn't have sufficient backing to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the collapses were a direct result of those things... the best one might get is "conspiracy to commit" but still a far cry from the true act...

Hasn't this set in yet after 12 years of repetition?