The TruthSeeker1234 $1000.00 Challenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
TS1289, I want specifics. This will not be a book as the price is way, way under the standard.
Click to expand...

I'm not asking my co-author to give up his/her share of authorship. The $1000 is just for accepting the challenge. It is a 50/50 co-write. There is no publishing deal in place, I have never done a book publishing deal before. I have, however, done a great many publishing deals. I'll begin negotiating specifics privately with anyone who drops me an email.

[email protected]

serious inquiries only please

I think the smartest thing is to have the debate offline. I suppose either party could have the right to post updates here, or anywhere, for the peanut gallery. But perhaps not. It might be to our mutual self-interest to keep it secret while it's going on. I'm not sure. This is a point that can be negotiated. I'm willing to take all sorts of input on how to structure the thing so that it is fair and mutually agreeable.

The only non-negotiable points are:

1) my co-author will begin the debate by advancing the positive case, as stated from the outset.
2) there will be equal time
3) there will be pictures and (for the online version) videos
4) when it's done, we will co-own it.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
I'm not asking my co-author to give up his/her share of authorship. The $1000 is just for accepting the challenge. It is a 50/50 co-write. There is no publishing deal in place, I have never done a book publishing deal before. I have, however, done a great many publishing deals. I'll begin negotiating specifics privately with anyone who drops me an email.

[email protected]

serious inquiries only please

I think the smartest thing is to have the debate offline. I suppose either party could have the right to post updates here, or anywhere, for the peanut gallery. But perhaps not. It might be to our mutual self-interest to keep it secret while it's going on. I'm not sure. This is a point that can be negotiated. I'm willing to take all sorts of input on how to structure the thing so that it is fair and mutually agreeable.

The only non-negotiable points are:

1) my co-author will begin the debate by advancing the positive case, as stated from the outset.
2) there will be equal time
3) there will be pictures and (for the online version) videos
4) when it's done, we will co-own it.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing this would be your best approach.
 
Let's see. A guy links the NIST homepage.

I link the Scholars for 9/11 truth homepage.

What kind of debate is that? That would be very stupid. I want someone who can explain the NIST report to curious laypeople. That is your challenge. Put it in your own words, cite your sources, and spell it out for the audience. Most people don't even know what the official story is, except that Suicidal hijackers did it with jet crashes and fires.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Let's see. A guy links the NIST homepage.

I link the Scholars for 9/11 truth homepage.

What kind of debate is that? That would be very stupid. I want someone who can explain the NIST report to curious laypeople. That is your challenge. Put it in your own words, cite your sources, and spell it out for the audience. Most people don't even know what the official story is, except that Suicidal hijackers did it with jet crashes and fires.
Click to expand...

No, no.

There you go, moving the goalposts again.

You're the one who said you would "DEMOLISH" the argument - so get to it.
 
A number of people have suggested I start the debate myself. Tell you what. I'll start throwing down the official story as I understand it, and you all feel free to correct me, and fill in the missing numbers, flesh things out, etc. Then whoever does finally come forawrd to accept the challenge will have a nice starting point for their actual opening argument.

Let's see.

On September 11, at xxxxxx am a 767 piloted by xxxxxxxxx crashed into the north tower at about floor xx. x number of perimeter columns were severed, and the shattered plane stripped a lot of insulation off of steel supports. The was a huge fire ball which ignited an intense fire on floors xx-xx. Meanwhile, at xxxx am a second jet crashed into the south tower, xx columns were severed. etc.

Insert quotes and pictures from NIST fire study here.

Eventually the floor trusses began sagging and pulling inwards on both the perimeter and core columns.

Insert photo of bowing perimeter columns.

FInally the blah blah columns gave way in such and such a manner, causing the top xx floors of WTC2 south tower to crash down like a giant sledge hammer onto the damaged structure below. While the building was designed to withstand great static load, the dynamic load was too much, and global collapse ensued.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Let's see. A guy links the NIST homepage.

I link the Scholars for 9/11 truth homepage.

What kind of debate is that? That would be very stupid. I want someone who can explain the NIST report to curious laypeople. That is your challenge. Put it in your own words, cite your sources, and spell it out for the audience. Most people don't even know what the official story is, except that Suicidal hijackers did it with jet crashes and fires.
Click to expand...

Excuse number 1

Next.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A number of people have suggested I start the debate myself. Tell you what. I'll start throwing down the official story as I understand it, and you all feel free to correct me, and fill in the missing numbers, flesh things out, etc. Then whoever does finally come forawrd to accept the challenge will have a nice starting point for their actual opening argument.

Let's see.

On September 11, at xxxxxx am a 767 piloted by xxxxxxxxx crashed into the north tower at about floor xx. x number of perimeter columns were severed, and the shattered plane stripped a lot of insulation off of steel supports. The was a huge fire ball which ignited an intense fire on floors xx-xx. Meanwhile, at xxxx am a second jet crashed into the south tower, xx columns were severed. etc.

Insert quotes and pictures from NIST fire study here.

Eventually the floor trusses began sagging and pulling inwards on both the perimeter and core columns.

Insert photo of bowing perimeter columns.

FInally the blah blah columns gave way in such and such a manner, causing the top xx floors of WTC2 south tower to crash down like a giant sledge hammer onto the damaged structure below. While the building was designed to withstand great static load, the dynamic load was too much, and global collapse ensued.
Click to expand...

Yet another dodge, BS1234.

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, the debate has been commenced in the manner that you prescribed.

Now, get to your "demolition" of it and stop screwing around.

It's waiting.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65027
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A number of people have suggested I start the debate myself. Tell you what. I'll start throwing down the official story as I understand it, and you all feel free to correct me, and fill in the missing numbers, flesh things out, etc. Then whoever does finally come forawrd to accept the challenge will have a nice starting point for their actual opening argument.

Let's see.

On September 11, at xxxxxx am a 767 piloted by xxxxxxxxx crashed into the north tower at about floor xx. x number of perimeter columns were severed, and the shattered plane stripped a lot of insulation off of steel supports. The was a huge fire ball which ignited an intense fire on floors xx-xx. Meanwhile, at xxxx am a second jet crashed into the south tower, xx columns were severed. etc.

Insert quotes and pictures from NIST fire study here.

Eventually the floor trusses began sagging and pulling inwards on both the perimeter and core columns.

Insert photo of bowing perimeter columns.

FInally the blah blah columns gave way in such and such a manner, causing the top xx floors of WTC2 south tower to crash down like a giant sledge hammer onto the damaged structure below. While the building was designed to withstand great static load, the dynamic load was too much, and global collapse ensued.
Click to expand...

Excuse number 2

Next.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Most people don't even know what the official story is, except that Suicidal hijackers did it with jet crashes and fires.
Click to expand...
i think your one of those "most people"

TruthSeeker1234 said:
On September 11, at xxxxxx am a 767 piloted by xxxxxxxxx crashed into the north tower at about floor xx. x number of perimeter columns were severed, and the shattered plane stripped a lot of insulation off of steel supports. The was a huge fire ball which ignited an intense fire on floors xx-xx. Meanwhile, at xxxx am a second jet crashed into the south tower, xx columns were severed. etc.

Insert quotes and pictures from NIST fire study here.

Eventually the floor trusses began sagging and pulling inwards on both the perimeter and core columns.

Insert photo of bowing perimeter columns.

FInally the blah blah columns gave way in such and such a manner, causing the top xx floors of WTC2 south tower to crash down like a giant sledge hammer onto the damaged structure below. While the building was designed to withstand great static load, the dynamic load was too much, and global collapse ensued.
Click to expand...
 
He just wants someone to summarize the NIST report so he doesn't have to read it. Buy the Cliff's Notes, TS.
 
Gravy, I haven't heard back from you on my special offer to you. Remember, I buy you a plane ticket and a hotel room and give you $100 to debate me on TV?
 
Most people don't even know what the official story is, except that Suicidal hijackers did it with jet crashes and fires. i think your one of those "most people"
Click to expand...

OK, straighten me out. What is the official story these days? I know it has changed several times, which is not in and of itself sinsiter. If new data or reasoning become available over time, it is reasonable for the explanation to change. Still, I'm waiting for someone to agree to write a total of about 50 pages. Anything less, and I will not have an opportunity to make my case.

Everybody keeps saying that my offer has been accepted, but I can't figure out who. Let me check my email and see if anybody is there.
 
Gravy said:
He just wants someone to summarize the NIST report so he doesn't have to read it. Buy the Cliff's Notes, TS.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He isn't capable of understanding the NIST report unless it's broken down for him into bite-sized pieces and someone helps him with the big words and the spelling.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
OK, straighten me out. What is the official story these days? I know it has changed several times, which is not in and of itself sinsiter. If new data or reasoning become available over time, it is reasonable for the explanation to change. Still, I'm waiting for someone to agree to write a total of about 50 pages. Anything less, and I will not have an opportunity to make my case.

Everybody keeps saying that my offer has been accepted, but I can't figure out who. Let me check my email and see if anybody is there.
Click to expand...

You are such a liar.

Your offer was accepted in this very thread, as you well know.

And your debate has been started for you in accordance with your terms, as you well know.

Funny, you still haven't taken up on it. Here it is, again:

It's waiting.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65027

Go to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom