Did you have to hit that hard?
Trouble in Conspiradroid Land
- Thread starter pomeroo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jim fetzer
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,936
You have a very odd definition of 'fact'.
Hint: Saying 'I say it is and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot' does not make something a fact'.
You know you do nothing to convince anyone, fence sitter or debunker alike, by making a grandiose statement like that, with nothing but uneducated opinion to back it up. Keep it up. With silly statements like that, we are winning the public over to reason, and away from your farce of a movement everyday.
TAM
What is the source of your expertise in controlled demolition? Please explain why no demolition experts, with the single exception of Danny Jowenko, agree with you. Jowenko, as you know, totally rejects the myth promoted by conspiracy liars that explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers.
Edited by Lisa Simpson:
Edited to remove inappropriate remark.
Last edited by a moderator:
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,354
Wrong. Good try though.
Amen, now you have made 90% of the posts in this forum pointless.
Oh hello again laurel to gravy's hardy.
Jowenko stated that its a CD yes or no?
Whether he subscribes to any theories or not is irrelevant, he probably does not want the hassle from you haters. makes sense
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2006
- Messages
- 7,474
jowenko has stated that WTC 1 and 2 were not CDs, yes or no?
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,936
Sorry bub, but in our case we can actually back up most of our statements.
What evidence do you have that WTC7 being brought down with explosives is a 'fact'.
I can think of several things that make your 'fact' rather weak before you even get started.
Miragememories
Banned
You know you do nothing to convince anyone, fence sitter or debunker alike, by making a grandiose statement like that, with nothing but uneducated opinion to back it up. Keep it up. With silly statements like that, we are winning the public over to reason, and away from your farce of a movement everyday.
TAM
Of course you are assuming you have a public.
MM
Jowenko's expertise begins and ends with demolition.
He states that wtc7 looks like a cd based upon the evidence presented to him.
He believes it was cd because he believes the US govt had the motive and the means to carry it out. That, however, is far outside of his area of expertise.
Therefore, Jowenko's support for the WTC7 cd is not based upon expert knowledge but is based upon a propensity towards woo.
Miragememories
Banned
Miragememories
Banned
Passing gas I'm sure would be a plausible explanation for anyone who has a hard time believing in controlled demolition.
MM
Miragememories
Banned
No, the collapses of the Twin Towers were not demolitions, according to Jowenko.
Why he holds his bizarre views on WTC 7 is a mystery, but an unimportant one. When NIST releases its comprehensive report this summer, conspiracy liars will reject it without reading it.
We rationalists hate the slanders you fantasists heap on the family members of the jihadists' victims. We hate your all-out assault on reason and logic. Fact-free scoundrels like yourself poison the public discourse with your pernicious falsehoods and then scamper off when challenged.
Remember, you're the bad guys and you will lose.
What?
Anyway, controlled demolition: lots of little explosions causing multiple flashes on the exterior of the building and very audible sounds.
WTC7: No visible multiple explosions or sounds of multiple explosion
Miragememories
Banned
Mindreading. That must be worth a cool million bucks eh Dave?
Danny Jowenko looked, he saw, he made his call.
He researched, he looked again, he made the same call.
Skeptics saw, got upset, put whatever lame spin they could on it!
Jowenko was still the expert...the skeptics were still the stubborn fools,
MM