Page 28 of 31 FirstFirst ... 182122232425262728293031 LastLast
Results 352 to 364 of 396
  1. #352
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Woburn, MA
    Posts
    6,649
    Well, using that logic we cannot really be sure whether or not all of 9/11 was accomplished by someone with magical powers, can we?

    We can go anywhere once we proceed down that road.

    That's why science and logic have rules. To help guide us through such messes.

    In any case, saw the video, and I've seen it before. Nothing new.

    It does seem, however, that you are ignoring some plain photo evidence at the pentagon.

    I'm a little busy with work atm, but I'll get to it.
    "Social networking" is an oxymoron.

  2. #353
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by scrogdog View Post
    Well, using that logic we cannot really be sure whether or not all of 9/11 was accomplished by someone with magical powers, can we?

    We can go anywhere once we proceed down that road.

    That's why science and logic have rules. To help guide us through such messes.

    In any case, saw the video, and I've seen it before. Nothing new.

    It does seem, however, that you are ignoring some plain photo evidence at the pentagon.

    I'm a little busy with work atm, but I'll get to it.
    Well, it’s been nearly fifty years and we still do not have a clue how they pulled off the murder and cover-up of the JFK assignation do we? Are you suggesting they used “magical powers?”

    Science alone cannot solve if, how and to what extent other parties were involved or aware of this attack. Science was not even invited to study the debris like they are with any other possible building attack. I bet they were invited to our recent embassy attack to determine where those bombs originated from.

    You say you saw that video of those officers and workers who saw Flight 77 fly right over their heads on a different flight path. Well, are they all delusional?

    As for photo evidence you have to be kidding. You are satisfied with that crappy, still photo of a blast that was released by the Pentagon when much, much more video is available and not being released. Heck, it doesn’t even show an identifiable plane. Why not release the real video from their rooftop or from nearby businesses that they confiscated? Next you are going to say the Warren Commission did an outstanding job.

  3. #354
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Woburn, MA
    Posts
    6,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    Well, it’s been nearly fifty years and we still do not have a clue how they pulled off the murder and cover-up of the JFK assignation do we? Are you suggesting they used “magical powers?”
    No, I am simply saying that what you ask us to consider possible is akin to suggesting magic exists. Can I prove it doesn't? No. But I can say that there is no evidence to suggest that it does, so it is not worth considering.

    Science alone cannot solve if, how and to what extent other parties were involved or aware of this attack. Science was not even invited to study the debris like they are with any other possible building attack. I bet they were invited to our recent embassy attack to determine where those bombs originated from.
    I said that science AND logic have rules. Things to do not present something tangible to study cannot be tackled by science. But lots of intangibles can be the subject of philosophy and logic. There is one logic exercise (sorry, forget what the technique is called) where it follows that if A is true, and if B is true, then it MUST be the case that C is true.

    None of A, B or C need be tangible "things".

    You say you saw that video of those officers and workers who saw Flight 77 fly right over their heads on a different flight path. Well, are they all delusional?
    No, but we have gone over the usefulness of first person accounts in other topics. Consider this, Brian. In other conversations you have suggested that first person accounts should be seen similar to how they work in a court of law. There is just one problem with that view. In court, one is under oath and subject to severe penalty if caught in perjury.

    What are the bad things that happen to people who lie on youtube?

    Can you seriously deny that some people will say or do anything to get their moment of fame? This is exactly why we even catch scientists lying at times. But that's also why we have rules and processes as they help weed out the charlatans. There is no such system of checks and balance on you tube.

    So, based on a video where there is no way to determine whether or not they are glory grabbing liars, you then proclaim NTSB as liars using a COMPLETELY arbitrary method that has no rules or standards to show why one is good information and the other not.

    As for photo evidence you have to be kidding. You are satisfied with that crappy, still photo of a blast that was released by the Pentagon when much, much more video is available and not being released. Heck, it doesn’t even show an identifiable plane. Why not release the real video from their rooftop or from nearby businesses that they confiscated? Next you are going to say the Warren Commission did an outstanding job.
    See, this is exactly why I would not trust a truther with "evidence" any further than I could throw them. Clearly you have not honestly and impartially reviewed the MANY photos that CLEARLY show aircraft debris, both in and out of the pentagon.

    That lack of impartial review (also known as not hearing what you do not wish to hear or seeing what you don't wish to see), coupled with AN INTENTIONALLY DOCTORED PHOTO submitted as evidence on not one, but many truther sites, leads me to the conclusion that truthers as a whole use the same dishonest techniques that they accuse others of. They can't be trusted. Yes, I am doing the same thing lawyers sometimes do in court, establishing that truthers are not credible in thier arguments or presentation.
    "Social networking" is an oxymoron.

  4. #355
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    3,296
    I can only say that you are not nearly smart enough to know how people would pull off or hide knowledge of 911. Nor are you smart or resourceful enough to know how the JFK assassination was done even after investigating it for nearly fifty years.

    People like that do exist as proven by the JFK assassination, only now they are much smarter. If you think the narrow fields of science and logic can root these people out you are sadly mistaken. A little humility is due.

  5. #356
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Woburn, MA
    Posts
    6,649
    Quote Originally Posted by scrogdog View Post
    Now let's look a molten metal claims.

    Here's a popular one;

    "New York Fire Department Captain Philip Ruvolo reported “molten steel running down the channel rails, like lava.”

    Do none of you see the problem with this? It's common sense not science.

    Let's see if any of you CT folks get the answer to this puzzle.
    Ok, just another point about first person accounts.

    Do I believe that this firefighter is nuts? No.

    But he is mistaken. For the following common sense reason.

    Steel has a meting point of 2000C. Meaning that the rails would have had to be made of a substance that had a higher melting point than that, or else THE RAILS WOULD HAVE MELTED TOO.

    See that? I didn't need to perform a study or review the evidence to make that determination.

    THIS PERSON MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT OBSERVE MOLTEN STEEL DESPITE HIS CLAIM.
    "Social networking" is an oxymoron.

  6. #357
    Quote Originally Posted by scrogdog View Post
    Ok, just another point about first person accounts.

    Do I believe that this firefighter is nuts? No.

    But he is mistaken. For the following common sense reason.

    Steel has a meting point of 2000C. Meaning that the rails would have had to be made of a substance that had a higher melting point than that, or else THE RAILS WOULD HAVE MELTED TOO.

    See that? I didn't need to perform a study or review the evidence to make that determination.

    THIS PERSON MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT OBSERVE MOLTEN STEEL DESPITE HIS CLAIM.
    You two crack me up. "Inside" job. I doubt it from a American political perspective at the time. I think they know much more now that they don't wish to share cause it admits they were bushwacked. But it was/is some globalist (NWO) takeover plan that had the current phase implemented by al Queda as hired/tricked/manipulated thugs. It was designed to do exactly whats its doing (drag down America financially, morally, and ideologically) This is only just beginning, and is much more intricate than the action of the pawn Muslim extremist. . Stage 2 is to come soon, and it only gets worse. Wake up!

  7. #358
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by scrogdog View Post
    Ok, just another point about first person accounts.

    Do I believe that this firefighter is nuts? No.

    But he is mistaken. For the following common sense reason.

    Steel has a meting point of 2000C. Meaning that the rails would have had to be made of a substance that had a higher melting point than that, or else THE RAILS WOULD HAVE MELTED TOO.

    See that? I didn't need to perform a study or review the evidence to make that determination.

    THIS PERSON MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT OBSERVE MOLTEN STEEL DESPITE HIS CLAIM.
    First off, what qualification does a fireman have of determining what a substance like that is. You jump on the fact that if he is wrong about molten steel then he must be wrong about seeing molten anything. As for molten steel melting the rail it’s running on, well, it would take time for that molten “something” to melt through a thick I-beam. Maybe it was only in contact with the rail for a minute or two.

    There is an old strategy used by professional debaters (lawyers). If you said the car is blue and I can prove the car was green then I can surmise that you didn’t see a car at all. Heck we even saw video of molten something running out of that building, didn’t we? It’s either steel or aluminum. Is there enough aluminum in that building to create that amount of molten?

  8. #359
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by wherzamizat View Post
    You two crack me up. "Inside" job. I doubt it from a American political perspective at the time. I think they know much more now that they don't wish to share cause it admits they were bushwacked. But it was/is some globalist (NWO) takeover plan that had the current phase implemented by al Queda as hired/tricked/manipulated thugs. It was designed to do exactly whats its doing (drag down America financially, morally, and ideologically) This is only just beginning, and is much more intricate than the action of the pawn Muslim extremist. . Stage 2 is to come soon, and it only gets worse. Wake up!
    If we are so smart why don't you tell us how they killed Kennedy and covered up the assaination to date?

    Our problem is that we think we know people's capabilities. We also think we can trust those in power because they are better spoken and better dressed than we are.

  9. #360
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Woburn, MA
    Posts
    6,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    Heck we even saw video of molten something running out of that building, didn’t we? It’s either steel or aluminum. Is there enough aluminum in that building to create that amount of molten?
    Again, this is EXACTLY why one shouldn't trust truthers with any type of evidence whatsoever!

    You think that metal is the only thing that can get red hot and flow? My gawd.

    Here's a note to the clueless, MANY things can do that. In fact PLASTICS do that. How many computers do you think were in that building? Tons of soft metal inside them THAT IS NOT ALUMINUM. There's also TONS of plastic WHICH RUNS RED HOT.

    That stream was, logically, a mixture of things including plastics and various types of soft metals.

    Even in the my can of corn example earlier... not only did it explode, but it also showered our tents and sleeping bags with RED HOT KERNALS OF CORN.

    Wow. Just wow.

    Yes, it's a very old strategy where we say that if you can't even tell what color a car was in your key point of testimony, then we must at least consider what other perceptions you have that are wrong. Perfectly valid thing, to show that the arguments and "facts" shown by somone are not credible.

    Doctored photos make my case even more.
    "Social networking" is an oxymoron.

  10. #361
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    If we are so smart why don't you tell us how they killed Kennedy and covered up the assaination to date?

    Our problem is that we think we know people's capabilities. We also think we can trust those in power because they are better spoken and better dressed than we are.
    money and power? Sculls and Bones? Rothschilds and Rockefellers? all of the above? take your pick.....? Same **** ... the power elite have had the plan since the early 1900's. The Kennedys in charge of the United States was a threat to their "Order" and they were eliminated. That simple!

  11. #362
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    7,487
    Lee Harvey Oswald was wound up tighter than something wound up real tight.....and he killed kennedy..... Nothing hidden about it.....

    Jack Ruby was just a stupid sob.......let his emotions get the best of him
    One things for _______ sure, ________ rock didnt land on ______ sorry ___. That ___ __ _ _____ wasnt nowhere near _______ a _______ years ago. __ aint even a ______, __ is half _______ and half ________.

  12. #363
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    7,487
    Kennedy will end up in hell too.......probably sharing a shovel with Khrushchev.
    One things for _______ sure, ________ rock didnt land on ______ sorry ___. That ___ __ _ _____ wasnt nowhere near _______ a _______ years ago. __ aint even a ______, __ is half _______ and half ________.

  13. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by corny View Post
    Lee Harvey Oswald was wound up tighter than something wound up real tight.....and he killed kennedy..... Nothing hidden about it.....

    Jack Ruby was just a stupid sob.......let his emotions get the best of him
    Oswald = project monarch stooge. sure he did the shooting....but a stooge nonetheless.

Page 28 of 31 FirstFirst ... 182122232425262728293031 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event