The TruthSeeker1234 $1000.00 Challenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Gravy

1,3 diphenylpropane, not 2,3. If it is so innocent, then why has this molecule been scrubbed from this report?

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html#heading08

Did I miss something? Just curious.
Click to expand...
I'll check that report. Are you going to answer the questions posed to you on this page, and finally back your claims with evidence, or withdraw them immediately? You've been shown to be wrong about all of them. If you disagree, stop stalling and prove it.

Or are you just trolling because you enjoy joking around about 9/11?

Time to be a man, TruthSeeker1234. Can you do it? Can you?

ETA: I checked the report. It's about the composition of settled dust particles. Did you "miss something?" Yeah, you missed the fact that the Erik Swarz report was about aerosols, WHICH YOU WOULD KNOW IF YOU HAD BOTHERED TO READ THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE: "Chemical stew filled the air in 2001."

Unbelievable. Do you have any shame?
 
Last edited:
Please provide any evidence of this insane claim.[that insurance companies in the US are defacto government agencies.]
Click to expand...

On a free market, producers of any product or service compete by differentiating themselves from their competitors. This differntiation may take the form of lower prices, or higher quality, or unique features. In the U.S. there are over 1000 federal and state laws regulating insurance, dictating what must be covered, what the allowable prices are, who is and is not allowed to enter the industry, and many other things. Nothing resembling a free market. Insurance companies answer to government agents known as "insurance commissioners", not so much their customers. See Murray Rothbard, Hans Hermann Hoppe, austrian school of econ. Hoppe gives a brilliant lecture called "from healthcare to welfare".
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
1. NIST civil engineers, et al have been asked and declined to debate.
Click to expand...
Why don't you get your civil engineers to submit papers supporting your cause to scholarly, peer-reviewed journals? Then other engineers will be forced to respond.

Oh, I forgot. You don't have any civil engineers.

2. such a lawsuit could easily cost a hunderd million dollars to prosecute, and worse,
Click to expand...
Why? I thought your "scientific" evidence was so obvious that you could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a little debate with JREFers. You were so confident of that a few days ago that you wagered $1000 that no one would take you up on your debate challenge. What happened in the past few days to change your mind?

the court system is part of the very institution, i.e. "the government" which is under dispute.
3. ditto to 2.
Click to expand...
So whistleblowing is a futile act, correct?

4. On paper, insurance companies are private. However, de facto they too are government agencies.
Click to expand...
To which facto are you referring?

5. The soviets tried killing all dissidents, and it didn't play out very well for them. Same with the Chinese. The U.S. has developed a different strategy of disinformation and discrediting. Make the crime very big, very complex, and make sure that many variations on the story all get out there. Then people won't know what to think. They'll just go back to making widgets and paying taxes, something that the soviet people were not good at.
Click to expand...
So the US government has alternate versions of who committed the terrorist attacks of 9/11? Do tell. Perhaps that explains your confusion.

People like Dr Jones can be handled by killing their careers, while allowing them to live.
Click to expand...
People like Dr. Jones are handled very simply: by exposing them as the frauds that they are. Just as I'm doing with you now. Simple. No violence. Just facts and repeated requests to put up or shut up.
 
DavidJames said:
Q1 Why don't you make your challenge directly to NIST and FEMA instead of posting anonymous challenges on an Internet forum.
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234 said:
NIST civil engineers, et al have been asked and declined to debate.
Click to expand...
Please provide evidence of your your challenge to NIST. Prove to me it wasn't a random email to a random NIST person. Prove to me it was a serious attempt at challenging the report.

DavidJames said:
Q2. Why aren't you enlisting lawyers to sue?
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A2.such a lawsuit could easily cost a hunderd million dollars to prosecute,and worse, the court system is part of the very institution, i.e. "the government" which is under dispute.
Click to expand...
I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers who would take this case pro bono for no other reason then the notoriety. Lawyers do this all the time. They would become instantly famous. The law of averages suggests there are CTists lawyers. I'm guessing none have come forward because they're afraid they would laughed right out of the bar. Your answer suggests, however, you haven't even tried? Which proves my point - prove me wrong. Your other excuse is a tin foil hat response played to avoid the obvious conclusion that you have no case

DavidJames said:
Q3. Why aren't you pursuing civil and criminal options?
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A3. ditto to 2
Click to expand...
Another tin foil hat response played to avoid the obvious conclusion that you have no case.

DavidJames said:
Q4. Why aren't you working with the insurance companies to expose the fraud perpetrated by the "inside job"
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A4. On paper, insurance companies are private. However, de facto they too are government agencies
Click to expand...
Another tin foil hat response played to avoid the obvious conclusion that you have no case.

DavidJames said:
Q5. Why are people like you, exposing the criminal activity of those who had no qualms about killing 3k innocent people, still alive?
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234 said:
A5. Rambling rants of a paranoid delusional tin foil hat CTist not copied.
Click to expand...
Another tin foil hat response played to avoid the obvious conclusion that you have no case.

Thanks TinFoilHat1234. Here's the bottom line...

You have proven to me that you are really not interested in the truth. You know you don't have a leg to stand on so you trot out paranoid CT's to cover for your lame and inept rantings. When you are ready to really want to help this country, let me know by doing more then spewing your crap anonymously on an Internet form. Let me know by actually doing something tangible, doing something that does more then stroke your overly inflated ego and feeling of self worth. Do something TS, just do something real.
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Gravy

1,3 diphenylpropane, not 2,3. If it is so innocent, then why has this molecule been scrubbed from this report?

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html#heading08

Did I miss something? Just curious.
Click to expand...

The fact that other tests fail to corroborate Jones' findings does not mean that the other tests were faulty or tampered with; especially when Jones' sample was not obtained under controlled conditions and the chain of custody of his sample is unclear.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
On a free market, producers of any product or service compete by differentiating themselves from their competitors. This differntiation may take the form of lower prices, or higher quality, or unique features. In the U.S. there are over 1000 federal and state laws regulating insurance, dictating what must be covered, what the allowable prices are, who is and is not allowed to enter the industry, and many other things. Nothing resembling a free market. Insurance companies answer to government agents known as "insurance commissioners", not so much their customers. See Murray Rothbard, Hans Hermann Hoppe, austrian school of econ. Hoppe gives a brilliant lecture called "from healthcare to welfare".
Click to expand...
So the only honest business is one that's not subject to any government regulations? Does such a business exist in the U.S.A.?

And if the insurance companies are so heavily regulated, why do you claim that 21 of them conspired with Larry Silverstein to destroy his buildings? And do you think they'll get caught by those big, bad g-men?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
On a free market, producers of any product or service compete by differentiating themselves from their competitors. This differntiation may take the form of lower prices, or higher quality, or unique features. In the U.S. there are over 1000 federal and state laws regulating insurance, dictating what must be covered, what the allowable prices are, who is and is not allowed to enter the industry, and many other things. Nothing resembling a free market. Insurance companies answer to government agents known as "insurance commissioners", not so much their customers. See Murray Rothbard, Hans Hermann Hoppe, austrian school of econ. Hoppe gives a brilliant lecture called "from healthcare to welfare".
Click to expand...
Did you wipe after you wrote that, I know I had to after I read it.

We could easily extrapolate from your "logic" that we are all (yes you to Mr. Woo) are government agencies or employee's.

Man TS, you've gone completely Christophera on us.
 
Does such a business exist in the U.S.A.?
Click to expand...

Nope. Thanks to anti-trust laws. And the EPA and etc, etc, etc.

Truthseeker crack open any beginning econ text book and look for "externalities" to see why an unregulated free market doesn't work.
 
TS1234, you're not going to get the last word, and you're not winning the debate, and you're not succeeding in making anyone here look silly.

Why do you continue to hit that "reply" button? Has someone wired it to your pleasure center?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
On a free market, producers of any product or service compete by differentiating themselves from their competitors. This differntiation may take the form of lower prices, or higher quality, or unique features. In the U.S. there are over 1000 federal and state laws regulating insurance, dictating what must be covered, what the allowable prices are, who is and is not allowed to enter the industry, and many other things. Nothing resembling a free market. Insurance companies answer to government agents known as "insurance commissioners", not so much their customers. See Murray Rothbard, Hans Hermann Hoppe, austrian school of econ. Hoppe gives a brilliant lecture called "from healthcare to welfare".
Click to expand...

Funny, almost the exact same situation exists in the automobile market. Yet GM, Chrysler and Ford all spend millions of dollars trying to convince me not to buy from the other two.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
1. NIST civil engineers, et al have been asked and declined to debate.
2. such a lawsuit could easily cost a hunderd million dollars to prosecute,and worse, the court system is part of the very institution, i.e. "the government" which is under dispute.
3. ditto to 2.
4. On paper, insurance companies are private. However, de facto they too are government agencies.
5. The soviets tried killing all dissidents, and it didn't play out very well for them. Same with the Chinese. The U.S. has developed a different strategy of disinformation and discrediting. Make the crime very big, very complex, and make sure that many variations on the story all get out there. Then people won't know what to think. They'll just go back to making widgets and paying taxes, something that the soviet people were not good at. People like Dr Jones can be handled by killing their careers, while allowing them to live. Killing the likes of Dylan Avery would serve only to make him a martyr, and publicize his film.
Click to expand...
Oh well. It's hopeless then. May as well give up and join the happy herd.

What a pathetic list of excuses for your laziness.
 
Gravy said:
I'll check that report. Are you going to answer the questions posed to you on this page, and finally back your claims with evidence, or withdraw them immediately? You've been shown to be wrong about all of them. If you disagree, stop stalling and prove it.

Or are you just trolling because you enjoy joking around about 9/11?

Time to be a man, TruthSeeker1234. Can you do it? Can you?

ETA: I checked the report. It's about the composition of settled dust particles. Did you "miss something?" Yeah, you missed the fact that the Erik Swarz report was about aerosols, WHICH YOU WOULD KNOW IF YOU HAD BOTHERED TO READ THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE: "Chemical stew filled the air in 2001."

Unbelievable. Do you have any shame?
Click to expand...
It's in this one. LOL!
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/esthag/2003/37/i16/abs/es030356l.html

In addition, the compound 1,3-diphenylpropane- [ 1',1'-(1,3-propanediyl)bis-benzene] was observed, and to our knowledge, this species has not previously been reported from ambient sampling. It has been associated with polystyrene and other plastics, which are in abundance at the WTC site. These emissions lasted for at least 3 weeks (September 26-October 21, 2001) after the initial destruction of the WTC.
 
Last edited:
I wanted to show truthseeker a closer look at his "pyroclastic flows" .
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5405555553528290546&q=WTC&pl=true
As you can clearly see it is just dust from the collapse billowing up via air pressure being funneled between the buildings.

Also, look at this CD collapse:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL3zIv7LdZQ

If you will notice. all the explosions go off before the building starts to collapse. Notice the billowing clouds of dust are caused by the falling materials displacing air and not the by the exlopsives themselves.
 
Last edited:
The challenge is still good, I have answered inquiries by two members, and would love nothing better than to have the written debate. Here's an additional challenge. This is good for Gravy only. Mackie already passed.

Gravy. You're in NY, correct? I will buy you a round trip plane ticket to LA and a hotel room, plus give you $100 spending money if you will debate me on television. 1 hour. Pictures and videos allowed. Put up or shut up.

I'm sure you're aware of the National 9/11 debate. I have nothing to do with it, but NIST and many others have been invited in writing, they all declined. Frank Greening accepted. That's good. Hopefully it will actually occur.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
The challenge is still good, I have answered inquiries by two members, and would love nothing better than to have the written debate. Here's an additional challenge. This is good for Gravy only. Mackie already passed.

Gravy. You're in NY, correct? I will buy you a round trip plane ticket to LA and a hotel room, plus give you $100 spending money if you will debate me on television. 1 hour. Pictures and videos allowed. Put up or shut up.

I'm sure you're aware of the National 9/11 debate. I have nothing to do with it, but NIST and many others have been invited in writing, they all declined. Frank Greening accepted. That's good. Hopefully it will actually occur.
Click to expand...

Here's a test to see if you're debate-worthy. You've failed it every time so far. Final chance.

TruthSeeker1234, please give a detailed description of what a pyroclastic flow is, and explain the mechanism by which explosives in the WTC created the "pyroclastic flows" you describe on 9/11, while also "shredding" the steel and "powderizing" the complete contents.

I eagerly await your response.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
On a free market, producers of any product or service compete by differentiating themselves from their competitors. This differntiation may take the form of lower prices, or higher quality, or unique features. In the U.S. there are over 1000 federal and state laws regulating insurance, dictating what must be covered, what the allowable prices are, who is and is not allowed to enter the industry, and many other things. Nothing resembling a free market. Insurance companies answer to government agents known as "insurance commissioners", not so much their customers. See Murray Rothbard, Hans Hermann Hoppe, austrian school of econ. Hoppe gives a brilliant lecture called "from healthcare to welfare".
Click to expand...

Oh my, caught out again!

You're totally out of your element here and dragging a red herring through the thread. Like ignoring the title of the document on aerosols, you're ignoring the subject of the 'brilliant lecture'. A speech on Health Insurance? Are you aware that the industry is segmented and that property insurers, capital and risk managers and particularly the re-insurers are the ones who take the hit, and not the likes of Humana? Hoppe and Rothbard are libertarians. Nothing wrong with that, but it might explain their concern about government involvement in anything. Is health insurance worthy of government regulation? If you think not, perhaps you should start another thread.

Just curious - are you aware that there is no "Austrian School of Economics?", i.e. a building or campus, and that it's a movement? Or did that just sound impressive? :p
 
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