|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
28th July 2008, 12:25 AM | #161 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
|
|
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win." |
|
28th July 2008, 08:44 AM | #162 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
You people are hilarious. Are you all like self-proclaimed intellectuals who haven't made it in the real world, so you have to come on here to make a name for yourself?
I don't understand how you can make 5 pages of posts, and not a single one has a single shred of intelligence that would change any rational persons mind on their doubts of the collapse of wtc7. How can you possibly watch the video of the collapse and think that a fire brought that down? Has NIST been able to fabricate a logical explanation yet? Please enlighten me on how it is so clear to you people that wtc7 was not demolished. |
28th July 2008, 08:51 AM | #163 |
NWO Master Conspirator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
|
|
__________________
Vive la liberté! Last edited by prewitt81; 28th July 2008 at 09:21 AM. Reason: editing quote to reflect username change |
|
28th July 2008, 08:52 AM | #164 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
If he/ she is really from Stevens Institute of Tech, which last I heard was reputable... Are they now training their students to rely on videos only? The world is in worse shape than I had thought.
|
28th July 2008, 08:52 AM | #165 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
Last edited by prewitt81; 28th July 2008 at 09:21 AM. Reason: editing quote to reflect username change |
|
28th July 2008, 08:58 AM | #166 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,127
|
Pete, you're giving my alma mater a bad name, please stop. I hope you're not earning any sort of engineering degree.
|
28th July 2008, 08:58 AM | #167 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
|
|
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts) Last edited by prewitt81; 28th July 2008 at 09:22 AM. Reason: editing quote to reflect username change |
|
28th July 2008, 09:04 AM | #168 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,717
|
You're here because?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
They take their paranoia, mix in a healthy dose of mistrust in anything "gubmint", and then bake it in that big ole EZ Bake oven of ignorance, and come to the delusional conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job. - Seymour Butz Last edited by prewitt81; 28th July 2008 at 09:22 AM. Reason: editing quote to reflect username change |
|
28th July 2008, 09:08 AM | #169 |
NWO Master Conspirator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
|
|
__________________
Vive la liberté! |
|
28th July 2008, 09:09 AM | #170 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
Red I., that isn't what it says in the Dec 06 summary. Could you provide a source for your comment?
ETA: http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/r...tc_062907.html |
28th July 2008, 09:09 AM | #171 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
|
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
28th July 2008, 09:26 AM | #172 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
I don't know why my email was set as my username, but i fixed it. I was pretty pissed about it.
I am getting two engineering degrees actually, and i have a very high GPA. Stevens is a good school, but a lot of people here are not that bright. A lot of people more concerned with getting the grades and a job rather than knowledge. Anyways, i'm entitled to question the official story. All you people are saying its ME who has to prove my theory... Hmmm.... tell me this intelligent ones, why should i have to prove my theory against a massive cover-up that blocks the necessary evidence for me to do so, when your idea is open to all evidence and investigation presented. I simply asked for a reason why i should believe that fire brought down wtc7, and you continue making this thread a joke as i have already pointed out. |
28th July 2008, 09:27 AM | #173 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
Papasmurf, have you done anything except looked at video? Have you read anything? (Has Stevens sunk so low?)
ETA: check the NIST link I posted. |
28th July 2008, 09:30 AM | #174 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
You were asked this direct question...
Quote:
|
28th July 2008, 09:34 AM | #175 |
NWO Master Conspirator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
|
Yes, your "theory" (whatever it is) will require some actual evidence. Got any?
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Vive la liberté! |
|
28th July 2008, 09:38 AM | #176 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
|
28th July 2008, 10:04 AM | #177 | ||||
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
I don't have my own theory, [edited]. That is part of my point, i asked you to tell me to explain what you believed, while ia haven't even elaborated as to my own ideas, yet the only response i got was for me to prove something...
You guys can attack me all you want, but i didn't come on here to start a pissing contest. I came on here to break up your
|
||||
28th July 2008, 10:12 AM | #178 |
このマスクによっ
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,866
|
Would it be fine if I asked you on what basis you have made your assertion that fire could not have brought down WTC 7 as well as examples you refer to to substantiate your claims? It'll help me determine how to respond to your criticisms of the 'official', as you and others have coined it, conclusion... |
__________________
Current Set:http://i.imgur.com/IoqiUdK.jpg |
|
28th July 2008, 10:13 AM | #179 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
First off. did you read the MA when you signed up? I highly doubt that you did and your incivility has been reported as such and since you are being a liar (since you claimed to have a theory) and you are an uncivil piece of trash....you just got yourself the award for fastest member to join and find itself on my ignore list. Congratulations on your accomplishment.
|
28th July 2008, 10:17 AM | #180 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
|
28th July 2008, 10:17 AM | #181 | ||
Notoriously Glorious
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,220
|
|
||
__________________
Knowledge is Power! "If we want to teach the Moon is green cheese then we'll do it!" -- Eric Hovind defending his father's pro-creationist stance. (http://www.kent-hovind.com/) "Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it." |
|||
28th July 2008, 10:23 AM | #182 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
WE can't attack your posts, you have nothing to attack, you are ignorant on physics, fire, firefighting, the art of observation, logical thinking, and many other fields. You have no idea about WTC since you failed to use the past 6 years to gain knowledge. It takes hours or days to read the material and understand it, but you come and attack others who have done the work and can see clearly WTC7 failed due to damage from the towers and FIRE!
You failed to read posts with fact and testimony. In a few posts you have proven beyond a shadow of doubt what pure ignorance on WTC7 IS. Do you lack the time to correct your vast ignorance on this topic? Did you miss the Penthouse falling into the WTC7 seconds before the FAÇADE fell? Can you explain how many columns supported the overall structure of WTC7? Do you know who built WTC7? If you can't answer the simple questions, why are you even here? Welcome to the sub forum, too bad you failed to bring facts and evidence to prove your theory, which you do not have! Great! Welcome, great posts, you revealed all your know about WTC7 concisely and without hesitation. http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/introduction Start here, this is common knowledge here, too bad you can't debunk the truth. Try to take time to learn why the level of abstraction here is too high for you and I to understand. I don't ask you to believe, I ask you to think! Stop being a follower, and think for yourself, I do not believe the stuff I read, I research WTC7 and learn how to understand it. Trust no one, they have to earn your trust; you have blindly trusted your ideas, and it appears lots of hearsay on WTC7, and failed to gather the knowledge to make a rational conclusion. |
28th July 2008, 10:24 AM | #183 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
Well first off, i don't understand how even if one critical beam did fail somehow, which i believe it would have had to have failed over 3 consecutive floors or something, how that would even explain the collapse as it occurred. We are talking about a very fast and symmetrical collapse that would have required multiple simultaneous failures across the structure.
If one piece did fail, wouldn't you expect the force to be distributed unevenly, and the collapse to progress from the point of initial failure, and for at least part of the building to resist collapse, causing it to slow down or force a non-uniform collapse. Is there any other case where a failure of a collumn has caused a collapse in this manner to proceed? No there isn't. Can the designers of the building say that if that collumn or collumns failed, that the rest of the structure should have collapsed in that fashion? Doubt it. Finally, we can all agree that the final outcome of the collapse was very similar to a cd. We had a uniform, straight down collapse into the footprint, with minimal collateral damage to other buildings. Now, wouldn't the fact that only a single collumn needed to be taken out for this to occur be of concern to demolition companies, who spend thousands of dollars and hours planning a demolition that requires a certain amount and configuration of explosives to do the job? This collapse could revolutionize the demolition industry. Apparently local failure of a single collumn or 2 can result in simultaneous and catastrophic failure of the entire structure! Is that enough for you to see where i am coming from? Can you please elaborate on how fire caused this collapse now? |
28th July 2008, 10:26 AM | #184 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
|
28th July 2008, 10:32 AM | #185 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 7,032
|
|
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance. Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane? Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude. |
|
28th July 2008, 10:34 AM | #186 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
[quote=beachnut;3897459]WE can't attack your posts, you have nothing to attack, you are ignorant on physics, fire, firefighting, the art of observation, logical thinking, and many other fields. You have no idea about WTC since you failed to use the past 6 years to gain knowledge. It takes hours or days to read the material and understand it, but you come and attack others who have done the work and can see clearly WTC7 failed due to damage from the towers and FIRE!
You failed to read posts with fact and testimony. In a few posts you have proven beyond a shadow of doubt what pure ignorance on WTC7 IS. Do you lack the time to correct your vast ignorance on this topic? Did you miss the Penthouse falling into the WTC7 seconds before the FAÇADE fell? Can you explain how many columns supported the overall structure of WTC7? Do you know who built WTC7? If you can't answer the simple questions, why are you even here? Welcome to the sub forum, too bad you failed to bring facts and evidence to prove your theory, which you do not have! Great! Welcome, great posts, you revealed all your know about WTC7 concisely and without hesitation. " Please spare me the insults, unlike you, i didn't come on here to reaffirm my own abilities or intelligence. Those are very cheap shots you took and do nothing to prove a point. You have no idea of what i know on physics, nor how much research i have done. I assure you that you are wrong on every accusation you made about me. Please don't waste your time on personal attacks, i promise you they don't have any effect on me whatsoever. |
28th July 2008, 10:39 AM | #187 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
|
We do know what the blue guy due know about english though...Anybody remember our old english major old school?
|
28th July 2008, 10:40 AM | #188 |
... and your little dog too.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16,361
|
papasmurf, allow me to be the first to congratulate you on your dazzling display of intellect and the calm, reasonable way in which you present your arguments. It's so very refreshing.
A couple of points that may have escaped your attention while you were busy a Super Genius School getting your degrees in I'm Smarter Than All of You: 1) WTC7 did not collapse due to fire alone. WTC7 was struck by falling debris from a 110-story skyscraper. The structural damage caused by this phenomenon and the subsequent fires combined to cause its collapse. 2) The people whom you would describe as not having "a single shred of intelligence" include the following: The FDNY - including firefighters that were on the scene and witnessed the debris damage, fires, and subsequent collapse with their own eyes. The overwhelming majority of the worldwide structural engineering community. Every MSM outlet on the planet. Every law enforcement agency on the planet. Every type of official investigative body on the planet. None of these people have questioned the official version of events. THe FDNY in particular is on record rejecting a controlled demolition hypothesis. Can you please explain to me why I should believe the baseless rantings of an anonymous Internet poster over all of them? |
28th July 2008, 10:42 AM | #189 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
Mr. Smith,
If my argument is from ignorance, you would have to prove it. Providing a link to a wikipedia article is cheap and lazy. Do you realize how pathetic you people are? Do you not think your own personal convictions are blinding you to the truth? Do you not have your own lack of imagination? I'm supposed to be able to "imagine" that fire magically caused that collapse, while its unimaginable that someone was able to bring it down with demolition charges? |
28th July 2008, 10:47 AM | #190 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
You are not speaking as someone with any knowledge of engineering. You are speaking in the same fashion as someone who thinks video viewing is serious research.
Please try. Make a serious effort and you may be taken seriously. And with regard to your post#184, I am the parent of a teenager. I recognize the style of response completely: "Nyah nyah he hit me first." It's no more justified now, in this envirnoment, than when it is said by a 6 year old on the playground. |
28th July 2008, 10:49 AM | #191 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
|
28th July 2008, 10:49 AM | #192 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 7,032
|
The highliged text of your post i quoted proves it, deal with it
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance. Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane? Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude. |
|
28th July 2008, 10:55 AM | #193 | ||||
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
OHHHHH MANNNNNNNNNN.....
Mr. Smith, I asked you for some math, DUDE. FIRST. Stop the ********. I explained my views and all you can do is plug your ears and cry like a baby.
You can't. All you can do is attack my argument by putting up links to wikipedia. I feel very sorry for you. Btw you think some damage to the exterior of the building from debris adds anything to your argument, prove it. PROVE IT.
|
||||
28th July 2008, 10:57 AM | #194 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
Let's see if we can get to 200 posts on this thread without a single post explaining a single rational thought as to how wtc 7 collapsed from fire.
|
28th July 2008, 10:57 AM | #195 |
NWO Master Conspirator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
|
Explain the relationship between WTC 7 and a Con Ed substation, and how this affected the construction of WTC 7.
Quote:
And finally, it's unimagineable that you, who claims to be an engineering student, is basing his opinion on a few seconds of video footage. |
__________________
Vive la liberté! |
|
28th July 2008, 10:59 AM | #196 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
Papasmurf, this site is for discussion, not for obscenity and abuse. You can find that elsewhere, I expect.
From the level of your comments I find it very hard to believe you actually have any engineering qualifications. The burden is on you to prove that the "official explanation" is incorrect or inadequate. Please proceed to deal with that burden. |
28th July 2008, 11:01 AM | #197 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,662
|
|
__________________
What? You pooped in the refrigerator? And you ate the whole... wheel of cheese? How'd you do that? Heck, I'm not even mad; that's amazing. - Ron Burgundy |
|
28th July 2008, 11:03 AM | #198 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
Do you honestly believe that anyone believes that the FDNY would be the ones to plant the demolitions? Give me a break. Does anyone want to point in the direction of the official theory that you have read. The part that says " the collapse is highly improbable" is useless to me, sorry. |
28th July 2008, 11:07 AM | #199 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
|
You show no signs of having done any preparation whatsoever. It is easy to find information. Go to the NIST site. Go to the Pop Mechanics volume for easy explanations. Use the search function on this site for prior discussions.
|
28th July 2008, 11:08 AM | #200 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 147
|
Still can't answer my questions? Anyone?
Please, at least ...try... Pretty please? |
Thread Tools | |
|
|