[Merged]Sizzler. Your theory please.

Quad4_72

AI-EE-YAH!
Quad4_72
Joined
Nov 7, 2006
Messages
6,354
Sizzler, a new thread at your request

Since you were tired of the supposed thread derailing in the other topic, here is one just for you. Now I know the mods do not like these call out threads but I think this one should bring about some relevant discussion. So anyways here you go Sizzler, this thread is created per your request here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3470959#post3470959

So what do you think caused the collapse of WTC7? Who was involved, what was motive, etc. If you kindly elaborate on your theory of what happened to WTC7 I think it will spark some relevant debate. Thanks.
 
Sizzler said:
Why WTC7 exclusively?
Click to expand...

Because that was the specific question that was asked of you in the other topic and you said you would be more than happy to answer the question if another thread was made about it. So here ya go.
 
Actually now that I just read over the question he was talking about collapses in general, so for now lets just start with WTC7.
 
I see you posting in the other threads Sizzler. This one is still waiting.
 
Sizzler said:
hypothesis to come.....
Click to expand...

FINALLY!!!

It'll be refreshing to see something other than the tired "just asking questions" cover. I'm proud of you, Sizzler.
 
Last edited:
Quad4_72 said:
Now I know the mods do not like these call out threads but I think this one should bring about some relevant discussion.
Click to expand...

To clarify - reasonable requests to discuss a particular point are fine - especially when addressed as you have done here. What we don't like are threads that are designed to ridicule a particular member and which quickly turn into flame wars as everyone jumps in with assumptions and mockery about what they expect the person to say.

:)

I'm quite interested to see what Sizzler comes up with in this hypothesis.
 
chillzero said:
To clarify - reasonable requests to discuss a particular point are fine - especially when addressed as you have done here. What we don't like are threads that are designed to ridicule a particular member and which quickly turn into flame wars as everyone jumps in with assumptions and mockery about what they expect the person to say.

:)

I'm quite interested to see what Sizzler comes up with in this hypothesis.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. And yes I think we are all very interested in Sizzler's first hypothesis finally.
 
Sizzler, keep in mind the enormity of this accusation as you form your hypothesis. Do not cast the deaths of 3,000 innocent people lightly at anyone's feet. Include all available evidence such as DNA and confessions. Include how the huge flaming chunk of WTC1 was ensured to hit WTC7, providing plausible cause for its collapse. Check your conjecture at the door.
 
cisco said:
Sizzler, keep in mind the enormity of this accusation as you form your hypothesis. Do not cast the deaths of 3,000 innocent people lightly at anyone's feet. Include all available evidence such as DNA and confessions. Include how the huge flaming chunk of WTC1 was ensured to hit WTC7, providing plausible cause for its collapse. Check your conjecture at the door.
Click to expand...
Well said and I second all of cisco's suggestions.

I would also hope your "evidence" doesn't rely on coincidences and arguments from incredulity.
 
619745a54bbe44f13.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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