patrick.net

Squatting in East CoCo says

bob2356 says

Ok you can post your 4 sentences again now.

There was trace evidence of thermite.

There was earwitness and video account of explosions.

WTC7 fell in a manner which defied physics.

The official report neglected or denied the evidence.

You are a broken record.

@bob,
when I watch the few vids of WTC 7 going down, it sure does seem like a lot of destruction happens in many places at the same time. What I mean is, like, the roof didnt just collapse in the weakest area, or a side of finishing material didn't just flake off, of a window or two burst when the thing flexed ... it just sagged in the center, from front to back, and then went down, in, down, in, and looks very "smooth", for a lack of better word.

If the building lost it's integrity due to the ground being heaved, then a big earth quake would have done the same thing, and more important than that, there may be other buildings in that general area that have been stressed. Right?

Anyways, for me, it is WTC 7 that bugs me. I don't buy the interanl job idea, but the NWO / Rothchilds / Illuminati type of event trigger is possible, right?

Squatting in East CoCo says

con·spir·a·cy/kənˈspirəsē/

Noun:

1.A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

2.The action of plotting or conspiring.

All of you deniers realize that the government's story is a conspiracy story too, Right?

Wrong.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Bigsby says

Squatting in East CoCo says

bob2356 says

Ok you can post your 4 sentences again now.

There was trace evidence of thermite.

There was earwitness and video account of explosions.

WTC7 fell in a manner which defied physics.

The official report neglected or denied the evidence.

You are a broken record.

Personal attacks are not helpful. Debate the evidence.

Like I said, you're a broken record. You keep posting 'personal attacks are not helpful. Debate the evidence,' and then you just keep posting the same 'evidence' again and again. The problem is there's nothing to 'debate.' You believe in your conspiracy despite the complete lack of any credible evidence for it. It is simply an article of faith to you. You've exhausted all your Youtube videos and conspiracy go to points. We don't agree with what you are peddling. Believe in your conspiracy theory if you so wish, but what's the point in posting the same thing over and over again?

So he's in the military. You do understand that there are people in all walks of life who believe in this sort of stuff. Why should we give any more credence to this particular individual than anybody else? He's not somebody with expertise in this area or any insider knowledge. He is a soldier one step above a major. Are we suddenly supposed to be converted to your point of view just because he likes a conspiracy theory or two? He just sounds like your typical right-winger.

Squatting in East CoCo says

If there is nothing left to debate, then why are you still here?

You have NOT been debating the evidence as much as attacking me personally.

What debate has there been? You don't respond to what people say to you, you simply repeat the same points over and over.
Squatting in East CoCo says

I have submitted lots of credible evidence to counter an incredible official story.

No, you haven't.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I say there were explosions, You say there were no explosions.

No, we don't. We say there was no controlled demolition. It's quite possible for things to explode in a major fire. That is entirely different to a CD.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I submit videos with explosions. You say they were not controlled demolition explosions without admitting there actually were explosions.

What? You post them up stating they are evidence of a CD. We say they clearly don't show a CD because one small flash or a couple of puffs of smoke do not make for a CD except in the mind of those immune to the glaringly obvious.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I could say the same about your belief in the official conspiracy theory.

The official story isn't a conspiracy theory if you believe it to be an accurate reflection of the events, which I do.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Right wingers, left wingers, civilians, active duty militairy, engineers, architechts, chemists, People from all walks of life QUESTION the official story.

Open your mind to the EVIDENCE!

And the vast majority of people don't believe in your version of events, so how about you open your mind to the evidence rather than relying on Youtube videos and wing-nut websites.

Squatting in East CoCo says

This was in 2008. Back then I was part of the, less than majority of, people who believed in the official conspiracy story.

Do you have more updated polls on what the "majority" of people believe?

And how many of those 15% thought the US government actually blew up the buildings? And no, I don't collect polls on wing-nut conspiracy theories, so why don't you Google one that directly asked the question of whether or not those polled believed the US government blew up all the WTC buildings.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Bigsby says

And the vast majority of people don't believe in your version of events,

Do you have evidence to back this claim?

The poll you just posted.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Okay, then, who really was behind the attacks on 9/11?

Squatting in East CoCo says

My version of events is that the official story is questionable. According to the, old, poll I posted 46% believed (past tense 2008) the official story.

In what world is 46% a "vast majority of people"?

Please explain your logic?

I said the vast majority of people do not believe your conspiracy theory. You posted up a poll saying that 15% of people polled believe the US government was involved in some way - NOT that it necessarily blew up the buildings. Your own bloody poll shows you are in a very small minority.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Outside of my imaginary scenarios, I never concluded the government was involved.

Again, I count myself in the 25% that don't know.

You are bullshitting.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Personal attacks are not helpful to the debate.

Please debate the evidence.

Here we go again.
You say you count yourself in the 25% who don't know (from that poll) and yet you do nothing but post stupid arguments in favour of the conspiracy theory (until, of course, I pointed that out to you, and so you posted up the Chomsky video -presumably so you could go 'no, no, look I'm examining all the evidence.' Sure you are.). Like I said, you are a bullshitter.

Squatting in East CoCo says

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/911-and-the-war-on-terror-polls-show-what-people-really-believe-10-years-later.html

So Youtube is popular. So what? Or do you think that a poll showing a lot of Chinese don't trust the US government (paint me shocked) is somehow proof that your government blew up the WTC?
As has been said by others, I do not believe for a second you are a professor, and if you are, I hope to an imaginary God that you don't teach a critical thinking course. Perhaps you work at Liberty University...

Squatting in East CoCo says

Bigsby

What is your personal reason for attacking me instead of debating the evidence I present?

You say you are a brit in monterey. Do you have some personal reason for perpetuating the official conspiracy theory?

Blah-blah-blah. You are just a conspiracy wing-nut who isn't interested in any informed discussion of the evidence. People have posted numerous responses to what you've posted and you've singularly failed to address any of them. Once again, you aren't new to this and you aren't interested in any form of reasoned discussion - you are simply repeating the same tired points over and over. You are someone who has accepted an outlandish conspiracy theory, who then ignores all evidence to the contrary, and tries to bolster their argument with the thinnest of Youtube 'evidence.' Why is someone who claims to be a professor so wedded to the reverse scientific method? The lack of logic and critical thinking skills you've demonstrated in this thread is a very poor reflection on you as a supposed educator. I stress the word supposed.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Or do you think that a poll showing a lot of Chinese don't trust the US government (paint me shocked) is somehow proof that your government blew up the WTC?

??

Do you find that hard to follow? It's not that complicated.

Squatting in East CoCo says

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/poll_only_16_percent_believe_gov_on_911.htm

And once again, that is not a poll showing how many people think the US government blew up the WTC buildings. Show me a poll of US citizens that deals with that question.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I am not argueing that the government blew up WTC7. I am argueing that there is evidence that the building was destroyed by controlled demolition.

And who do you think carried out this supposed CD for which you have yet to post any convincing evidence and for which you seem to be very strongly implying that the US government carried out. Is a picture of you in the dictionary next to the word disingenuous?

Squatting in East CoCo says

Can you show me a poll that shows the "vast majority" of people accept the official story of 9/11? No?

And once again, I said the vast majority don't believe your version of events (and I'm talking about US citizens here before you go off and find yet another poll, no doubt this time about what Middle Eastern arabs think happened). You really don't seem very good at following a line of argument. Are you sure you're a professor?

Squatting in East CoCo says

Are you saying that "the Chinese not trusting the US government is proof that the US government blew up the wtc"?

Help me understand your logic?

Oh, good God. This is the level of a US university professor? Read what I posted again. It really isn't that difficult to follow.

Squatting in East CoCo says

And once again can you show me a poll that backs up your statement that "the vast majority don't believe your version of events"?

You posted one up for crying out loud. This is just ridiculous.

And I take it you do actually understand that when polls show some people don't fully believe the government's version of events, it doesn't actually mean they therefore think that the government blew up the buildings.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Please help me understand the logic of your statement:

" do you think that a poll showing a lot of Chinese don't trust the US government (paint me shocked) is somehow proof that your government blew up the WTC?"

FFS, read the bloody link you posted up and then think about it. It's not that bloody hard to understand or are you just playing the village idiot?

Squatting in East CoCo says

Bigsby says

Oh, good God. This is the level of a US university professor?

Personal attacks are not helpful to the debate.

You are a troll. Plain and simple.

I've wasted too much time on this. You simply aren't worth the effort.

Squatting in East CoCo says

It may have been an insurance job. It may have been the jihadists. It may have been an accident.

You have yet to post any evidence conclusively against CD of WTC7.

Then why have you never discussed any of those other possibilities. You conspiracy wing-nuts have been stating it was the US government all the way through this thread. Come on, be honest...

And there will never be sufficient evidence for people with your views and your way of thinking. And just as with religion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are the one making the extraordinary claims and we are all still waiting for your extraordinary evidence.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I've posted a lot of links. I still don't understand your statement:

" do you think that a poll showing a lot of Chinese don't trust the US government (paint me shocked) is somehow proof that your government blew up the WTC?"

How does one follow the other?

Er, the bloody link that was included with my comment. I know you are a troll, but you should try a bit harder than that.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Personal attacks are not helpful to the debate.

"You can't waste time or money, but you can misuse them."

I am sorry you have no proof to contradict all the evidence I have presented for the CD of WTC7.

Are you a 9/11 conspiracy theory auto-response programme?

And I have no proof to contradict your evidence? Every single one of your posts has been countered by people on here. You simply don't want to listen. And every single Youtube video that has been posted has singularly failed to meet the criteria of extraordinary evidence. It doesn't even represent any kind of evidence except in the bizarre world of people who think 2 puffs of smoke is proof of a CD. Seemingly, pretty much anything passes as proof to those of you who believe. All bow down to the altar of 9/11 conspiracy theories. Any 'evidence' is good enough. It's all a matter of faith.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Still waiting for a poll that shows a vast majority of people believe in the official story of 9/11.

And once again, nobody except you has mentioned such a poll, so what exactly are you waiting for?

Squatting in East CoCo says

Pretend I am a simpleton (I am asking for it) and explain your statement:

" do you think that a poll showing a lot of Chinese don't trust the US government (paint me shocked) is somehow proof that your government blew up the WTC?"

Read the link you posted (after all you posted it), read the bit where it talks about Chinese opinion on what happened. Take that opinion, then apply it to my comment and relate it to what you have been claiming. Get it?

Squatting in East CoCo says

I do believe in God, but I have no evidence.

I claim:

There was trace evidence of thermite in the WTC dust.

There was earwitness and video account of explosions.

The official story has WTC7 falling in a manner which defied physics.

The official report neglected or denied evidence.

These claims are not extraordinary.

You require extraordinary evidence to prove your argument. Your claims don't have to be extraordinary, your evidence does. And if your evidence amounts to those points, as it quite clearly seems to, then you have utterly failed in that requirement.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Chinese opinion is NOT evidence that our government blew up the WTC. You can do better than that.

Oh, God, tell me you are just playing dumb.

Squatting in East CoCo says

If you find yourself getting upset over my posts, is it because there may be some truth to the evidence i present?

No, it's because I'm flabbergasted that a supposed university professor could post what you post.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Only 4 points there. Can you rebut them with evidence?

If you like I will repost the evidence for my points. All 4 of them.

You've already posted your evidence and it's already been rebutted. Is it really necessary for you to play this game?

Anyway, enough of your inane ramblings. Enough of your circular arguments. Enough with your false claims of being a professor. I'm going to go do something that doesn't involve my brain cells suffering a slow and painful death at the hands of a trolling conspiracy theorist.

Squatting in East CoCo says

I don't mean to upset you Bigsby. I suspect that you are troubled by the inconsistencies of the official story.

You suspect wrong. As usual.

Goodnight.

Bap33 says

@bob,
when I watch the few vids of WTC 7 going down, it sure does seem like a lot of destruction happens in many places at the same time. What I mean is, like, the roof didnt just collapse in the weakest area, or a side of finishing material didn't just flake off, of a window or two burst when the thing flexed ... it just sagged in the center, from front to back, and then went down, in, down, in, and looks very "smooth", for a lack of better word.

If the building lost it's integrity due to the ground being heaved, then a big earth quake would have done the same thing, and more important than that, there may be other buildings in that general area that have been stressed. Right?

Anyways, for me, it is WTC 7 that bugs me. I don't buy the interanl job idea, but the NWO / Rothchilds / Illuminati type of event trigger is possible, right?

Bap, quit being a fucking moron.

bgamall4 says

He is saying the truth and you call him a bleeping moron? You are rude, Homeboy. Not too smart either.

Bap is a troll. He pretends to be a truther, then says, "Oh, I was just playing along". Read his posting history.

This video makes a strong case to call for a new investigation. Architects and engineers in this group have nothing to gain and much to lose by making their opinions public. These people are not conspiracy nuts. They are serious professionals.
As a builder I agree with their concerns.
The people who criticize the video as being in-scientific either cannot grasp the disturbing implications or they choose to remain in their own bubble. Or, they are professional shills to maintain the official government conspiracy theory.
Thank you for posting this video. The 3000 victims of 9/11 are owed a new investigation, no matter how difficult this may be

Trolling in East CoCo's sock puppet says

Architects and engineers in this group have nothing to gain and much to lose by making their opinions public.

Nothing to gain...except $400,000 a year.

Squatting in East CoCo says

An Excellent Analysis of the Collapse of WTC7.

That same Steven Jones wrote a paper claiming to have proven that the resurrected Jesus visited America. Do you believe that as well?

Hmmm... maybe you are a professor, Squatting. Steven Jones is an obvious example that professors don't necessarily have to be intelligent. Of course, he got kicked out of his job for being a nutcase.

Squatting in East CoCo says

Head of AE911truth.org makes a good salary.

Hmmm... could have sworn I just said that yesterday.

Why don't you take me off ignore so you can stop making an idiot of yourself? Then you won't have to use your sock puppet BuilderMike to find out what I'm saying.

Homeboy says

bgamall4 says

He is saying the truth and you call him a bleeping moron? You are rude, Homeboy. Not too smart either.

Bap is a troll. He pretends to be a truther, then says, "Oh, I was just playing along". Read his posting history.

read the history. I had some fun.
homeboy is libtarded, so don't be harsh to him. His mom couldn't point out his daddy in the line-up, and he's still angry about it.

houseboy, if you re-read my post to bob, I'm asking a question, not making any statements. I have compassion for the libtarded. We all should.

This video makes a strong case to call for a new investigation. Architects and engineers in this group have nothing to gain and much to lose by making their opinions public. These people are not conspiracy nuts. They are serious professionals.
As a builder I agree with their concerns.
The people who criticize the video as being in-scientific either cannot grasp the disturbing implications or they choose to remain in their own bubble. Or, they are professional shills to maintain the official government conspiracy theory.
Thank you for posting this video. The 3000 victims of 9/11 are owed a new investigation, no matter how difficult this may be