Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
#28
Tony,
Quit the ad homs. I have no agenda and I could care less. You and others have accused me of being a paid agent for the US government which is complete rubbish. You have made all sorts of attacks when all I did was state that your arguments have not held up to scrutiny. Let readers decide, if they can whether you are making it up and cherry picking to support your pre concieved beliefs or if you are truly trying to figure out what happened. When those much smarter than me have asked you to defend your positions you have dodged. I tried to share my work with you in a polite and civilized way and you gotten all childish and attacked me as having some sort of agenda.

No I won't swear that anything happened. I will say that the CD case has not been made and that a further investigation to hopefully get more data and proper analysis should be done. I do not agree with the NIST explanation for the twins and building 7's collapse.

See I am not a government shill for a truther bot. I tried to examine the evidence and the structure at my level of understanding and to understand all the arguments made for and against CD and the inside job. The extraodinary claim of CD puts the burden on the CD side to present an affirmative case with supporting evidence along with the mechanisms and so forth. They have not. NIST bulding 7 analysis has been debunked by truth guys and I concur with their findings. I don't buy the sagging truss stuff either. Having said that your claim makes no sense and has not convinced me. But your critics have convinced me that you are wrong.

This is a debate and people who are interested need to inform themselves of all the relevant issues, science and engineering. Or... they can repeat what some expert claims. And I don't know many who consider Bazant as the go to guy who explained the collapse of the towers.

If you don't agree with me... fine. Just confine your remarks to the substance and leave the personal attacks out of it. it's undignified. And it makes you sound a bit desparate... when you can't argue the facts attack the messenger.


Messages In This Thread
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis - by Jeffrey Orling - 06-08-2013, 03:00 AM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WTC-7 Before Collapse - Video of activities inside and outside Peter Lemkin 0 5,819 04-12-2015, 09:45 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New Detailed Analysis of WTC 7 Controlled Demolition Peter Lemkin 0 6,248 01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 5 5,729 29-11-2013, 04:31 AM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  New Analysis Summary Of 9-11-01 Insider Trading [with some very interesting facts, if true]! Peter Lemkin 4 7,141 28-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis: Redux Lauren Johnson 0 4,514 16-08-2013, 03:39 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  New Seismic Analysis Further Points to Controlled Demolition.... Peter Lemkin 0 4,426 03-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  911 Meta Analysis Jeffrey Orling 18 14,862 23-10-2012, 08:54 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  STill the best and most comprehensive timeline and information source for 911-related events Peter Lemkin 0 3,415 10-08-2012, 08:10 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  New theory explains collapse of Twin Towers- Aluminium and water explosions Magda Hassan 7 12,282 27-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  First Wikileaks Cable possibly related to 911, Al Quaeda, etc. Peter Lemkin 0 7,447 26-09-2011, 08:02 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)