|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 10/16/2006 : 19:47:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Once again your silence is deafening.
Why don't you come back when you have more than a handful of false assertions and a needless contempt for those who generously attempt to show you the many, many problems with your evidence-free conjectures.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2006 : 19:54:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
ergo123:
Well, someone truly looking for the truth wouldn't just stop there--only someone affraid of what pushing that theory will result in would stop there.
Sorry, but that doesn't work. I am not afraid of what I would find if there was enough evidence to investigate the cd theory. Sure, it would be a big bummer if it was true, but it's also a bummer that there is probably no life after death. But I accept that probable fate based on a lack of evidence otherwise. On the other hand, a person of faith may pursue that possibility to his grave. All theories are not equal. And that is a point that you seem to ignore. You would have scientists pursuing, or giving equal weight to all hypotheses, which is just not a reasonable thing to expect.
Given the problems with the cd theory, it does not rise to the level of likelihood that the planes did it theory does. It doesn't even come close.
Soooooo…
If you feel otherwise, it is up to you to present the evidence to support the cd theory. Not us. As an extraordinary claim, it is up to the claimant (you) to provide the evidence to support said claim. (I know you have said you are not making that claim. But of course, you are offering it as a viable alternative, which is pretty much the same thing. You need to demonstrate that it really is a viable alternative to the official theory. Once again, like creationists taking pot shots at Darwin, without offering a viable alternative to evolution, you do the same with the NIST report. It's time to leave that alone and take your best shot at supporting the theory you favor. Otherwise, this has all been hot air.)
All conclusions are tentative. So you do have a shot here. (One you seem reluctant to take, and worse, feel more comfortable throwing insults in our direction because we don't just drop everything and follow you down a road you have so far refused to take on your own. If you need us to hold your hand, why don't you just say so?)
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2006 : 20:06:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Is that all you can process--things that are explicitly said or written? What kind of scientist can't see what is assumed in a given argument?! And does NIST or the 9/11 CR discuss what happened at the pentagon? I must have missed those chapters...
Holy crap! You're right: the government's whole theory revolves around 19 hijackers just coincidentally boarding four planes and flying three of them into buildings! The scales have been lifted from mine eyes, and I see the glory that exists within the sheepskin of Steven Jones! O, WOE upon the world that hath not accepted the "pools of molten metal" nor the "gravity only worketh vertically" arguments! WOE be to those poor sheeple who are fooled by the Feds into thinking that photographs of airplane wreckage at the Pentagon have not been Photoshoppethed! Surely thou, ergo, art the shepard to bring this flock around! |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/17/2006 : 04:00:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Now then: if you wanted to blast the top of the Twin Towers down into their own footprints, how would you go about it? Just in a general sort of way. You don't have to get too technical unless you want to.
How does a shaped charge work, and how would you assemble one? What is a liniar shaped charge and how it it used? What other types of shaped charges are there, and their uses. Be precise, because shaped charges on the support structure is the only way to implode a major building.
Answer those few questions, laddy, and you will have discovered that groundlessness for yourself.
You are guessing; I am not.
Am I to assume that this means:
A( You are too lazy to look up the answers
B( Afraid of what you might find
C( Are here just to troll?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 04:05:19 [Permalink]
|
| D) All of the above |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 04:16:18 [Permalink]
|
For others who might be interested, Wikipedia has some excellent and well-references articles on demolitions....:
Demolitions
Shaped charges
Primacord
And if ergo should actually open those links (he won't. They almost never do), he might learn something about the impossibility of his entirely speculative conjecture. Or not....
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 08:13:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Haven't you caught on yet Dave? You are my fact-checker... that's what you are for.
Oh, okay, so you lied when you said that you didn't expect anyone else to do your homework for you. Got it, I understand now.
No, I didn't lie. I just changed my approach. You seemed to enjoy taking points I made and doing the research on them to prove me wrong. I realized what a time saver that was. Not only did you save me time debunking some of my points, but the ones you did not debunk indicate areas that will likely be fruitful. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 08:16:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Once again your silence is deafening.
Why don't you come back when you have more than a handful of false assertions and a needless contempt for those who generously attempt to show you the many, many problems with your evidence-free conjectures.
How do you know the accusations are false? You show no evidence that they are false?
BTW: Why are you so angry? |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 08:37:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
ergo123:
Well, someone truly looking for the truth wouldn't just stop there--only someone affraid of what pushing that theory will result in would stop there.
quote:
Sorry, but that doesn't work. I am not afraid of what I would find if there was enough evidence to investigate the cd theory.
Then why don't you investigate it?
quote:
Sure, it would be a big bummer if it was true, but it's also a bummer that there is probably no life after death. But I accept that probable fate based on a lack of evidence otherwise.
So to you, lack of evidence is evidence of probable non-existance? That's a leap of faith I'm not willing to make. For me, lack of evidence is lack of evidence. All it does for me is lead me to realize that I don't know the answer. So while you would answer the question of "Is there a life after death?" with a "Probably not," I would answer it with an "I don't know."
Based on my experience with people like you (people who make those leaps of faith, typically out of some need to have "an answer") those little assumptions are sympomatic of a closed mind--a mind that needs closure on a topic to move on. The problem with that kind of mind is that its subconscious tries to defend those assumptions and turns a blind eye to evidence that counters those assumptions. Read some Freud to fully understand what I'm talking about.
quote:
Given the problems with the cd theory, it does not rise to the level of likelihood that the planes did it theory does. It doesn't even come close.
What problems with the cd theory? All anyone has presented is some logistical issues with a "typical" controlled demolition--one that is designed such that none of the debris will hit another building and no one gets hurt. I haven't seen anyone offer any evidence that there would be problems with a controlled demolition where those criteria were not applied to the situation.
|
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 08:39:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Is that all you can process--things that are explicitly said or written? What kind of scientist can't see what is assumed in a given argument?! And does NIST or the 9/11 CR discuss what happened at the pentagon? I must have missed those chapters...
Holy crap! You're right: the government's whole theory revolves around 19 hijackers just coincidentally boarding four planes and flying three of them into buildings! The scales have been lifted from mine eyes, and I see the glory that exists within the sheepskin of Steven Jones! O, WOE upon the world that hath not accepted the "pools of molten metal" nor the "gravity only worketh vertically" arguments! WOE be to those poor sheeple who are fooled by the Feds into thinking that photographs of airplane wreckage at the Pentagon have not been Photoshoppethed! Surely thou, ergo, art the shepard to bring this flock around!
No, Dave. That's not the coincidental part. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 08:43:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Now then: if you wanted to blast the top of the Twin Towers down into their own footprints, how would you go about it? Just in a general sort of way. You don't have to get too technical unless you want to.
How does a shaped charge work, and how would you assemble one? What is a liniar shaped charge and how it it used? What other types of shaped charges are there, and their uses. Be precise, because shaped charges on the support structure is the only way to implode a major building.
Answer those few questions, laddy, and you will have discovered that groundlessness for yourself.
You are guessing; I am not.
Am I to assume that this means:
A( You are too lazy to look up the answers
B( Afraid of what you might find
C( Are here just to troll?
Assume what you like, filth. But the reason I don't bother answering your questions or looking at your wikipedia links is that they are irrelevant because they deal with conventional or traditional controlled demolitions--which are designed to cause no collateral damage to property or people.
If the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 were assisted by a controlled demolition, it would appear that those design issues were not really accounted for. |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 09:02:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
No, I didn't lie. I just changed my approach.
Without letting anyone know.quote:
You seemed to enjoy taking points I made and doing the research on them to prove me wrong.
No, my point was that your "points" can't possibly be made. They were just wild assertions without support.quote:
I realized what a time saver that was.
And you would save even more time by checking them yourself before you even assert their truthfulness here.quote:
Not only did you save me time debunking some of my points, but the ones you did not debunk indicate areas that will likely be fruitful.
What a nutty assumption that is, since the primary limitation on what I do or don't debunk is how much time I have to spare. Jones' other arguments seem just as easy to eliminate - a handful of minutes looking at the actual evidence followed by a few seconds' thought and maybe a calculation or two. The most time is simply spent typing it all up. Since you have no need to type any of it up to debunk them for yourself, it'd be much more time-efficient for both of us if you did your homework on your own. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2006 : 09:11:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
No, I didn't lie. I just changed my approach.
quote:
Without letting anyone know.
Now you know!
quote:
I realized what a time saver that was.
quote:
And you would save even more time by checking them yourself before you even assert their truthfulness here.
I'm not following your logic here dave. How does doing the fact checking myself save me time versus having a genius like you do it for me?
|
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
 |
|
Just to be clear (part 2)
