If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
(Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
Vandar wrote:
Hiram Thair Mark wrote: "NoOneYouKnow" wrote in . net: Perhaps this will add to the "debate": http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html I don't follow HTML links. There could be viruses. Me, earlier in this thread: http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_squibs.html Your reply: This is a criticism of an argument apparently forwarded by "http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/". You could not know that unless you followed the html link I provided. I reiterate: You are a liar and a coward. Y'know, I'm no fan of Pres. Bush but the depth to which some of these sick people with sink just to fuel their irrational hatred is really scary. Hiram, dude, seek some therapy. Seriously. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
(Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
Hiram Thair Mark wrote:
"John P." wrote in : "Hiram Thair Mark" wrote in a message Funny how the 9/11 Truth Movement - no 1990s-style scare quotes required - base their arguments on documented evidence, while their detractors respond by calling them names and questioning their motives. The 9/11 truth movement presents theories, not facts. If they had facts, one could not readily dispute their claims. If they had facts, they'd not need to resort to tactics such as using selective quotes to mischaracterize what someone said, or selective editing of video evidence in order to make it appear to show something different from reality. If they would avoid such obvious and dishonest tactics, they might find support among a group of more reasoned people. Sorry "dude," Jesse speaks the uncomfortable truth that physics professors and hundreds of Ph.Ds have spoken out about since 9/11/01. Hundreds? I challenge you to name 25. Considering the irrational jingoistic rage from the pro-war, "glass parking lot" crowd, it's probably not wise to publish lists of political undesirables. Abortion doctors don't like their names published in lists for similar reasons. Sorry kook. You don't get the names, at least not from me. When you one day learn to use a search engine, perhaps you'll be able to spare 2 seconds to find them yourself. I'll list the names - you just need to pick out which of them would account for your "hundreds of PHD's" (or even 25 of them) James H. Fetzer: Philosophy Paul W. Rea Humanities Stephen LeRoy Economics Tracy Belvins Bioengineering David Gabbard Education Daniel Orr Economics Kevin Barrett adjunct lecturer at the University of Wisconsin on the subject of Islam: Religion and Culture. Robert M. Bowman has never held an academic position at any university. Daniele Ganser ETH David Ray Griffin Philosophy of religion and theology Wayne Madsen Investigative journalist, author, and syndicated columnist. John McMurtry FRSC, moral philosopher, ethicist, and author of six books on public policy issues Don Paul American peace movement activist, writer, musician, and poet. Kevin Ryan Former Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories in South Bend, Indiana, a subsidiary of Underwriters Labs(UL) responsible for water testing. He was fired after publicly challenging UL's conclusions regarding the collapse of the WTC. Webster G. Tarpley Author of George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992) and 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA (2005-6), historian and terrorism expert. Andreas von Bülow Former state-secretary in the German Defense Ministry, minister for research and technology, and member of Parliament for 25 years. William Woodward Psychology Harriet Cianci Tunxis Community College Judy Wood Resigned from the association on August 23, 2006 criticizing both Prof. Jones and the Journal for 9/11 Studies. Morgan Reynolds Resigned from the association on August 23, 2006 criticizing both Prof. Jones and the Journal for 9/11 Studies. Of the 139,000 members of the American Society of Civil Engineers, none are members of the Scholars for Truth Among the other Scholars for Truth members, you have degrees in; Folklore, English, Law, Philossphy, English Literature, Radiology, Medical Hypnosis, French Language & Culture, Math, Computer Science, Political Science, Classics & Philosophy, Criminal Profiling, Forensic Psychology, Humanities, American Studies, Cultural Studies, Physics of Optical Materials, Materials Science & Engineering, Theatre, Economics, Religious Studies, Theology, Linguistics, Oriental Languages, Literature and Humanities, Statistical Research, Sociology, Population Biology, Evolution & Ecology, Aeronautics, Astrophysics, Engineering, Political Science, Accounting, Creative Arts... Quite an unimpressive list when it comes to structural engineering, architectural engineering or forensic investigation. To be fair, SFT does list 2 'structural engineers' among their members - Doyle Winterton, a stereo salesman, was in training to be an engineer, but lost his license in 1999. Joseph M.. Phelps does appear to have been a structural engineer. He is 82 years old and runs a 9 hole golf course in Florida. You seem like quite an angry individual. I'm not sure if I should reply to you. Physician, heal thyself. YOU ARE A NUTJOB! |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
NORAD did not stand down. NORAD never looked at internal flights. (was: (Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
Well Done wrote in
: Hiram Thair Mark wrote: I didn't see any refutation of why NORAD stood down No refutation is needed against such mindless bull****, you idiot. NORAD did not stand down. NORAD never looked at internal flights. NORAD looked mostly North, but also East and West over the ocean. or why Cheney changed all the rules about how this stuff is handled -- centralizing command in himself -- right in the months preceding the "terrorist attack". He didn't. You guys are full of ****! snip Sorry "dude," Jesse speaks the uncomfortable truth that physics professors and hundreds of Ph.Ds have spoken out about since 9/11/01. ... proving once again the innate narcissism and ideological commitment of many a tenured Prof. There are SO many reasons these guys are utterly wrong it's just hard to know where to start. For one thing, the towers could NOT have been demoed without anyone noticing. The WTC towers had their load-bearing members distributed around the perimeter of the building. Any charges would have been seen as large explosions, complete with with shattering glass well below the level the planes hit. Besides, you don't demo a building from the top, you blow the lower floors and pull it into itself. The WTC collapsed due to catastrophic failure of load bearing members due to the impact of a 600 ton plane and the resulting fire. -- ): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" (: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net It's amazing how easily people like you can be fooled. -- The above post was written by A Troll. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
NORAD did not stand down. NORAD never looked at internal flights. (was: (Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
"A Troll" wrote in message ... Well Done wrote in : Hiram Thair Mark wrote: I didn't see any refutation of why NORAD stood down No refutation is needed against such mindless bull****, you idiot. NORAD did not stand down. NORAD never looked at internal flights. NORAD looked mostly North, but also East and West over the ocean. or why Cheney changed all the rules about how this stuff is handled -- centralizing command in himself -- right in the months preceding the "terrorist attack". He didn't. You guys are full of ****! snip Sorry "dude," Jesse speaks the uncomfortable truth that physics professors and hundreds of Ph.Ds have spoken out about since 9/11/01. ... proving once again the innate narcissism and ideological commitment of many a tenured Prof. There are SO many reasons these guys are utterly wrong it's just hard to know where to start. For one thing, the towers could NOT have been demoed without anyone noticing. The WTC towers had their load-bearing members distributed around the perimeter of the building. Any charges would have been seen as large explosions, complete with with shattering glass well below the level the planes hit. Besides, you don't demo a building from the top, you blow the lower floors and pull it into itself. The WTC collapsed due to catastrophic failure of load bearing members due to the impact of a 600 ton plane and the resulting fire. -- ): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" (: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net It's amazing how easily people like you can be fooled. You're giving them far too much credit. They've been fully conditioned to embrace victimhood at the slightest provocation. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
NORAD did not stand down. NORAD never looked at internal flights. (was: (Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
On 2006-10-02 00:32:17 -0700, A Troll said:
It's amazing how easily people like you can be fooled. Time to give you the respect you deserve. *plonk* |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
(Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
"marika" wrote in message
oups.com... NoOneYouKnow wrote: "Hiram Thair Mark" wrote in message ... "NoOneYouKnow" wrote in . net: Perhaps this will add to the "debate": http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/06-09-11.html I don't follow HTML links. There could be viruses. Wow, you really are paranoid, aren't you. i had never seen it before. the first page of what you sent has four citrines. i hate citrines. and these are overpriced ones too i did like the designer jewelry And hallucinatory! Do you hear voices too? ---JRE--- |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
(Ventura) Payne Stewart's jet
NoOneYouKnow wrote: And hallucinatory! Do you hear voices too? I don't know why you needed to "probe". This is common knowledge, more so in steeplechasing than flat racing though. mk5000 "Let's go driving in my new car over a cliff onto the rocks below you never know we might live to tell the tale"--King Chicago, Boo Hewerdine |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|