911: What makes you suspicious - now with added extra poll option!
- Thread starter taffboy gwyrdd
- Start date
- Status
WouldBe
Dislicksick
Jazzz said:
Why when it is known ( and reported in the article you are moaning about) that smoke and flammable liquid (both of which were present) are capable of causing explosions do you insist it was a bomb / demolition charge?
It is equally unlikely that a UFO crash landed onto the towers bringing them down. Why not consider that possibility as well?
WouldBe
Dislicksick
Jazzz said:
Foe steel to warp like that it need to be heated to in excess of 400C yet that is safe to touch is it?
See you still haven't commented on your own evidence of the Madrid fire that clearly shows an office fire is capable of causing large steel beams to severely sag.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y
You're entitled to your own opinions, Jazzz, but you are not entitled to your own facts, especially when they've been proved to be bullshit time and again...
You're entitled to your own opinions, Jazzz, but you are not entitled to your own facts, especially when they've been proved to be bullshit time and again...
I will concede that having been used to using 'rappunzel's' name I may have mentioned it a few more times, I was mistaken. However, that's not the same as being a 'liar', a word which you are far too eager to bandy around.editor said:
And there was nothing 'moronic' about defending her. Rather than being pissed off with me for mentioning her name as you make out, she counts me as something of a hero.
Thanks to your failure to make amends, the site not only risks legal action from her, which I wouldn't want to see but could hardly blame her as she suffered immense distress here, but also extremely bad press should she decide to make a story out of it elsewhere.
Oh incidentally, the reason she 'flounced' when laptop asked her something had nothing to do with laptop's question and everything to do with receiving a pm from Mrs Magpie. I believe that's the last reason anyone had for doubting anything about her.
Anyway, I've said enough about her.
I'm not concerned about the name of my street being revealed per se. However I AM concerned about unequivocal threats and so should you. I'm not making a huge deal out of this, because there did seem to be some misunderstanding on pk's part and he was big enough to apologise, but this is really not the sort of thing you can have being posted, at all, and if I get anything like that again coming my way I will go to the police regardless.
There were - I think - 47 such steel beams. Only two engines.WouldBe said:
Plus you are missing the point that no damage could have occurred to the steels below the impact floors, and there is no force I can think of that could have brought them down.
Here is the picture of that 'heat sink'
the columns under construction
Steve Jones says very much the same in his paper, which hosts the above picture
Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?
editor
hiraethified
No. You lied. There's no other word for it.Jazzz said:
You claimed that you stopped referring to her by her real name when 'reminded'. You did not. You carried on.
And you still haven't explained why you chose to ignore her express request to have her name taken off these boards and why you thought it was OK to continue compromising her privacy and putting the site at risk from legal action.
Perhaps you'd like to explain now, because the FAQ is very strict on that kind of behaviour.
brixtonvilla
should be Oslovilla, really
Another piece of "evidence" bitch-slapped/discredited by a reputable academic source... it's like watching table tennis, this.
This is ridiculous!editor said:
She admires me greatly, and has no complaint with anything I've said about her.
You, on the other hand, she thinks... well let's not go there.
So in the heat of discussion I mentioned her by old login a few times because that's how we were all used to calling her. Undeliberately. Big deal. I haven't said anything bad about her.
When I first started defending her, there were a chorus of voices against me. Last time, it was only you and laptop. All the other mods appear to have rightly distanced themselves from the shameful affair, and most notably, not a word from Mrs.M.
If you want the site to be safe from either legal action or expose, you would lance the boil by simply making a statement undoing the damage. Yet you are too obstinate for this.
I'm sorry about that.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Don't you try to drag other mods into this as if they tacitly supported your position. I certainly don't.
<editor: identifying info removed>FridgeMagnet said:
No one has produced a scrap of any evidence with any substance to doubt her. I'm seeing her soon, if you have any questions you would like to clear up I can put them to her.
But why bother, when you can smear outrageously and then refuse to countenance the possibility that you were wrong?
I'm surprised at you Fridgemagnet. I thought you had seen through the appeal of the rumour mill and lynch mob.
"What must not be, cannot be"
editor
hiraethified
You mean 'academics' whose research is so shoddy that their own university ends up distancing themselves, pointing out that they're "not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review"?Jazzz said:And you wonder why academics may be afraid to speak out publicly?
Unless you've got proof that the entire university was also 'in on it too', I'll look forward to your reasons for supporting such poor quality research in preference to proper, peer-reviewed analysis.
editor
hiraethified
Yes. Why not try and stir up all over again, eh?Jazzz said:
In accordance with her wishes, all references to her were removed off this site at no small personal inconvenience to me, so I can only assume your constant attempts to keep bringing it up here is part of a campaign to get the site, and more specifically me, in trouble.
It's old news. It's long been removed off the site.
You're a nasty, malicious piece of shit-stirring work and I really am running out of reasons why I should let you remain here. I'll see what the other mods think.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
brixtonvilla
should be Oslovilla, really
Have you been to university, Jazz?
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
It's no longer a subject for discussion here. Your friend does not want to see any more it appears (which is fine with me) and any further bringing up of the issue is a potential threat to the board and will be dealt with as such. Therefore I would strongly advise against it.Jazzz said:
Condescend all you like, I'm used to it, as long as it's not related at all to any identifiable issues.
brixtonvilla
should be Oslovilla, really
Just wondered if you realised what a big deal it was for a university to publicly denounce a member of staff like that. It's not taken lightly - this is someone's professional reputation we're talking about. It's that person's livelihood. Are you claiming that this is an act of censorship due to a dangerous, 9-11 consensus-threatening theory, and that there are other academics who are being cowed into silence? And if so, who's doing the censorship and why? (and don't even THINK of coming up with that "I-dunno-I'm-just-asking-questions" schtick). Or are you willing to consider that maybe the research this guy did just wasn't up to the normal (yes, peer-reviewed) academic standards? Which seems more likely to you, based on a balance of probabilities?
- Status
Similar threads
