AviationBanter - View Single Post - Video of THERMITE REACTION at WTC on 9/11

Tank Fixer

In article ,
on Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:47:31 GMT,
TRUTH attempted to say .....

mrtravel wrote in
m:

TRUTH wrote:

Tank Fixer wrote in
.net:

In article ,
on Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:20:47 GMT,
Wake Up! attempted to say .....

mrtravel wrote in news:ZBvRf.521$4L1.486
:

Wake Up! wrote:

Whatever, though, for you to simply assume that WTC 7, a steel
framed building, totally collapsed near free fall speed from fire,
you are definitely not qualified. A qualified engineer would know
that steel framed buildings do not completely collapse from fire.
Never. Sorry.

You claim it was thermite.
There is also ample evidence on collapses of steel structures.
But, don't let the facts bother you.
You seem to be ignoring any information provided to you, even the
info you post yourself.

No 1: It was thermite or some other kind of cutter-explosives. It's
the ones who believe the government's nonsense that say it was fire.

#1 Thermite is NOT a cutter explosive.

red herring. Whether is is a cutter explosive or not, it means
nothing to the points in Jones paper

Are all of your false beliefs "red herrings"?
Dr Jones is NOT an expert. Why do you have so much faith in his paper?

I had said a while ago that I knew the WTC was professionally demolished
long before I even heard of Dr Jones. The evidence is so obvious, so
overwhelming, and so clear. Jones' paper just helped me understand the
science a bit more. I need not "have faith" in Jones' paper. There is
nothing in it for me to have faith of. I just looked at the verifiable
information, and used my common sense. I don't need a physics professor,
or any other professor to tell me how to examine the evidence. My common
sense is extremely keen. I need not examine it scientifically. There is
too much evidence for it all to be coincidence. It is not normal thinking
to assume it's coincidence. Sorry, coincidences like that do not happen.
They do not.

So you are approaching this from a predetermined point of view.
Just the very same thing you accuse anyone who disagrees with you of.

I would say you have the common sense of a house fly, to be charitable.

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.