9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-03-2016, 08:55 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
So I'm guessing this guy will come back at some point again but once again not address the demonstrated horrid flaw in his reasoning and assumption leaping of happenings in relation to this forum with the view count thing with evidence showcased against him just as he ignored responded after his ha this place can't math not seeing how certain people were able to neg him multiple points but his looking at the number of members negging him was as far as his evaluation went.

He just demonstrates terrible assumption leaping and poor logical outlooks yet thinks people should do the things that he thinks are going to satisfy him or else they're ignoring reality. Or lack the curiosity they SHOULD have because he has it.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2016, 09:53 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(17-03-2016 03:43 AM)adey67 Wrote:  And I said what about any conspiracy theory?

Please see pages 160 & 161 of this thread.

I read each of my posts on 160 and 161.

What did I say about any conspiracy?

Who did I accuse of doing what?

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2016, 03:19 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Not outright you didn't but your last post on page 160 did kinda allude to the demolition theory. My point and the points of many others has been that if we accept your physics of the collapse we are left with only one alternative that being that the towers were bought down by other means and if it wasn't the aircraft it logically has to be one of the various conspiracy theories. You keep on about the physics but if we accept your physics you are asking/ forcing us to accept a conspiracy theory none of which remotely make sense, which kinda means that your physics cannot be correct.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-03-2016, 06:20 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(24-03-2016 03:19 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Not outright you didn't but your last post on page 160 did kinda allude to the demolition theory. My point and the points of many others has been that if we accept your physics of the collapse we are left with only one alternative that being that the towers were bought down by other means and if it wasn't the aircraft it logically has to be one of the various conspiracy theories. You keep on about the physics but if we accept your physics you are asking/ forcing us to accept a conspiracy theory none of which remotely make sense, which kinda means that your physics cannot be correct.

Quote:con·spir·a·cy
kənˈspirəsē/
noun
noun: conspiracy; plural noun: conspiracies

a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
synonyms: plot, scheme, plan, machination, ploy, trick, ruse, subterfuge;
informalracket
"a conspiracy to manipulate the results"
the action of plotting or conspiring.
"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
synonyms: plotting, collusion, intrigue, connivance, machination, collaboration;
treason

The term conspiracy is about people and their actions not the inanimate objects they use to accomplish the actions.

Debate based on defective semantics. Oops

[55,752]
psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes psikeyhackr's post
31-03-2016, 07:54 PM (This post was last modified: 31-03-2016 09:35 PM by Chas.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(31-03-2016 06:20 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(24-03-2016 03:19 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Not outright you didn't but your last post on page 160 did kinda allude to the demolition theory. My point and the points of many others has been that if we accept your physics of the collapse we are left with only one alternative that being that the towers were bought down by other means and if it wasn't the aircraft it logically has to be one of the various conspiracy theories. You keep on about the physics but if we accept your physics you are asking/ forcing us to accept a conspiracy theory none of which remotely make sense, which kinda means that your physics cannot be correct.

Quote:con·spir·a·cy
kənˈspirəsē/
noun
noun: conspiracy; plural noun: conspiracies

a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
synonyms: plot, scheme, plan, machination, ploy, trick, ruse, subterfuge;
informalracket
"a conspiracy to manipulate the results"
the action of plotting or conspiring.
"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
synonyms: plotting, collusion, intrigue, connivance, machination, collaboration;
treason

The term conspiracy is about people and their actions not the inanimate objects they use to accomplish the actions.

Debate based on defective semantics. Oops

[55,752]
psik

I see that your reading comprehension is as abominable as ever.

Adey was not referring to the means but to the choice of means. That is, to a different conspiracy.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
01-04-2016, 03:00 AM (This post was last modified: 01-04-2016 03:10 AM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(31-03-2016 06:20 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(24-03-2016 03:19 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Not outright you didn't but your last post on page 160 did kinda allude to the demolition theory. My point and the points of many others has been that if we accept your physics of the collapse we are left with only one alternative that being that the towers were bought down by other means and if it wasn't the aircraft it logically has to be one of the various conspiracy theories. You keep on about the physics but if we accept your physics you are asking/ forcing us to accept a conspiracy theory none of which remotely make sense, which kinda means that your physics cannot be correct.

Quote:con·spir·a·cy
kənˈspirəsē/
noun
noun: conspiracy; plural noun: conspiracies

a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
synonyms: plot, scheme, plan, machination, ploy, trick, ruse, subterfuge;
informalracket
"a conspiracy to manipulate the results"
the action of plotting or conspiring.
"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
synonyms: plotting, collusion, intrigue, connivance, machination, collaboration;
treason

The term conspiracy is about people and their actions not the inanimate objects they use to accomplish the actions.

Debate based on defective semantics. Oops

[55,752]
psik
As Chas pointed out choice of means is the operative phrase, perhaps I should have been more specific.
Also,people and the inanimate objects they use to achieve their actions have effects on both other people and other inanimate objects eg; religitard terrorists fly loaded airliners into buildings, fire weakened buildings structure, building collapses or man kicks tin can with booted foot, tin can flies off in the air and lands elsewhere.
My point is that if the towers did not collapse as the result of the fires weakening the structural integrity we are left with choosing one of the myriad of conspiracy theories, controlled demolition, nano thermite laser/death ray from space etc etc, all are ridiculous to the point of insanity so I don't believe it is defective semantics its common sense.
The trouble I have with you is that its very difficult to engage with someone who's cookie cutter is so incredibly narrow, physics and models and that's about it, I just don't understand how you cannot see that the wider picture is a vital part of the whole thing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2016, 11:38 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(01-04-2016 03:00 AM)adey67 Wrote:  The trouble I have with you is that its very difficult to engage with someone who's cookie cutter is so incredibly narrow, physics and models and that's about it, I just don't understand how you cannot see that the wider picture is a vital part of the whole thing.

Regardless of what conspiracy did or did not occur, human beings cannot change the Laws of Physics. Therefore if airliner impacts doing structural damage and starting fires could cause the buildings THAT HUGE to collapse less than two hours after impact and come down in less than 30 seconds then why should the physics be difficult to demonstrate? Shouldn't that mean climate models must be utterly impossible? Laugh out load

But since the buildings did come down, if it can be demonstrated that airliners could not have done it, then some other "Conspiracy Theory" must be put on the table. I do not know OR CARE which one.

At this point the failure of engineering schools to resolve the issue is a bigger deal than who did it.

The nation that put men on the Moon can't even discuss the distribution of steel down skyscrapers. RIDICULOUS!!! The NIST could not even specify the amount of concrete in 10,000 pages. INSANE!!!

[56,105]
psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2016, 11:43 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(01-04-2016 11:38 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  Regardless of what conspiracy did or did not occur, human beings cannot change the Laws of Physics. Therefore if airliner impacts doing structural damage and starting fires could cause the buildings THAT HUGE to collapse less than two hours after impact and come down in less than 30 seconds then why should the physics be difficult to demonstrate?

They aren't.

You simply don't understand them.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2016, 12:13 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(01-04-2016 11:38 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(01-04-2016 03:00 AM)adey67 Wrote:  The trouble I have with you is that its very difficult to engage with someone who's cookie cutter is so incredibly narrow, physics and models and that's about it, I just don't understand how you cannot see that the wider picture is a vital part of the whole thing.

Regardless of what conspiracy did or did not occur, human beings cannot change the Laws of Physics. Therefore if airliner impacts doing structural damage and starting fires could cause the buildings THAT HUGE to collapse less than two hours after impact and come down in less than 30 seconds then why should the physics be difficult to demonstrate? Shouldn't that mean climate models must be utterly impossible? Laugh out load

But since the buildings did come down, if it can be demonstrated that airliners could not have done it, then some other "Conspiracy Theory" must be put on the table. I do not know OR CARE which one.

At this point the failure of engineering schools to resolve the issue is a bigger deal than who did it.

The nation that put men on the Moon can't even discuss the distribution of steel down skyscrapers. RIDICULOUS!!! The NIST could not even specify the amount of concrete in 10,000 pages. INSANE!!!

[56,105]
psik

Today I'm in a room full of certified general contractors taking continuing education classes. During the last break I was showing some of them a few of your posts. Your fame as an entertainer has grown, you should take your act on the road 'cause these guys were busting a gut laughing at you.

Laugh out load

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
01-04-2016, 06:27 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(01-04-2016 12:13 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Today I'm in a room full of certified general contractors taking continuing education classes. During the last break I was showing some of them a few of your posts. Your fame as an entertainer has grown, you should take your act on the road 'cause these guys were busting a gut laughing at you.

Laugh out load

Can any of your general contractors specify how much concrete they use on a job?

Can any explain why the NIST shouldn't be able to do that for the Twin Towers?

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: