The typical JW education process is simply repeating their facts over and over at every meeting and publication. It's so redundant and yet it works and every JW eventually buys whatever that fact is. I suppose starting 3 threads on the same topic and then name calling everyone who disputes it is similar to the JW education process that we are all to familiar with.
One problem, it's still not true
Re: My 9/11 threads ... a study in NLP ... enjoy!
by What-A-Coincidence 76 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
wha happened?
-
Caedes
Golf,
I am not interested in checking out links to some dodgy website, If you are prepared to state in your own words what bought down the twin towers then I am prepared to read what you have to say. The Nist report I have read made perfect sense to me, all I have heard from others like you is some extremely unlikely and convoluted conspiracy theory involving the complicity of thousands of people. When you can make a realistic case with evidence then I will reconsider my point of view.
I don't have to discredit you, you keep on doing it for me.
-
Beta Male
the inner columns were the ones actually bearing the weight of the building. weakening the outside columns would have caused at worst a failing of the outer curtain of the building, but not the destruction of the building itself. when the inner, more structurally important columns failed, the building failed.
btw, just because you know how to build, doesnt mean you know how to knock down.
-
golf2
Beta-male, I'm also a tree surgeon, meaning, I know how to knock things down. What's your experience? You didn't get my drift about the additional columns. Here I go again, the inner core columns were MUCH thicker than the perimeter columns. Are you trying to convince me that 47 inner columns uniformly and simultaneously collapsed together not to mention the hundreds and hundreds of other columns below where the plane crashed? I guess citing the additional columns of 240 didn't leave any lasting impression about this immense structured building that collapsed. What experience do YOU have in this field? Are you a demolition expert? Provided me with some videos to view your argument, is that asking too much?
Caedes, what crap you are spewing out, the Nist's report? Is that your best? A government funded group, yeah right.
You haven't checked out http://physics911.net/stevenjones As I've said Caedes, you are calling these top notch Engineers and Architects at http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html arse's. So, your telling me that your in a better position than these Engineers and Architects to know HOW the WTC came crashing down!!!! You remind me of a scripture in the Bible that says,"For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he is deceiving his own mind." Galations 6:3 You not acknowledging the contents of above sites speaks volumes. Your still saving face. -
shamus100
Hi Golf2,
I'm not interested in looking into those websites either. I enjoy nice debates, not people who are condescending and rude - not that you have been that way to me. When someone bases all they're information of the internet, something is really wrong, IMO. Based on YouTube, well, that's just crazy, being the generation that can change pictures and video in a heartbeat. Frankly, the internet is full of idiots websites who live in they're parents basement suite and have a few marbles rolling around. I prefer to get my source from credible sources.
I appreciate PM's when it comes to JW issues, but for debates I'm not so keen. Let's keep it out here if you want, but I'm not looking at those websites.
Have a good evening.
-
Robdar
Anybody who has watched H&C knows they use NLP with anybody they do not agree with. The professor is not an exception.
-
Robdar
It seem to me that the architects would have designed the towers to come straight down in the case of a disaster. In a city like NY, it would be a design flaw, not to mention negligent, to have them topple willy nilly.
-
golf2
Fellows, I'm referring to professors, engineers a architects on this subject and yet you refuse to check them out, why? Here's another professor speaking out, and it's 50 pages in length if you care to read it. Http://review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html Really, am I asking toooooooo much?
If you guys can't be objective about this issue, how can you be objective about other issues? I have provided many sites for everyone to view, what have you guys provided? Is this a one-sided affair? As former witnesses, did you not have material to refute householders, well, where's your refutation? What I'm beginning to see is that nobody wants to at least say, I may be wrong, instead, you give me government funded agencies who naturally support government claims. I've taken abusive and belittling comments about my occupation from people who have NO about my trade!!!! I've been blessed and honored with the people that I have worked with throughout my years.
For anyone to say to me that they will not look at videos or rely on experts who say that the wtc was rigged, and yet, accepts NIST and Fema's report, just doesn't make sense. Check out these agencies, it may surprise you. While your at it, check out FIAT money and The Federal Reserve that has deceived people since 1913!!!!! I guess that's all bullshit too!!
Please supply me information (videos,etc) from independent sources that say, the wtc collapse came about by the plane crash and the subsequent fire. Is that tooooo much to ask? -
Caedes
You are a funny guy golf2,
I have no interest in spending time reading 50 pages of some wacko when he is so unconvincing you cannot summarise his claims in your own words. I certainly have no interest in reading websites created by tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists. I am not interested in any amateur video on youtube, I would rather read a report based on scientific research.
If your collection of engineers and architects have a complete explanation of how three skyscrapers could be wired for demolition without anyone in those buildings being any the wiser and the demolition timed to coincide with the aircraft crashing into the building (without damaging the demo charges naturally!) then I might be interested in hearing their evidence. If you cannot summarise that evidence in your own words then you clearly haven't read the report you linked to, so why should I? If you have read it why can't you tell us what it says?
If you charge onto a thread claiming to be the sole authority that everyone should bow to, then be prepared to back up those claims. I asked you some very specific questions that you failed to respond to, as I remember you chose to belittle my profession instead. So your cries for sympathy seem a little childish to me.
If you want to read about actual evidence then read the Nist report. No amateur video is going to go into the same amount of depth as to why the evidence points to the attack being the cause of the collapse.
Btw, quoting bible passages is never going to impress me.
-
golf2
Caedes or rather 'deep throat' you putting your foot deeper down your throat. I love the way you reply to my posts. Sooooooo, Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin, two well known men in their field are arses! Boy do have a high opinion of yourself. About your NIST as being the only true source, these men pounce on their report. Do you work for the government? The source you quote from is government funded source. I beg you to send me an independent report about the wtc. You can't, so you have to drum up your usual rhetoric. Is the NIST report the best you can offer me? You've taken the course of least resistance. For someone who claims to be an engineer your not convincing enough, I suggest you turn to politics.
My contention all along has been about the inner core columns of the wtc. No way in hell could these massive columns collapse by jet fuel uniformly and simultaneously. I've also mentioned about the antenna on the top of the roof that came down straight, why straight? Shouldn't it have toppled? How is it that no other high-rise burning building came crashing down prior to 911?
Why do I need to quote others on this subject? Hmmmmmmmmm, because as you say, I can't say it in my own words, what a laugh!
For the benefit of others, read what David Ray Griffin has to say, and THEN draw your conclusions. HTTP;//911REVIEW.COM/ARTICLES/GRIFFIN/NYC1.HTML
http://physics911.net/stevenjones