"Progressive collapse" challenge: 4+ years and still no takers

Originally posted by VitalOverdose

there is no point this debate other than to massage your ego.

Arrogance is like that.

And this kid has it in spades.

reply to post by Joey Canoli


" "Progressive collapse" challenge: 4+ years and still no takers "

Besides accusing me of being arrogant and having a big head, would you like to contribute anything to the OP? Or are you going to mimic VitalOverdose again and decline? Do you really see "JREF" at the top of the screen? Insults don't actually equate to a good argument here.

Originally posted by bsbray11

would you like to contribute anything to the OP?

Yeah, it's stupid to think that anyone would dignify something as insane as this "challenge", when it's been demonstrated over and over again that troofers either won't believe the results when they go against them, or have the intelluctual capacity to even understand. At least, not without troofers paying for it.

Insults don't actually equate to a good argument here.

Then don't insult our intelligence by demanding that someone "do" the challenge.

Face it, the TM will never get their new investigations into 9/11 being an inside jobby job..... UNLESS you can convince someone that matters that something stinks.

I know that I, and I suspect, that no debunker has any interest in trying to change your collective minds. Cuz years of experience tells us that you are all, as a group, not interested in learning. You are stuck with your fantasies, and they'll take you no where but down a long, hard, painful road to nowhere.

Troofers should just thank their lucky stars that this side of the fence sees the TM as just a bunch of delusional idiots, and DON'T call for show trials, or outright executions of troofers like that the wack job CTers have spouted for members of the press or interested guys like Mark Roberts.

We are sane. You are not.

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by bsbray11
would you like to contribute anything to the OP?

Yeah, it's stupid to think that anyone would dignify something as insane as this "challenge"

Yeah, you say that even as you continue to post on it. I should have said any science to contribute.

Insults don't actually equate to a good argument here.

Then don't insult our intelligence by demanding that someone "do" the challenge.

Again you implicitly agree with what I am saying but apparently find no fault in it at all. 'Ad hom' is bad form. You post here on your own free will. Though you cannot satisfy the OP.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Though you cannot satisfy the OP.

Satisfy the OP? That's a laugher in and of itself.

If the challenge is stupid and insane, and has been proven to be an exercise in futility, given the past history of your typical troofer, why would anyone "do" the challenge?

Like the other guy said, it's a stupid challenge.

Thought I'd just point that out to you.

That is unless you'd like to point out the merits of someone taking it up...

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
If the challenge is stupid and insane, and has been proven to be an exercise in futility

Prove how it is stupid, insane, and "an exercise in futility." I don't think you've ever said why it is.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Prove how it is stupid, insane, and "an exercise in futility." I don't think you've ever said why it is.

The answer is in the part you snipped out. Given the history of the TM, if someone was to do this, and then the structure was to collapse, they wouldn't listen or accept the resuts. That is the nature of a conspiracy theorist.

So it would be stupid at this point to even attempt it.

That is, unless the TM got Rosie,Ed,Sunjata, Charlie,etc to pay for it.

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
The answer is in the part you snipped out. Given the history of the TM, if someone was to do this, and then the structure was to collapse, they wouldn't listen or accept the resuts. That is the nature of a conspiracy theorist.

I thought you said you had proof the OP is "insane," "stupid," etc.? All you are saying is that if you were able to satisfy the challenge, then we wouldn't accept the results (something you assume) so there is no point in attempting the challenge anyway. The only thing you've proven is that you are intellectually lazy and arrogant.

The challenge, btw, is not to make a structure collapse, which makes me think you didn't even read the OP. What a shocker.

Originally posted by bsbray11

we wouldn't accept the results (something you assume) so there is no point in attempting the challenge anyway.

Exactly.

How many times have you, personally seen evidence that debunked some idea that a troofer had, only to watch them deny its very existence, or deny that it debunked them.

I've done just that, and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to play along with you guys anymore. Time and time again, you see the same no planers, which most of the ATS troofers think is garbage, start the same old thread about how they have "proof" that no planes were used. Same thing with the nukers. And space beamers.

Now granted, they are waaaay short of a six pack also, but the reaction to counter evidence is the same.

So if you want it done, you pay for it. Which was gonna be my only post here, but apparently, you choose to humiliate the TM by making me point out the obvious....

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by bsbray11
we wouldn't accept the results (something you assume) so there is no point in attempting the challenge anyway.

Exactly.

Exactly, and so now that it is clear we are in agreement, notice that I have already responded to you in the same post you are quoting:

The only thing you've proven is that you are intellectually lazy and arrogant.

Too lazy to try to satisfy the OP, too arrogant to admit you are too lazy to try it. Also arrogant because you assert evidence does not matter to us anyway, which is another 'ad hom' rather than a logical reason (which is why you didn't really "prove" anything about this thread, but of course you must have already realized you were just being silly anyway ). So it somehow becomes "twoofers" fault that you can't satisfy a challenge that is based on evidence. Huh.

Reminds me of NIST's "investigation": 'It's obvious planes and fires caused the buildings to collapse, so let's just gear our entire investigation around that assumption and neglect investigating anything anomalous to our assumptions.' It's funny who ends up using all the ad homs and calling everyone else stupid, isn't it?

Originally posted by bsbray11
The challenge, btw, is not to make a structure collapse, which makes me think you didn't even read the OP. What a shocker.

So have you actually read the OP yet? Might want to take 30 seconds to do so before replying, you can honestly say "yes."

[edit on 18-8-2009 by bsbray11]