It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
"Squibs" are never seen anywhere besides controlled demolitions. If you can't provide an image or video of a "squib" that is not from a controlled demolition, then there's nothing more to debate on this subject.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
"Squibs" are never seen anywhere besides controlled demolitions. If you can't provide an image or video of a "squib" that is not from a controlled demolition, then there's nothing more to debate on this subject.
That's not an entirely fair argument, because squibs may also be seen in events such as when a commercial airliner crashes at high speed into a skyscraper. It's just that it doesn't happen very often.
Eg - if I employ your logic in reverse I could ask you to show me an example of a building failure resulting from the high speed crash of a commercial airliner into it that did not result in squibs. By your logic if you can't do that then there's nothing more to debate.
Originally posted by iamcpc
reply to post by jthomas
it's impossible to prove that anyone lied about anything as I have shown time and time again.
The earth is flat.
Prove that statement is a lie. Better yet present one small bit of evidence that suggest that it MIGHT be a lie. I'll send 100 dollars to every single person who can do it. Not one person has been able to.
"A cash reward of $100,000 has been offered to anyone who can send us, by e-mail, conclusive physical evidence of the existence of the moon. This reward remains unclaimed."
www.revisionism.nl...
Originally posted by iamcpc
This is because no expert has been able support the theory that the squibs are not from explosives with photographic and video evidence.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Yours is a specious and, strictly speaking, illogical argument.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Yours is a specious and, strictly speaking, illogical argument.
It's not illogical. The planes had absolutely nothing to do with with the "squibs" at all.
Originally posted by jthomas
As we've seen, there is no evidence for "explosive squibs."
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
All you're doing is making yourself look foolish by arguing a topic that you can never win. So give it up.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by jthomas
As we've seen, there is no evidence for "explosive squibs."
I don't recall anyone saying "explosive squibs". You continue to play your word games and put words in other peoples' mouths.
There were ejections:
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
It's not illogical. The planes had absolutely nothing to do with with the "squibs" at all. "Squbs", or ejection plumes, are caused by high-powered explosives being detonated. Numerous first responders, by-standers and survivors heard these explosions.
There's no denying the fact that the "squibs" are only ever seen in controlled demolitions. Nobody to this day has still been able to prove otherwise.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
All I see is a bunch of "blah blah blah" text all over the screen to explain away the facts, but nobody is trying to prove the ejections are not from explosives since we've only ever seen the ejections being from explosives.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by jthomas
As we've seen, there is no evidence for "explosive squibs."
I don't recall anyone saying "explosive squibs". You continue to play your word games and put words in other peoples' mouths.
There were ejections:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6dab83d90c0f.jpg[/atsimg]
Those ejections have only ever been seen in controlled demolitions and nobody has, to this day, shown otherwise. All you're doing is making yourself look foolish by arguing a topic that you can never win. So give it up.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6dab83d90c0f.jpg[/atsimg]
Originally posted by iamcpc
If those were from explosives how come there were no explosions? What type of explosives were used that could create those squibs but not be heard at all?
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Originally posted by iamcpc
If those were from explosives how come there were no explosions? What type of explosives were used that could create those squibs but not be heard at all?
You're kidding, right?
He'll do what all truthers do. He'll lie and say that he hears hundreds of them going off in the videos, then shift the burden of proof and challenge you to prove him wrong......
Originally posted by iamcpc
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Originally posted by iamcpc
If those were from explosives how come there were no explosions? What type of explosives were used that could create those squibs but not be heard at all?
You're kidding, right?
He'll do what all truthers do. He'll lie and say that he hears hundreds of them going off in the videos, then shift the burden of proof and challenge you to prove him wrong......
I'm not kidding. I don't hear explosions.
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Originally posted by iamcpc
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Originally posted by iamcpc
If those were from explosives how come there were no explosions? What type of explosives were used that could create those squibs but not be heard at all?
You're kidding, right?
He'll do what all truthers do. He'll lie and say that he hears hundreds of them going off in the videos, then shift the burden of proof and challenge you to prove him wrong......
I'm not kidding. I don't hear explosions.
Nobody that's both sane and honest do.
But Bonez has stated that he hears hundreds going off during the collapses, and that's what produces the continuous roar during said collapses.
Of course there will be zero scientific analyses of the videos you gave. Just an assertion, then a challenge to you to prove him wrong.
Cool, isn't it, when one shifts the burden of proof like that.......
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
"Squbs", or ejection plumes, are caused by high-powered explosives being detonated. There's no denying the fact that the "squibs" are only ever seen in controlled demolitions. Nobody to this day has still been able to prove otherwise.