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 Six Sigma
Why is anyone... i mean ANYONE responding to this filth??? The poster is either totally toying with you to get a rise out of debunkers and truthers alike. Or, he is severely delusional and in desperate need of a psychological intervention.
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Originally posted by septic
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Sure, I already thanked hooper for it and responded a couple times. Read back a few pages.
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Originally posted by septic
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Sure, I already thanked hooper for it and responded a couple times. Read back a few pages.
You missed it.
Originally posted by septic
I guess so.
Have you read the OP? The police claim the fires were so intense concrete melted.
Originally posted by septic
reply to post by snowcrash911
If the conversation deviates from the OP as part of the discussion of the OP, fine, but your credibility ceased when you started tossing out dummies, pun intended.
Did you want to comment on the OP, or were you just leaving?
Originally posted by snowcrash911
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to deviate from the OP. Carry on!
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Originally posted by septic
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Oh hey, I took your advice and looked back and I guess I did respond to you...I must have forgotten...you all look the same.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by snowcrash911
To be frank, I don't think you know much about them at all. Hence the garbled response.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
It's a concept that Truthers have invented. In reality there is a shifting but generally consistent narrative supplied by dozens of sources.
This is a pretty naive, run-of-the-mill debunker style put-down, and it betrays your ignorance on the subject of 9/11.
But it wouldn't be authoritative, because it would merely be an amalgam of superficial media commentary based on unverified partisan administration claims. Factually wrong? How many "dozens" of facts did I get wrong?
At other times, I put conspiracy theorists in their place, since what matters is not the conspiracy element of any claim, but the factual accuracy.
The police claim the fires were so intense concrete melted.
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Originally posted by septic
Originally posted by snowcrash911
Concrete pulverization calculations were already posted. No response was forthcoming.
Oh hey, I took your advice and looked back and I guess I did respond to you...I must have forgotten...you all look the same.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
That's not a response. There's not even anything remotely close to a "response" in there. I linked to concrete pulverization calculations, and you don't even discuss them in your "response". Which is why I said there was no response forthcoming. Jesus.... Can't you do any better?edit on 23-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by septic
The police claim the fires were so intense concrete melted.
Their claim is much like your claims, based on visual appearance.
The police are not chemist.
Besides if the fires were hot enough to melt concrete then they were hot enough to melt steel beams. But the truthers say the smoke shows the fires were not that hot. Once again the truthers pick and choose their version of the facts.
Originally posted by samkent
I never believed the concrete melted.
If I had seen the exhibit with a sign saying concrete melted, I doubt I would have believed it. Because they are not experts in such matters.
There many times I read or hear stories that have minor details I feel are wrong. But I don’t jump to a conclusion that they are intentionally lying to the public. Most of the inaccuracies are irrelevant to the main point of the story.
Just because it’s wrong doesn’t mean it’s a lie. A lie is something that is intentional.