danielpalos
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #681
lol. You need valid rebuttals for an intellectual discussion.Out of curiosity, did you read the title of this thread ?
I believe the cartoon section is down a few levels.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
lol. You need valid rebuttals for an intellectual discussion.Out of curiosity, did you read the title of this thread ?
I believe the cartoon section is down a few levels.
You sound like an 8 year old.lol. You need valid rebuttals for an intellectual discussion.
I thought you wanted an intellectual discussion? Ad hominems are considered fallacy not any form of sublime Truth(value) discoverable through argumentation.You sound like an 8 year old.
What would you know about valid rebuttals ?
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)
I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-
There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-
From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.
As I wrote then:
On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.
Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
Ouch.The OP would have to have some intellect first...right?
It wasn't an attack.....it was an observation.I thought you wanted an intellectual discussion? Ad hominems are considered fallacy not any form of sublime Truth(value) discoverable through argumentation
But don't feel bad..... I act like an eight-year-old all the time.It wasn't an attack.....it was an observation.
All you need is a valid argument to support your currently unsubstantiated opinion.But don't feel bad..... I act like an eight-year-old all the time.
I've always had a valid argument, ,All you need is a valid argument to support your currently unsubstantiated opinion.
Bullshit.I've always had a valid argument, ,
Otherwise I would have let it go a long time ago.
The first indication of guilt ^^Bullshit.
You have never posted evidence and you are a proven liar who keeps making the same disproven claims
It is YOU in denialThe first indication of guilt ^^
Denial.
Meaningless statement, there are many sharp noises that in fact are explosions.There are many types of loud sharp noises that are not caused by explosives,[57]
Makes the false presumption all explosions are recordable on a seismographseismographic records of the collapse do not show evidence of explosions.[58]
NIST the gov agency charged with investigating the destruct of the wtc is presently being sued for creating falsified documents.NIST attributes these puffs to air pressure, created by the decreasing volume of the falling building above, traveling down elevator shafts and exiting from the open elevator shaft doors on lower levels.[61]
Calm down Skippy .....the dark side won.... you should be happy.It is YOU in denial
You have no evidence and your claims are disproven and you are a lying sack of treasonous shit
Not with your unsubstantiated opinions. Links to other professional associations that have a different interpretation?Meaningless statement, there are many sharp noises that in fact are explosions.
So whats the point?
Makes the false presumption all explosions are recordable on a seismograph
They are not.
In fact most are not.
NIST the gov agency charged with investigating the destruct of the wtc is presently being sued for creating falsified documents.
fuel didnt travel down the elevators, and if it did it would be impossible for it to explode.
the building cant fall fast enough to cause 4 ton chunks of facade to be blasted off and away from the building at at 60 miles per hour.
this discussion doesnt look too intellectual to me.
all of that has been debunked.
Behind a paywall.If you really want to go down the rabbit hole, here ya go.
![]()
Choosing The Light – by Cody Snodgres (e-book) - Ole Dammegard - Truth Seeker, Code Breaker - Peacemaker
Cody Snodgres: “For over 20 years, I was an Independent Contractor (IC), specializing in sensitive,lightonconspiracies.com
So now we know the official version of what happened. Do you know what was missing after the bombing ?Behind a paywall.
McVeigh claimed that the building in Oklahoma City was targeted to avenge the more than 70 deaths at Waco. Following the Oklahoma City attack, media and law enforcement officials began intense investigations of the militia movement and other armed extremist groups.
![]()
Oklahoma City bombing | Facts, Motive, Timothy McVeigh, Waco, & Deaths | Britannica
Oklahoma City bombing, terrorist attack in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, U.S., on April 19, 1995, in which a massive homemade bomb concealed in a rental truck exploded, heavily damaging the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. A total of 168 people were killed, including 19 children, and more than 500...www.britannica.com