Also, where is the evidence that he destroyed his own buildings for the insurance money?
How are you CERTAIN and DON’T KNOW at the same time?
If I’m going to accuse someone of mass murder, mayhem, terrorism, and treason, I’m going to have a shitload of rock-solid evidence. Those are the most serious charges I can conceive of levelling against an individual. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (a scientist said that.) Where is your evidence against Silverstein? You think he got paid. We know that. Now where is your evidence?
And please respond to post #153.
At least we have his theory - the planes were hijacked, the pentagon attacked, the WTC towers destroyed, thousands dead, 2 wars started, all as part of a (failed) insurance scam by the WTC owner.
What are some specific facts that you feel have not been adequately or properly explained? What are some explanations that seem wrong to you?
While I am not a practicing engineer I do have a BS and MS in structural engineering from one of the top CE schools in the country so I may be able to answer questions in that area.
I’m going to take a chance here and assume you are Republican as well. So go ahead, apologize for Bush and tell me how stupid I am.
So you have basically just given up, is that it? Do you have *anything *of substance to say?
Valguard → View Public Profile → Statistics → Find all threads started by Valguard
Results:
Hi, we’re assholes and proud of it! (Rep. Sally Kern)
4/22/2008
Forum: BBQ Pit
Rant about Republican Sally Kern
"Frequent Fuck-You" Card For Tom DeLay
4/8/2005
Forum: BBQ Pit
Rant about former House Majority Leader and Republican Tom Delay
Cram your Constitutional Amendment up your ass Bush.
2/24/2004
Forum: BBQ Pit
Rant about former President and Republican George W. Bush
That took less than 3 minutes of my time. Since you could not bother to do this before accusing Valguard of being a Republican, what other inconvenient facts are you whistling right on past? Is it time for us to go ahead and take a chance here and assume you are a 15 year old forum troll who is wasting all of our time?
I haven’t given up, I’ve just been through this before. It’s a pretty common theme.
First, claim to be an “expert”, then , completely apologize for the people lying to us, then, tell the questioner why they are not qualified to argue because they aren’t educated enough.
And use the term “Conspiricy” or “CT” as often as possible, because those terms now, thanks to the Kennedy assasination, mean “nutcase”.
Who are you and why do I care what you think? BTW, I’m 49 and have legitimate questions about a national tragedy.
If you are referring to Valgard, he never claimed to be an expert, and as for the rest, you invented it out of whole cloth.
Claims that people acted in concert to achieve a nefarious goal are pretty much claims of conspiracy by definition.
Mozart1220, please respond to post #153.
Tell you what…ask the question again, or please let it go.
Ok, here you go:
Have you studied much science? If you have, then you know that the debate over the line of demarcation (what is and isn’t science) raged in the early 20th century. When the dust finally cleared, one of the few things that everybody could agree on was that science is falsifiable. If it can’t be falsified, it is not science. That’s why Freud’s theories are no longer accepted as scientific; how could you prove he was wrong?
What can falsify your claims? What facts, observations, or data could be introduced to the argument that would invalidate your claims? And while we’re at it, why don’t you - clearly and concisely - state your claims.
Put up or shut up. Don’t ask us to keep playing Calvinball with you. Give us the rules to play by and we will more than gladly play.
Well, to be fair, the connection between CT and nutcase has been taken to new highs (or lows) by the Truthers, who stretch things such that even ‘nutcase’ seems mild as a descriptive term. I mean, the Kennedy Assassination CTers were certainly nuts, but the CT almost seems plausible when compared to the 9/11 Truthers…
-XT
That is not me. I am Valgard, not Valguard.
Mozart1220, I am not a Republican, I am not an apologist for Bush and I am not calling you stupid. Calm down.
That’s not a fact, that’s an opinion. As I think has been explained in this very thread (and if not it’s been done in several of the previous threads on this topic), a 1000 foot office building is not a big solid block of material that will tip over like a fencepost. It’s mostly empty space and it’s designed to stand upright. When a structural system fails, the dead loads (weight of the structure + contents) go straight down, and the impact can easily destroy the part of the structure immediately underneath, and so on.
It may not seem obvious or believable to many people, and that’s not because they are stupid, it’s because most people do not have an education or work experience in a related field and also because our everyday experience with things breaking, falling down and so on is limited to small stuff - a tree falls over, my bookshelf tips, that kind of thing. Those events don’t just scale up linearly to massive structures. The behavior changes dramatically as the size of the objects involved changes.
Do you have some particular reason for saying that it’s not believable, or does it just not “seem right”?
This has been answered several times. If you crash an aluminum airplane into a massive reinforced structure (IIRC, that part of the Pentagon had recently been retrofitted to be more bomb-resistant), you don’t get a neat plane-shaped hole. In addition, at least some photos purporting to show that the hole was much smaller than the plane were not the entry hole at all, they are “exit wounds” on an inner ring where whatever was left of the plane punched through. Finally, there are plenty of photos showing plane parts scattered about, hunks of engine and whatnot.
Well that’s a fair criticism. I don’t know whether someone told him “Mr. President, an airplane struck the WTC” and he was thinking “What a terrible tragedy” (that was my first thought when I heard the first bits of story on the radio that morning, I was thinking a little Cessna had hit it and a few people would be dead), or if he was told “Mr. President, two passenger jets flew at full speed into WTC1 and WTC2, someone is doing something terrible”. I assume that he, like anyone else, would react differently in those two situations.
However neither one of those situations makes me think anything different about the technical/factual issues of the collapse of WTC1, 2 and 7.
Ok, I spelled your name wrong (less than 3 minutes of my time, remember :p), but did you not start those threads?
The plane parts are here. Click the last link in the post.
Note that the linked post is a response to you, the last time you trotted out this nonsense. Please don’t ignore it this time.
Well holy smokes, I guess I did. I’d forgotten about those. From my wild and crazy days 
But yeah, I’m still not a Republican (nor am I a card-carrying Democrat, either).
Seriously man, there are only two choices here. Either you are a Democrat, or you are a Bush Apologist who is simply buying the governments line of bullshit about what Really™ happened on 9/11.
You probably have stock options and possibly own a house as well, and you are probably one of those kind of guys who lights your $10,000 dollar Virgin Thigh Rolled Cuban cigars on the backs of the peasantry as well…
-Xt
Oh yeah, then tell me why the American Flag is moving or there are no stars in the sky?