And it’s pricks like you that make religious people, turn into fundies. By taking a deeply held, and spiritual, belief in God and comparing it to a wacko who thinks the government killed 3k of their own people to build a pipeline! To make some strange point, that could have been made without resorting to shitting on someones religion.
Take Sent as an example; has he backed down at all in the face of all the negative calls on his character? No. Instead he has become more fanatic and fantastic in his claims. A deeply religious person who reads that a someone is equating his/her faith with a CT nut, would do the same.
Im not Jesus, so I wouldn’t pretend to know what he would do. IMHO, when he was nailed to that cross, left there for a few days, then stabbed with a spear…he probably thought “Dick”.
Explain the physics of a fireball travelling down a quarter-mile elevator shaft that can blow out elevator doors and obliterate the contents of a machine shop. Doesn’t sound reasonable to me. More likely, these were explosions.
Please explain how a deeply held spiritual belief in god is different than Sent’s deeply held spiritual belief in a goofy conspiracy? Try to pretend you are talking to a person who believes in neither god nor goofy conspiracy theories.
OF COURSE IT WAS AN EXPLOSION! What do you think 10,000 lbs. of jet fuel DO when you sent them on fire and when some of it is funneled into the confined area of an elevator shaft? As to the “quarter-mile,” what of it? Gravity works on exploding material just like anything else. We tend to think of explosions going up because explosives are usually set or dropped onto the ground which is too firm to allow the exploding gasses to penetrate, forcing much of it upward, but when there is no ground below an explosion, gravity will drag it downward just like anything else. Artillery has used airbursts as an effective weapon since the Civil War. The coal dust and ammunition from the Maine blew downward very effectively.
You have never stood next to a cluster of tall buildings and felt a downdraft? Seriously, are you always this obtuse or are you selective on when you decide to throw away basic life experiences it exchange for some pixels written by chimps?
I would just tell you to google it yourself but it seems that CT’s are taking over the internet.
I have been on this board long enough to know this line of conversation isn’t going to end anywhere. But…
Whether or not you think there is a difference beteween a CT, or a RF, is not relavent to why I called you a dick. I called you a dick because you said something im sure you knew was insulting to RF’s, for no reason (I can see) except to be insulting. Hence, you are a dick.
FTR, I agree that to an atheist a CT would equal a RF. Both dont rely on any sort of real hard proof, but go on “gut”, or “faith”, or what THEY would call “common sense”. And again, if I have to explain to why it would be insulting to equate the two, it points to one of two things:
Your dense
Your not dense, your just being a dick.
I have read many of your posts, in this thread and others, so I dont think your dense.
Really? Doesn’t sound reasonable to you? What do you base this judgement on, precisely? Your extensive knowledge of demolitions? Your advanced degree in thermodynamics? Perhaps years of experience rigging explosions for Hollywood movies? Exactly what experiences and skillsets are you drawing on to make the conclusion that its not “reasonable” for a fireball to behave in that fashion under those circumstances. 'Cause I’ll admit right up front, I don’t have anything near the background to determine if a claim like that is “reasonable” or not. Nothing in my life has ever happened that’s sufficiently comparable to detonating a 10,000 lb fuel bomb in an office high-rise that can allow me to make the determination of whether or not that scenario is “reasonable.”
However, there are thousands of people out there who have precisely that sort of background. People in the military, who blow things up for a living. Physicists, who have spent years studying the underlying mathematical formulas that dictate the motion of excited particles. These people have been sifted through the remains of the towers, have studied the data, including your precious eye-witness reports, and their conclusions are precisely what tomndebb has posted: an airplane hit the building, the fuel tanks exploded, and the blast was channeled down the building through the elevator shafts. If you don’t want to believe them, then the onus is on you to come up with either the mathematical proof that shows their conclusion to be impossible, or evidence that all these hundreds of people, from disparate backgrounds and organizations, are all either thouroughly corrupt, or entirely incompetent.
Let me describe the position you’re putting me in, here. One one side, we have hundreds and hundreds of people who do this sort of thing for a living, and who have no discernable motive to lie, and several substantial motives for blowing the whistle on any cover-up they might be involved in. All of these people say A. On the other hand, we have you, with absolutely no first-hand experience with the material, and an edited and editorialized video-tape you found on Amazon.com, that says B. A and B are mutually incompatibile, which means that the proponents of one of these theories must be either idiots, or lying. From my perspective, what do you think is easier to believe? That all these hundreds and hundreds of people are idiots? Or that you are?
FTR, I was not intending to be insulting to people with religious beliefs, just the crazy ones. You know the ones that think its ok to kill people who don’t believe what they do. The ones who want to control everybody elses lives. Basiclly the shitheads. If you want to defend THOSE people, be my guest. Frankly, I have no problem being a dick to THOSE people.
Sent, it’s too bad that it took four pages of this thread and what, 8(?) of the one in GD to get to the heart of the matter, but if you read nothing else, please read the last pargraph of Miller’s recent post above. That really sums ups why you simply haven’t a leg to stand on here.
Frankly, if you cannot see where you may be in error after reading that paragraph, it is convincing evidence that your mind is completely closed on this subject.
As a matter of fact, I sort of answered this in GD, but I’ll be happy to summarize it here:
Kunilou’s First Rule of Conspiracies – Somebody always talks Kunilou’s Second Rule of Conspiracies – The pieces have to fit together
So what Sent or any good conspiracy theorist could do is find the person with the big mouth who can explain his little part of the big picture, and point us along to the next person in line. With some confirmation of this person’s involvement (and I’m not talking about nutjobs who claim they PERSONALLY gave Josef Stalin the poison only to find out Stalin died several years before they were born) we have a piece of a jigsaw puzzle.
With the name of the next person in line, we can then work on that piece, knowing who to talk to, what records to search, etc. As the pieces fall into place, the rationale behind the act begins to make sense. We see the reason for doing it in the first place, and who stood to benefit from it.
This is how Watergate, Iran-Contra, the Lewinsky scandal and every other coverup I can think of, eventually became revealed.
Let me ask the question another way. Is there any possible argument, any possible presentation of facts, any possible set of witnesses with conflicting testimony, anything at all, that would convince Sent (not that I’m picking on you personally, Sent, but you’re still here to answer the question, and I commend you for that) that the “official” finding is actually pretty much what happened?
He was only actually nailed to the cross for a few hours. Then they took him down and stuck him in a tomb for a few days. You know, that whole resurrection thing?
