posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 06:37 PM
Originally posted by Griff
Why do emotions always get in the way of reading comprehension? ANOK clearly stated that he wasn't saying the firemen had anything to do with it.
So, why do we need to go back to the knee jerk reaction of "how dare you say this and that" when it hasn't even been said?
Because He DID say that. Several times. he just wants to make the claim, but not be held accountable for it.
He said that The conversation to pull it was about demolishing the building. if he is talking to the fire chief, then that means he is saying the fire
dept is in on it. THAT is claiming that the firemen were responsible.
IT's not a knee jerk reaction (!!). It HAS been said and there is absolutely NO way you can contest it. Unless of course he would like to retract his
claim that they were talking about demolishing the building.
And in response to your other question, Dr Greening is a perfect example. he would be more than happy to point out the many many fatal flaws made in
the waiving the hands claims including the absurd 2000% claim which shows he CLEARLY does not understand the ratio between live weight and dead
weight. Sure it sounds great to a forum of people who don't understand engineering, but the reason the guy as well as the whole engineers for truth
movement can't get anything peer reviewed is because these claims simply don't hold up. They are simply designed to impress those of us without the
proper background to know any better.