reply to post by Conspiriology
A controlled demolition doesn't require any of those items.
Your kidding right?
This is going to just make your head explode but I have to say it: says who? In what type of demolition are you referring to? Where did you get your
information from to draw that conclusion?
Before you tell me to prove your negative: I asked if any of those items were found. You made an assertion that they aren't needed in a controlled
demo. I am asking for some outside evidence that your statement is correct. I have not made any assertions, only asked for clarification. You have
made a statement in fact that blasting caps, det cord, etc are not needed for CD. Share with me how you came to that conclusion.
Sure there is,, just watch the buildings when they come down. As demolished buildings go,, you couldn't get more control then the way all three of
them came down.
In your experience, this is the way it happens? What experience do you have to make such a claim?
Listen, I don't make assertions like this because I rely on third party works to draw my opinion from. When you make an assertion like this, that you
are submitting as a basis for discussion, in this manner, you are making a statement of fact with yourself as the source. There is nothing overly
complicated about this logic. If that's your opinion, that's great....but say so. The truth movement trys to substitute opinions
represent them as facts
If the truth movement continues, in this thread, to make assertions as fact (which are nothing more than their opinions) I will keep pointing it
If his assertions are correct IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT HIS QUALIFICATIONS ARE.
Quite right. But, he's not. He, like you earlier, makes a claim with himself as the source for the conclusion and claim. With no outside works to
reference, or even mentioned, Orion positions himself as drawing independent conclusions on his own. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable to qualify
him to make such conclusions.
Again, I am not making claiming that I
am the original source for my opinions
. Does that make
you are only here to repeat the lyrics of that broken record of yours " Do yo have any proof" "That's only an idiot from some place we probably
never heard of" "You call that proof" "You haven't shown an iota of proof" yata yata yata
Yes. See above. Also, read the actual post you are referring to. Actually watch the video clip. That video clip was presented by Orion as (seriously
now) has having some relation to his argument. The idiot I was referring to was in the video clip, not Orion.
If he is a buffoon,, then let him hang himself
I don't believe him to be a buffoon or anything like that. I have been complimentary of him and made it public. I do think his thinking has much,
much more to do with politics and a whole lot less to do with 9-11. I think that is self evident.
As for why I refute claims like his? Because to perpetuate the biggest myth in history is corrosive to our country IMO. It must be countered, even at
ATS. That's my opinion and nothing more. It's also the answer to one of your questions.
You keep giving him a reputation to live up to but won't allow him to make his reputation known.
I see your point. Briefly; he is making claims positioning himself as the source for the conclusions. This is important. Opinions need to be
clearly marked as such
He no more has to show you his License then he does his social security number because frankly,, it isn't any of your business for one and two that
is how far you'd take it IF HE DID SAY YES HE IS CERTIFIED
Drama! I have never asked for anything like what you try to portray. This is becoming a broken record; if he's going to make the assertion that he is
somehow an expert in what he is talking about, at least enough to draw his own conclusions, it is entirely reasonable to ask what qualifications he
posses to make such conclusions. Is it not?
NOTHING he says, you are going to look at objectively
Not true. Wild claims based on wild speculations presented as fact? Your right, I am going to require some outside, third party reference. That's an
attempt to re frame my comments as being impossible to meet. IMO, I am not asking for anything unreasonable. It just irritates you guys to no end
because I ask for the conversation to grounded in reality, not based off of conjecture. You're very upset because I am unyielding in that.
YOU GOT YOUR MIND MADE UP, THE LAST THING I SEE YOU EVER DOING IS LETTING A TRUTHER CONFUSE YOU WITH THE FACTS.
No, I wont let a truther confuse the discussion with their opinions, presented as facts.
The rest of the personal stuff I intentionally didn't answer
[edit on 10-1-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]