Originally posted by Seymour Butz
""Like I said, the seismic evidence that you give is wrong. It's discussed WHY it's wrong in my link
Now, that's an interesting remark.
Can you defend it against my laid out counter-arguments?
The first and most devastating arguments against Dr. Holzer's pet theory, I posted already, and I see only your usual one liner as your defense.
No meat. No taste.
I'll hammer the next arguments a bit further into your conscience, in my next post.
""But you're missing the point here. Read the quote in my signature line. I believe he wrote that in a direct response to the futility in
discussing HE with YOU. He's proved his chops as far as knowing what HE can and cannot do, and yet you were arguing with him about it in another
I'm missing nothing at all, except his clear absence from that thread
after I made
his main mistake clear to him, that he calculated the amount of HE necessary to take down a COMPLETE WTC Tower, while I showed him that we should and
must discuss only, the amount necessary for the initiating event, the breaking and displacement of a few essential core columns just under the impact
Because his main argument was his opinion, that HIS proposed amount would have been heard as far as New Jersey.
Well, in that he was right, it was heard as far away as that, but as a result of a whole tower thundering down.
I made my opinion very clear, those planes were intentionally aimed at very distinct floors, high up; the ones in BOTH towers, with all those lately
renovated and reinforced back-up power accumulator rooms in them, with strong acidic fluids in those accumulators, which would coincide with the
After the initiating event, the blowing up of those essential columns, with cutter charges, be it the ones he was trained in, HE, or the ones I
proposed to him in another thread, modern day sophisticated thermobaric cutter devices, with a low frequency footprint, inside the columns, or
outside; all the following racing down explosions would totally drown in the subsequent thundering noise of an artificial ""gravitational"" global
Gravitational for the uninformed global audience, at first.
We know better by now.
By the way, his HE cutter charges are not giving off the so advertised by many truth opponents, "thundering noise", in a still intact, fully
enclosed with very strong hurricane resistant glass windows, office or maintenance space, at +300 meters high. The noise of these charges in such an
environment are downright disappointing compared to professional demo jobs in totally gutted, empty buildings.
What most of you imagine, when hearing from HE demolition charges, are those fancy videos from demo companies.
But they rip out FIRST all windows, non load bearing walls and other obstacles in a contracted building, before they place and set-off the charges in
an essentially totally empty steel and/or concrete carcass.
They don't want to be forced to pay insurance for external damages by flying debris.
All possible sources of debris are meticulously removed before taking down a building.
The explosions in such a job are so clear and loud, because essentially these charges are blown in "the open".
""Which now links to my original post in THIS thread. it's bad enough discussing info with some CT believers here when they just parrot what
they've watched on a youtube video. But this is YOUR particular pet theory...... So like I said, who gets to decide when you've been debunked? From
what I've seen, you seem to think that you've been debunked only if you agree to it.
Much obliged, that will save me from doing that myself.
Thus our audience can see your debating style, and compare it to my fully referenced arguments, which references are lacking in 95% of your mainly
YOU have been thoroughly debunked, but I doubt you will ever admit that.
Just as you will never admit, I'm sure, that the Gulf of Tonkin "incident" was a set-up to bring the US military-industrial complex into the
Vietnam war; or the Pearl Harbor "incident" was a set-up by US intelligence and president Roosevelt to bring the US into WW II; just as the sinking
of the Lucitania "incident" was the same kind of set-up to bring the US into WW I; and the Bay of Pigs "incident" was a set-up to bring Castro
down, which failed for non-cooperation by president Kennedy; and the Havana Harbor "incident" was the set-up to take Cuba from the Spanish; and
there are a few more "incidents", all needed to expand the US global influence sphere.
9/11 was just another "incident" to grab power in the Middle East, and its devastating effect is still rolling on, wait for Iran.
They will find a new "incident" again.
How dumb can a nation be, to repeatedly fall for all these badly played out military "defense" tricks.
The USA has become an offensive nation; under the cloak of defending freedom, it only brings us badly paid slavery, for the last 100 years.
Slavery for the interests of a wealthy few.
Middle classes are exploitable, and worthless in times of tension.
""But this whole seismic line of reasoning has about the same credibility as the hologram guys. That's without a doubt the stupidest thing I've
ever seen. And yet, you don't see them backing down either, regardless of the insanity they talk about.
What a vile manner to pack an insult in a deliberate lie. A lie I proved to you in this whole discussion with you. You did not even dare to touch upon
the crux of my thesis, WTC 7's seismic chart.
You keep sidetracking, while you know very well that WTC 7 is the heart of the matter.
And then you come with this kind of pathetic "apples and oranges" reasoning.
How dare you to insult our collective intelligence with such obvious crippled reasoning.
""In short, it is I who is wasting MY valuable time, discussing a theory with a guy that ignores and cherry picks evidence if it doesn't
agree with his hypothesis.
That last line is a "contradictio in terminus", perhaps you'll understand which one.
To set things straight, I'm the one that doesn't run away from your arguments, like you do after each of my posts, only addressing cherry picked
details with petty arguments, or not addressing it at all, because you have no solid defense.
I'm the one to have to show you the faulty argumentation in your precious link ( why don't you even have the decency to provide a
), and this post of yours shows the full weight of your ignorance, you can't defend the
arguments in your own links. You can only copy and paste, and fill up the remaining space with hidden insults.
If you post a link, you must stand up for it, and be able to defend the meat of it.
I'll follow up with some more background information, why exactly you failed.
[edit on 13/8/08 by LaBTop]