Still????, page 1

reply to post by Jake the Dog Man

I'm going to "bicker" now, because you pointed "weak evidence" out of my analogy so I must retaliate.

...shows that you actually believe all of the plane wreckage was planted, regardless, it is evidence.

If it's planted that doesn't exactly make it legitimate, so therefore, it's weak. The lack of debris and wreckage is the main problem. I have never heard of any other 767 crash in which a 737 engine was found, have you?

Evidence ignored is the best you have...

No sir, but I really didn't feel this the necessary thread to debate evidence. I could type out about 500 things to support my claims, but again, I don't think this is the thread to do that. However to reply, I have listed a few things below.

You need to ask yourself why you choose to ignore all the evidence.

I'm not ignoring evidence, it is you sir that is ignoring the lack of evidence supporting the OS.

See, your side needs to prove that the evidence that is everywhere is wrong.

That has been done many times.

plane parts being planted, explosives being used, holograms even being possible (let alone being used), something, anything

As I said above, they found a 737 engine where a 767 allegedly crashed. I call that planted plane parts.

Explosives being used--let's count how many characteristics of controlled demolition are featured compared to a fire induced collapse.

Controlled demolition--
-flashes, check (seen in videos)
-sounds, check (heard in videos)
-witnesses of flashes and sounds, check
-free-fall collapse, very close, check
-pyroclastic dust clouds, check
-core column damage first, check
-rapid onset of collapse, check
-"squibs", check
-blast waves, check
-demolition waves, check
-total destruction, check
-symmetrical collapse, check with WTC 7, but not with 1 and 2 because destruction started at the initial attack areas(at the top)
-collapse into footprint, check with WTC 7, but not with 1 and 2 because destruction started at the initial attack areas(at the top)
-experts agree it was CD, check
-fore-knowledge of collapse, check (on all 3 WTC buildings)

(Not to mention steel beams being individualized, and the 20 ton beams being ejected 500 feet away. Only explosives can explain that. And the molten metal in the basements of all 3 WTCs.)

Destruction by fire:
-asymmetrical collapse following the path of least resistance, no. (Watch the top floors of the South Tower when it begins its collapse. Why didn't that large section of building hit the ground? Instead it violates laws of angular momentum, and is pulverized.)
-temperatures hot enough to soften steel, no
-slow onset, no
-experts agree it was fire, check (But I wouldn't exactly call them "experts", more along the lines of "paid".)

Hmm...yeah, those were controlled demolitions.

Holograms? I don't subscribe to the hologram theory.

If you still continue to disregard all the evidence...

Again, I think you mean lack of evidence supporting the OS. Lack of evidence is weak evidence.