Originally posted by roboe
reply to post by psikeyhackr
*blink*
What a non sequitur response. If you have a problem with something presented in the 9/11 Mysteries Guide, feel free to point it out and we can take it
from there. Given that it's 4½ years old, I'm sure much of the information is outdated - but then again, so is 9/11 Mysteries itself 
Oh yeah, the distribution of steel in a skyscraper is a no--sequitur.
Like the fact that skyscrapers must withstand the wind which was pointed out in 9/11 Mysteries is a non-sequitur.
Calling something a non-sequitur is just rhetorical debating bullsh# that says nothing but sounds intelligent to some people. Physics isn't a
non-sequitur. In fact physics is not verbal at all. But apparently you people can't build a model that can be completely collapsed by its top 15%.
You can just dish out non-sequitur
IF, IF, IF, IF, IF, IF, IF, IF, IF, IFs.
Give me some more non-sequitur non-sequiturs.
psik
