Search found 32 matches

by RedStone2
Sun Jul 08, 2012 8:57 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Either you're using it as evidence for your conspiracy, OR you're bringing it up for no...reason. I only get those two choices...lol? It's for neither of those reasons. I bring it up because it destroys the fantasy...that Bin Laden and "Arab terrorists" are the explanation for 9/11. I rep...
by RedStone2
Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:07 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

...7 WTC was severely damaged by the collapse of the other towers... In other words...you don't have the foggiest clue what you're talking about, yet you take a very harsh stance, including lots of discourteous name-calling. That's pretty ironic, no? Except for all the fire. Steel like all material...
by RedStone2
Tue Jul 03, 2012 12:57 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Whatever, same thing as far as I'm concerned. My goodness--the sheer nonsense. You're saying the building falling from structural damage is the "same thing" as it NOT falling from structural damage?? Alrighty then. a rejection of the 'conventional' narrative that a bunch of terrorists jac...
by RedStone2
Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:21 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Ah, Building 7; the last resort of the 9/11 conspiracy nut. ...7 WTC was severely damaged by the collapse of the other towers... So, I'm the nut and you're the Einstein? Well, Einstein...WTC7 was not "severely damaged by the collapse of the other towers" and that's the official conclusion...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:31 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Your 'common sense' answer was no answer at all.That's why I keep "missing" it. Because it's not an answer. If you can "see the truth," anyone can. I hate to parrot your snarks about 'comprehension'. but...you're having a severe comprehension issue: I didn't say I could see all ...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:08 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Given your unwillingness to explain how you differentiate out "Intilectually valid" presuppositions From previous posts: Unassumption: "What makes a presupposition less valid - for example, your idea of kittens blowing up the world trade centre rather than a controlled demolition?&qu...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:02 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

I bet you'd would agree with the first four of these, without sarcasm. No, I do not agree with this guy's descriptions. It's interesting how much effort you're spending, trying to predict what my views might be...all across the far-flung corners of the cosmos. Anythng to get away from specific argu...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:12 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

what does "just shy" mean? I already explained. Building 7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds. Pure free-fall would've been 6.0 seconds. It didn't fall at free fall speed. If it was a controlled demolition, it would have fallen at free fall speed . Where do you get that idea? Where in the world are...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:39 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

What makes a presupposition less valid - for example, your idea of kittens blowing up the world trade centre rather than a controlled demolition? Common sense. Building 7 dropped straight into its own footprint, just shy of free-fall speed...6.5 seconds versus 6.0 seconds. No steel structure, in th...
by RedStone2
Tue Jun 26, 2012 8:13 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Your answer begs the question of how you tell the "Intilectual quality" of a presupposition. Frankly, I don't think you understand the definitions of many of these 'logic' phrasings you use. For example, my comment "the quality of your presuppositions makes the difference between err...
by RedStone2
Tue Jun 26, 2012 6:28 pm
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Well I tried to point out why these are fringe claims, but apparently the system by which we as a society learn stuff and come to agree on stuff is beyond some people. Again...you're imposing your assumption that something is a "fringe claim". You've made a leap. And quite ironically...yo...
by RedStone2
Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:21 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

So when we talk about ordinary vs. extraordinary, those words are not used colloquially in this context. "Ordinary" is a stand in for "that which conforms to or builds on the consensus opinion of experts in that field"; "extraordinary" is a stand in for "that whic...
by RedStone2
Thu Jun 21, 2012 9:43 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

The content of the video, not the video itself, is an appeal to authority. Amazingly bizarre nonsense. The video presents evidence from the standpoint of science, the laws of physics, and simple common sense...among many other aspects. What in THEE world are you talking about? You say the governmen...
by RedStone2
Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:06 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Your theory requires them to be this brilliant OK so...with regard to the Gulf of Tonkin, a conspiracy that involved hundreds and thousands of sailors and fighter pilots, and yet was successfully perpetrated and covered up for nigh unto half a century and is STILL successfully concealed from 90+% o...
by RedStone2
Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:55 am
Forum: Off Topic Discussion
Topic: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?
Replies: 115
Views: 15474

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

what proof do you have for all this wild claims? Who had determined these were "wild claims"? There is a very substantial portion of the American community that subscribes to all kinds of revisionist history. I've found it's usually among the more well-read, well-informed, the folks who'v...

Go to advanced search