What brought down WTC7

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Like most 911 threads, this has descended into a state where all the evidence is on the table, yet the OP continues to deny that fact and instead clings to the delusional belief that he is correct. If anything can be ascertained from his previous attempt at convincing people he is correct, we will continue to see the same dodges, personal insults, and general inability to comprehend what evidence has been presented.

He has willfully denied or ignored any contravening evidence, launched massive personal attacks against people who are clearly qualified to discuss the matter, and conveniently sidestepped any issues which he cannot address.

Until the OP actually examines what has been presented to him, there is no discussion taking place here and continuing to post here does not constitute arguing or debating, but rather shouting into a room where nobody is listening.

I would be more than happy to see a discussion continue, but a discussion is a two-way exchange and we have not had a two-way exchange here for about 400 posts. This thread was basically hijacked from the beginning by an individual who had no interest in hearing what anybody had to say, but hoped that he could spread his ideas without any resistance. Once the OP steps down from the pulpit, drops his condescending attitude, gets rid of the personal insults, and actually decides to engage in a conversation, this thread should be locked.

I see your point and can't really defend continuation of the thread if it is to be nothing more than... My side is right cuz your side is wrong. IF there is some value to it it is in the advancement of the learning process. I've learned some stuff here (related to building and structures etc) I already know something about the tools used to take a formula and make sense of it. And explicit in your statement is the assertion that some do not. I suppose that stands unchallenged to this point. And, I understand that if a DrPizza, by virtue of using a formula or whatever he's expert in, can or ought to be able to convince that a belief is false, then that too is a bit more learned. I recall a fellow who said he was a Ph.D. in some related to the investigation field say he felt the NIST was all bunk... not sure what I learned there except he said what he said. I know if I said something was 'all bunk', and used my academic credentials to support that I'd also produce a tome of evidence to that as a form of backup. [I don't often post in the related threads for that reason... aside from some glib statement]
So the simple truth may be that this thread is not the venue to argue belief but it, belief, is the essence of every other thread in this forum with some exceptions. Many of the other forums and sub forums of AT debate from a technical as well as a belief perspective.
I believe WTC 7 to be an anomaly... the why I've stated and from what I've seen so far in the NIST, FEMA etc.. I still see it to be so... I think I'm reasonable, ergo, I Want folks to show me where I'm wrong so I can learn why. I think that is a good thing. The name calling and worse is frustration that neither side in that room you mentioned can hear anymore with the exception of some who try to help a listening person understand...

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

I didn't make such a claim, but rather speculated that, considering TLC's demonstrated compulsion to spout flagrant lies, I wouldn't put it past him. How else would you suggest interpreting his dishonesty, or are you too concerned with silencing me to even consider it?

You're suffering from delusions of grandeur Kyle. It's serious and a sure sign of alcoholism. You should consider giving up booze, admit you were wrong and attend some AA meetings.

I can't see any other explanations for your behavior in this thread.

No offense to other alcoholics in here.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: kylebisme

I didn't make such a claim, but rather speculated that, considering TLC's demonstrated compulsion to spout flagrant lies, I wouldn't put it past him. How else would you suggest interpreting his dishonesty, or are you too concerned with silencing me to even consider it?

You're suffering from delusions of grandeur Kyle. It's serious and a sure sign of alcoholism. You should consider giving up booze, admit you were wrong and attend some AA meetings.

I can't see any other explanations for your behavior in this thread.

No offense to other alcoholics in here.

Would it be appropriate to utter this: Change the things you can change, accept the things you cannot change, and, hope like heck you can tell the difference?

Delusions of any sort manifest for a variety of possible reasons...
From Wiki but I think is a pretty good definition...

"A delusion, in everyday language, is a fixed belief that is either false, fanciful, or derived from deception. Psychiatry defines the term more specifically as a belief that is pathological (the result of an illness or illness process). As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, apperception, illusion, or other effects of perception.

Delusions typically occur in the context of neurological or mental illness, although they are not tied to any particular disease and have been found to occur in the context of many pathological states (both physical and mental). However, they are of particular diagnostic importance in psychotic disorders and particularly in schizophrenia, paraphrenia, manic episodes of bipolar disorder, and psychotic depression."

John Nash suffered from megalomania 'delusions of grandeur' hehehehe he actually gave up a very important academic chair cuz he said he was about to become the emperor of Anarctica...

It is the meek who shall inherit the earth... and the pompous who shall be their slaves... 1st Jim 40: 44. (forgot a smile)

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Delita

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
If you were copying & pasting I'd have no doubt you'd readily admit to it. It's a shame certain others in here can't seem to channel that same honesty.

I wouldn't think it to be an issue. Of course, I'd say I got this from here and I agree!

And so would I, but TLC likes to mislead people into believing otherwise. Like I said before, he is obviously of the same mentality of those who actually did mastermind 9/11, and I wouldn't be surprised if he hopes to do something similar one day himself.

Alright can we finally get the ban stick out for this idiot for claiming someone wishes to become a mass murderer.

The language we share is sort of sticky wicky with regard to what can be derived from a sentence. That Kyle wouldn't be surprised about a thing is not a claim that the person he referenced wishes to do it.
Besides that, until 2007 in California, at least, The California Penal Code Section 26 provided that, 'Idiots' were one of six ( I think 6) types of people who are not capable of committing crimes so, you say he can't do what you accuse him of doing in the criminal sense but wish him punished in the AT sense.
[After 2007, I think they changed the wording to a general class of people... mentally incompetent I think it became or like that.]

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: kylebisme

But of course he didn't show anything of the sort, nor could he, because the math is my own work. So, can you please acknowledge TLC's dishonesty here?

Lie...

Yes, like here:

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I already posted the proof in this thread for all to see that you copied and pasted the math in the JREF thread.

But he did nothing of the sort.

So, Lunar, am I asking to much by hoping you would acknoledge this fact?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: kylebisme

I didn't make such a claim, but rather speculated that, considering TLC's demonstrated compulsion to spout flagrant lies, I wouldn't put it past him. How else would you suggest interpreting his dishonesty, or are you too concerned with silencing me to even consider it?

You're suffering from delusions of grandeur Kyle. It's serious and a sure sign of alcoholism. You should consider giving up booze, admit you were wrong and attend some AA meetings.

I can't see any other explanations for your behavior in this thread.

No offense to other alcoholics in here.

He says he is from Kansas. Someone should look into if he knew McVeigh. He is so intent on the bomb part of WTC7. Seriously. Feds most likely watching this thread.

 

[kylebisme]

Wow Dave, you sure dream up some absurd nonsense to defend a liar and avoid coming to terms with reality.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: kylebisme
Wow Dave, you sure dream up some absurd nonsense to defend a liar and avoid coming to terms with reality.

The only liar in here is you.

You were not there, you're in the middle of the country and don't know jack shit.

Unless you're admitting to somehow involved in on something there in New York.

Which is it?

 

[kylebisme]

It's neither, see the OP.

 

[PottedMeat]

With kylebisme vs. dmcowen674, this thread has reached perfection.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: kylebisme

But of course he didn't show anything of the sort, nor could he, because the math is my own work. So, can you please acknowledge TLC's dishonesty here?

Lie...

Yes, like here:

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I already posted the proof in this thread for all to see that you copied and pasted the math in the JREF thread.

But he did nothing of the sort.

So, Lunar, am I asking to much by hoping you would acknoledge this fact?

You can't even defend your lies yourself and have to beg for help.

Indeed, you need help Kyle.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: kylebisme

But of course he didn't show anything of the sort, nor could he, because the math is my own work. So, can you please acknowledge TLC's dishonesty here?

Lie...

Yes, like here:

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I already posted the proof in this thread for all to see that you copied and pasted the math in the JREF thread.

But he did nothing of the sort.

So, Lunar, am I asking to much by hoping you would acknoledge this fact?

What I'll acknowledge is that what I saw after going from start to finish in that Randi forum is that you and R. Mackay were in dialog regarding his white paper and you referenced a line of his logic with a question regarding it and he responded to that..
The folks there indicated that, even to the end of the thread, that you've not provided math... sssssooooooo...
The only math you provided is that bit of extrapolation I posted earlier... from some other person's proffer... and attributed him properly...
IMO, any reference to you having copied other's math and called it your own has not been found by me.
I've no idea how Shira's post omitted any reference to the guy you attributed for the first bit that you extrapolated from... EDIT: Additionally, if someone quickly scanning another forum sees something and finds that something exactly contained in a document and presents that as proof of some other fact having taken it out of context may have simply made a mistake. Who knows what is in that person's heart?... Not me! It is for them to remedy that mistake if it is one because it is the right thing to do. As I've said a few times... I've not seen the alleged copy and paste thingi... but, that is just me! [END EDIT]

AND, a person relying on some information that having been posted in this forum and they believe is factual or represented accurately and they used it to conclude something is not lying in my book... As long as they believe it to be true...
I think the issue you have is with the accuracy of what was posted in this forum that may not be factual. Like I said, I couldn't find any bit of cut and paste that you claimed to be your own.

 

[LunarRay]

I think this thread has evolved into a Something that does not further the OP.

I for one will try hard to NOT post anything that does not go to the issue of WTC 7's anomaly (as I see WTC 7).
Defending or challenging stuff that has no bearing on the OP issue is, imo, continuing the tangential arguments that don't do diddly to explain anything.

I really think any assertion that has a 'math' or should have a 'math' support ought to have that 'math' included. IF it is simply a visual v visual then any assertion made regarding that should have the underlying logic presented too..

I've enjoyed trying to present my position and have learned stuff so for me the thread has been a good thing... I challenge others to likewise refrain from posting in this thread unless there is something posted that regardless of its basis in fact can be supported or defeated using the evidence we have and the 'math' we all use...

 

[Number1]

Another conspiracy theory Kyle came up with:

"Put simply; our presence in Afghanistan allows us to prevent the establishment of pipelines which would otherwise which would otherwise carry oil and gas though the region to China and Russia, and it also allows our robber barons to fill their pockets with our tax dollars and by exploiting what resources Afghanistan has. Claims of noble intentions are just propaganda used to sucker the public along for the ride."

The "safe haven" myth Check the first post.

In Kyle's world, if it's 911 related, EVERYTHING is a cover up, a lie by the US government. No wonder he so passionately defends his OP. To admit defeat in this thread would put into question everything he has so firmly believed in for years.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I think this thread has evolved into a Something that does not further the OP.

I for one will try hard to NOT post anything that does not go to the issue of WTC 7's anomaly (as I see WTC 7).
Defending or challenging stuff that has no bearing on the OP issue is, imo, continuing the tangential arguments that don't do diddly to explain anything.

I really think any assertion that has a 'math' or should have a 'math' support ought to have that 'math' included. IF it is simply a visual v visual then any assertion made regarding that should have the underlying logic presented too..

I've enjoyed trying to present my position and have learned stuff so for me the thread has been a good thing... I challenge others to likewise refrain from posting in this thread unless there is something posted that regardless of its basis in fact can be supported or defeated using the evidence we have and the 'math' we all use...

But I hate myself and I suck at math. I can't defend my position but it has to be right. If I'm wrong then I might feel bad and if I feel bad I might just feel how bad and I can assure you that I feel like the worst in the world even though I would rather the world die than feel it. I have to slime everybody who thinks differently on the issue than me because they threaten me to the core. Anybody who doesn't think like me is a heretic and needs to be tortured till they convert and then killed. This is the proper response that has been used for centuries. Don't let the thin veneer of civilization get in my way. Heretics need to die.

 

[Moonbeam]

I see the issue this way. The towers etc fell. I have not seen the actual site, but I accept that they did. Some say airplanes some say termites. I say that it it was termites nobody has been able to find the termite planters. They were that good. So folk will say planes or termite planters and not much will change their thinking.

I see planes I don't see planters. Therefore I am going with planes. I don't care about the math. If it were just planes then how the buildings fell is how they fell regardless of any fucking math. I don't believe any planters will ever be found, they were that good. I have my own ideas on the math of how they could be that good. They were either that good because they control all of the data and investigation, in which case they will remain that good, or they don't exist.

In short we will never know the answer. Some will say planes and some will say planters. Occam's razor says planes. I go with planes and find the math an irrelevant abstraction, a field onto which to project your prior suspicions.

It doesn't matter if it was planters because they will never be caught, they were that good.

They were so good they are invisible and may as well not exist. They will always be untouchable, unreachable, unknowable, unaccountable, just as if they were imaginary beings. I expect never to hear proof otherwise.

But if I do I will change my mind.

 

[Ozoned]

Moon beam,

Why does it have to be one or the other?

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I see the issue this way. The towers etc fell. I have not seen the actual site, but I accept that they did. Some say airplanes some say termites. I say that it it was termites nobody has been able to find the termite planters. They were that good. So folk will say planes or termite planters and not much will change their thinking.

I see planes I don't see planters. Therefore I am going with planes. I don't care about the math. If it were just planes then how the buildings fell is how they fell regardless of any fucking math. I don't believe any planters will ever be found, they were that good. I have my own ideas on the math of how they could be that good. They were either that good because they control all of the data and investigation, in which case they will remain that good, or they don't exist.

In short we will never know the answer. Some will say planes and some will say planters. Occam's razor says planes. I go with planes and find the math an irrelevant abstraction, a field onto which to project your prior suspicions.

It doesn't matter if it was planters because they will never be caught, they were that good.

They were so good they are invisible and may as well not exist. They will always be untouchable, unreachable, unknowable, unaccountable, just as if they were imaginary beings. I expect never to hear proof otherwise.

But if I do I will change my mind.

I know the answer.... I know the truth.... It too does not rely on math although the math I know supports my truth but my truth is not dependent on the math... IT IS What I believe to be true that is true... I am the only person I care to convince of anything! So long as I know what I know I'm satisfied. IF I'm the only person on earth that shares my view... that is fine with me.
I've never in my life tried to teach another what to think or at least that was not my motive if I did... I've only ever sought to teach how to think. How to approach an issue and result in a conclusion that will satisfy them primarily and subsequently anyone who they may have reason to satisfy.
IF you showed me 27, 8X10 glossy photos with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back depicting termites eating steel at the WTC site, as Arlo said... a case of blind justice would ensue. It would not elude me that you were attempting to convince me of what I can't be convinced of.

There are probably a bazillion things that I don't believe are true or false. I've no idea! I've not had a reason to inquire. Or I could not find the basis to believe one way or another. That, however, is personal to me. That you can, quick like a bunny, do them Mechanical IQ questions we tried back awhile ago, I've to plod along step by step accepting or rejecting as my mind sees fit. But, as I indicated then to you, what I've already dealt with allows me to be like you and readily see the answer... my answer.
Can you introduce evidence that would change my mind... I don't know... depends!

Do I have an answer to WTC 7 that causes me to believe something about its collapse... I'm working on it. I was confident that this thread would provide that information. But, like the other bazillion things this one may be obvious to the multitude and proved beyond doubt to them, I won't let folks teach me what to think... or believe... I'll do that on my own.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Moon beam,

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Hehehehehe at the Home of the Reflective tissue are many many faucets with a 'H' and a 'C'. The Moonbeams see stuff as being either hot or cold and the movement from 'H' to 'C' has no consequence. Luke warm is so subjective that there is no answer found there... I wonder what Luke cold might be if not Luke warm?... I wonder if Moonbeam's 'self Feel bad' is supplanted by some other emotion... like maybe 'dislike another'... and the emotional trip between the two is so rapid like the faucet that there is nothing twixt the two.
Edit: in other words... I'd not be surprised if Moonster adjusts the thermostat to provide Luke warm water when on the 'H' cuz he's comfortable with that temp. ?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I see the issue this way. The towers etc fell. I have not seen the actual site, but I accept that they did. Some say airplanes some say termites. I say that it it was termites nobody has been able to find the termite planters. They were that good. So folk will say planes or termite planters and not much will change their thinking.

I see planes I don't see planters. Therefore I am going with planes. I don't care about the math. If it were just planes then how the buildings fell is how they fell regardless of any fucking math. I don't believe any planters will ever be found, they were that good. I have my own ideas on the math of how they could be that good. They were either that good because they control all of the data and investigation, in which case they will remain that good, or they don't exist.

In short we will never know the answer. Some will say planes and some will say planters. Occam's razor says planes. I go with planes and find the math an irrelevant abstraction, a field onto which to project your prior suspicions.

It doesn't matter if it was planters because they will never be caught, they were that good.

They were so good they are invisible and may as well not exist. They will always be untouchable, unreachable, unknowable, unaccountable, just as if they were imaginary beings. I expect never to hear proof otherwise.

But if I do I will change my mind.

I know the answer.... I know the truth.... It too does not rely on math although the math I know supports my truth but my truth is not dependent on the math... IT IS What I believe to be true that is true... I am the only person I care to convince of anything! So long as I know what I know I'm satisfied. IF I'm the only person on earth that shares my view... that is fine with me.
I've never in my life tried to teach another what to think or at least that was not my motive if I did... I've only ever sought to teach how to think. How to approach an issue and result in a conclusion that will satisfy them primarily and subsequently anyone who they may have reason to satisfy.
IF you showed me 27, 8X10 glossy photos with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back depicting termites eating steel at the WTC site, as Arlo said... a case of blind justice would ensue. It would not elude me that you were attempting to convince me of what I can't be convinced of.

There are probably a bazillion things that I don't believe are true or false. I've no idea! I've not had a reason to inquire. Or I could not find the basis to believe one way or another. That, however, is personal to me. That you can, quick like a bunny, do them Mechanical IQ questions we tried back awhile ago, I've to plod along step by step accepting or rejecting as my mind sees fit. But, as I indicated then to you, what I've already dealt with allows me to be like you and readily see the answer... my answer.
Can you introduce evidence that would change my mind... I don't know... depends!

Do I have an answer to WTC 7 that causes me to believe something about its collapse... I'm working on it. I was confident that this thread would provide that information. But, like the other bazillion things this one may be obvious to the multitude and proved beyond doubt to them, I won't let folks teach me what to think... or believe... I'll do that on my own.

Do you know the story of the Indian Chief named Bowels and the story of his resettlement on the reservation? Every time the government came to his tee pee to move him, he would say Bowels no move so they would give him a laxative and this went on till the shit got so high Bowels finally was persuaded to move. That's my theory on why people change their minds on things about which they have an opinion.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Moon beam,

Why does it have to be one or the other?

I limited my points to two facets, not faucets, for the simple reason that this thread evolves around two points of view, the towers either fell because of the plane attack, or were helped along by a secret demolition. I assumed the alien teleportal theory was a joke and nobody was serious about it. It might help if you would ask yourself first, what other alternatives we should be discussing instead of leaving all that work up to me.

In other words, don't fucking ask me why it has to be one or the other without suggesting, as you do, some alternate suggestions of your own to ascertain, for your own edification, that such a question actually makes any sense.

This would save me the embarrassing task of telling you your question is stupid and save you the embarrassment of having it pointed out to you. However, I am all ears if you do have a suggestion.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam


Do you know the story of the Indian Chief named Bowels and the story of his resettlement on the reservation? Every time the government came to his tee pee to move him, he would say Bowels no move so they would give him a laxative and this went on till the shit got so high Bowels finally was persuaded to move. That's my theory on why people change their minds on things about which they have an opinion.

To start with, I can't grasp why the Dept of the Interior is in charge of all the Out Doors...

I wonder... if the Government continued to inquire as to the status of Chief Bowels' bowel condition after he moved or did they no longer care? And, if not why not? Is it a case of who can out last who or is it who failed to communicate or who failed to listen?
I wonder what would have happened if Chief Bowels had said... "I can't move cuz all this poop is in the way" Would Government have dug into the poop to provide a path through what they created to enable The Chief to move and what if he said... "No shit, now my foot is caught''? (The chief talks funny so it ain't his fault there is poop or is it?)

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Moonbeam


Do you know the story of the Indian Chief named Bowels and the story of his resettlement on the reservation? Every time the government came to his tee pee to move him, he would say Bowels no move so they would give him a laxative and this went on till the shit got so high Bowels finally was persuaded to move. That's my theory on why people change their minds on things about which they have an opinion.

To start with, I can't grasp why the Dept of the Interior is in charge of all the Out Doors...

I wonder... if the Government continued to inquire as to the status of Chief Bowels' bowel condition after he moved or did they no longer care? And, if not why not? Is it a case of who can out last who or is it who failed to communicate or who failed to listen?
I wonder what would have happened if Chief Bowels had said... "I can't move cuz all this poop is in the way" Would Government have dug into the poop to provide a path through what they created to enable The Chief to move and what if he said... "No shit, now my foot is caught''?

I refer you to Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

I refer you to Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby.

I was born and bred in the briar patch! hehehehe

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Moon beam,

Why does it have to be one or the other?

why not??
It would be way too easy if it could --which it cannot--be both!!