Flat earth or globe
#181
Scooby Regular
No
we are dealing with your claim that the BBC reporting the WT 7 collapse is part of a conspiracy and evidence of controlled demolition
Remember my post - one claim at a time
Repeated here
"They are often so wide ranging and so full of rubbish, and the proponent of a conspiracy will often simply change the goalposts when confronted with counter evidence – it is like nailing jelly to a wall. So what you have to do is nail any specific claim when they are made, such as"
One claim at a time
we are dealing with your claim that the BBC reporting the WT 7 collapse is part of a conspiracy and evidence of controlled demolition
Remember my post - one claim at a time
Repeated here
"They are often so wide ranging and so full of rubbish, and the proponent of a conspiracy will often simply change the goalposts when confronted with counter evidence – it is like nailing jelly to a wall. So what you have to do is nail any specific claim when they are made, such as"
One claim at a time
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 02 April 2016 at 09:18 PM.
#184
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
We are dealing with that , but you origannaly asked me what question a and e have that needs answering ,
Why was controlled demolition not investigated , your answer , because there is no evidance ,
My question to you , which I've asked you twice now , is
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered .
Now back to BBC reporting , what I said is , repeating myself for the third time , it is part of the reason I question if we have been told the truth , I accept it may be an innocent mistake but still it's because of the things I mentioned that I *QUESTION* it .
Do not confuse me with others who claim to know facts etc
Why was controlled demolition not investigated , your answer , because there is no evidance ,
My question to you , which I've asked you twice now , is
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered .
Now back to BBC reporting , what I said is , repeating myself for the third time , it is part of the reason I question if we have been told the truth , I accept it may be an innocent mistake but still it's because of the things I mentioned that I *QUESTION* it .
Do not confuse me with others who claim to know facts etc
#185
Scooby Regular
#186
Scooby Regular
We are dealing with that , but you origannaly asked me what question a and e have that needs answering ,
Why was controlled demolition not investigated , your answer , because there is no evidance ,
My question to you , which I've asked you twice now , is
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered .
Now back to BBC reporting , what I said is , repeating myself for the third time , it is part of the reason I question if we have been told the truth , I accept it may be an innocent mistake but still it's because of the things I mentioned that I *QUESTION* it .
Do not confuse me with others who claim to know facts etc
Why was controlled demolition not investigated , your answer , because there is no evidance ,
My question to you , which I've asked you twice now , is
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered .
Now back to BBC reporting , what I said is , repeating myself for the third time , it is part of the reason I question if we have been told the truth , I accept it may be an innocent mistake but still it's because of the things I mentioned that I *QUESTION* it .
Do not confuse me with others who claim to know facts etc
No no no
You claimed the BBC report as evidence - one claim at a time
#188
Scooby Regular
Lol, like I said Gary
One claim at a time
You said in a post today regarding the reporting of the WTC 7 collapse by the BBC
Like I said it is like nailing jelly to a wall
One claim at a time
You said in a post today regarding the reporting of the WTC 7 collapse by the BBC
Like I said it is like nailing jelly to a wall
#189
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
The first question you missed is ,
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered ,
In my opinion there was good reason to investigate that hypothosis
Then the BBC report , I mentioned that as an example of why I question what we have been told ,
You didn't need to prove it was misreported , the whole point is , that it was somehow misreported ,
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered ,
In my opinion there was good reason to investigate that hypothosis
Then the BBC report , I mentioned that as an example of why I question what we have been told ,
You didn't need to prove it was misreported , the whole point is , that it was somehow misreported ,
#190
Scooby Regular
This is what you said
A and E don't so much have questions they feel they have good reason for a proper investigation into whether controlled demolition was used to bring down arc 1 2 and 7
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collaps
, before it did , the speed they fell , how the concrete turned to ddust and gravel as it collapsed , and the fact it looked controlled , as in symmetrical and complete , what happened to the top portion above where the planes impacted
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collaps
A and E don't so much have questions they feel they have good reason for a proper investigation into whether controlled demolition was used to bring down arc 1 2 and 7
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collapse , before it did , the speed they fell , how the concrete turned to ddust and gravel as it collapsed , and the fact it looked controlled , as in symmetrical and complete , what happened to the top portion above where the planes impacted
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collapse , before it did , the speed they fell , how the concrete turned to ddust and gravel as it collapsed , and the fact it looked controlled , as in symmetrical and complete , what happened to the top portion above where the planes impacted
#194
Scooby Regular
The first question you missed is ,
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered ,
In my opinion there was good reason to investigate that hypothosis
Then the BBC report , I mentioned that as an example of why I question what we have been told ,
You didn't need to prove it was misreported , the whole point is , that it was somehow misreported ,
Without an investigation how can evidence be gathered ,
In my opinion there was good reason to investigate that hypothosis
Then the BBC report , I mentioned that as an example of why I question what we have been told ,
You didn't need to prove it was misreported , the whole point is , that it was somehow misreported ,
Just not hypotheses that have no evidence
What is so difficult to understand
#200
Scooby Regular
It was investigated
They found the collapses mechanism - it matched the observations, it matched the physics
Potential energy plus gravity
What they did not find was any evidence of controlled demolition
None, nada, zilch, Fvck all
It really is that simple, Occam's razor
They found the collapses mechanism - it matched the observations, it matched the physics
Potential energy plus gravity
What they did not find was any evidence of controlled demolition
None, nada, zilch, Fvck all
It really is that simple, Occam's razor
#202
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
It was investigated
They found the collapses mechanism - it matched the observations, it matched the physics
Potential energy plus gravity
What they did not find was any evidence of controlled demolition
None, nada, zilch, Fvck all
It really is that simple, Occam's razor
They found the collapses mechanism - it matched the observations, it matched the physics
Potential energy plus gravity
What they did not find was any evidence of controlled demolition
None, nada, zilch, Fvck all
It really is that simple, Occam's razor
Maybe you are correct in saying it was legitimately investigated , I don't think it was ,
As I understand it , you believe the people I'm doubting ,
#203
Scooby Regular
"Moving goal posts, nailing jelly to a wall"
You quite clearly posted the BBC reporting as evidence of a conspiracy
Please don't pretend you did not
Like I said give up you are just making yourself look like a tool
#204
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Repeating myself for the last time
This is what I said , and I ment exactly what I said
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collapse , before it did , the speed they fell , how the concrete turned to dust and gravel as it collapsed , and the fact it looked controlled , as in symmetrical and complete , what happened to the top portion above where the planes impacted
Now hodgy , I may look stupid , I don't care , but I for certain think you are a complete arsehole and can **** right off now
This is what I said , and I ment exactly what I said
You might wonder why I question what caused there destruction ,
Facts like , the BBC reporting wtc 7 collapse , before it did , the speed they fell , how the concrete turned to dust and gravel as it collapsed , and the fact it looked controlled , as in symmetrical and complete , what happened to the top portion above where the planes impacted
Now hodgy , I may look stupid , I don't care , but I for certain think you are a complete arsehole and can **** right off now
#210
Scooby Regular
You are the one who is confused
"Certainly not evidence"
Precisely, then why bring it up
Like I said in my original post you cannot refute a daft theory in its entirety (it contains a whole heap of ****) all you can do is refute a single claim - AKA the BBC report of WT 7 collapse
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 02 April 2016 at 11:00 PM.