Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Yeah, ?my delusions?. I have not convinced myself of anything, the evidence has done that little tommy. No modern skyscraper has been brought down by fire. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. It?s hardly delusional when there hasn?t been ONE SINGLE SKYSCRAPER brought down by flames. Furthermore, structural engineers seem to be saying the same thing (that fire alone could *never* bring down a modern skyscraper) including those commissioned by FEMA. Ya got that little buddy? =)
|
Now we have been through this. But okay will say it again. Just because 'no modern skyscraper has been brought down by fire' is not evidence or confirmation that it cannot ever happen. Now I know you don't understand this but try and think it through logically. Not happened before does not equal it will never happen in the future. Equally when it does happen this is not proof or evidence of a conspiricy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Getting pretty pathetic there tommy boy. Buildings close to WTC didn?t suffer the same fate that #7 did? why? Again, because of magic? Luck? Jesus?s second coming? Maybe Mohammed asked them politely to not please fall even though they suffered essentially the same identical conditions that #7 did? Damn that Mohammed, he?s a pretty powerful playah? I guess.
|
Again we have been through this. For some reason you think because Building B was destroyed then Building A must also be destroyed and because it wasn't then this is proof of well fuck knows what really but there you go. Now I have explained why through random chance that weird shit can happen. Its scary I know but sometimes thats just the way it is and sometimes there is no explanation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
You are a fucking moron. I call you out on your stupid fucking ?analogy? or whatever the hell you pretended you were trying to prove. We have ?observed? the life cycle of yellow dwarf stars directly based on what we understand about stellar events. It?s not like we have a telescope/camera system powerful enough to say zoom in to even the closest star, but based on the observational characteristics scientists have came up with a pretty decent working THEORY as to their life cycle. Sorry if I didn?t make it that clear for you tommy boy, I know you have that whole issue with reading and comprehending. Don't feel that bad about it tom tom, I have a problem with flatuence!
|
In other words we have not directly observed the life cycle of a yellow dwarf star as you claimed. Just checking.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Don't feel that bad about your disorder though tom tom, I myself have a problem with flatulence!
|
It explains a lot.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Wow? what a load of faggot shit. It?s hardly the same thing; normal buildings are easily destroyed by fire ? most buildings are not made with such finesse as a STEEL SKYSCRAPER is. However, many buildings that suffer fire damage are not destroyed, including homes primarily made of wood, but that?s another matter. STEEL SKYSCRAPERS on the other hand CANNOT be destroyed by fire alone. It is technically impossible and has been stated as such by structural engineers. Even the structural engineers who were hired by FEMA consent to that point ? they themselves say it is IMPOSSIBLE for fire alone to have destroyed a skyscraper. They claim that #7 was destroyed due to structural instability from falling debris from the WTC in combination with intense fire. Since buildings much closer to the WTC were exposed to the SAME FALLING DEBRIS, the SAME INTENSE FIRE, and did NOT fall, we can take FEMA?s report dubious at best. So get this through your head my dear faggot: It is I M P O S S I B L E for a STEEL SKYSCRAPER to be destroyed by fire based on FACTUAL DATA.
|
Yet again you missed the point. Never mind I was probably expecting too much from you on this one
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Yes, my hygiene is identical to my logical analysis? lmao, nice try faggy one. Fire cannot destroy a steel skyscraper friend. I hope you realize this by now. If not, I feel so sorry for you tommy boy.
|
See previous comments on steel and skyscrapers and fire etc
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
No, I have no hardcore proof in what I believe who/what group took down Building #7. There is plenty of proof to support that modern STEEL SKYSCRAPERS cannot be destroyed by fire.
|
So in one sentance we have 'Fire cannot destroy a steel skyscraper' to 'There is plenty of proof to support that modern STEEL SKYSCRAPERS cannot be destroyed by fire'. The first is presented as a statement of fact with no room for argument. The second is in effect closer to the actual truth that there is plenty of proof to support (the theory) that they cannot be destroyed by fire. However as we all know with the the theories of experts that reality has a habit of biting them in the ass. At least though (and at last) we seem to have be heading in a more sensible direction.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
You haven?t heard of Gamera you stupid faggot fuck? Jesus Christ, that?d be funny if it wasn?t so depressing. Gamera is a giant turtle who defends those who cannot defend themselves, another great pop-icon from Japan. I would recommend watching a few Gamera movies but I?m sure you?ll start screaming halfway through NO THIS IS NOT LOGICAL GIANT TURTLES THAT BIG CANNOT EXIST LOL EVEN THOUGH I HAVE NOT OBSERVED A GIANT TURTLE ROFL.
|
...and I was wrong about heading in a more sensible direction. We now have giant turtles.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
*sighs* Fema claims building was taken out by fire + structural damage, which is fairly unsubstantiated. This leads me to believe then that the collapse of #7 was setup in advance by another entity since Al Qaeda could not have done it without hundreds of hours of prep work + inside help. Simple enough for you shit for brains?
|
Crystal. FEMA claims are in your eyes unsubstantiated so naturally explosives were planted in advance to bring the building down. Why this building and not others etc is not addressed but hey lets just jump to dribbling conclusions and run around shouting at everyone.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Thanks boy! Keep your eyes off my cock though please. It?s making me kind of nervous and I can?t perform well when I?m nervous  |
Have no idea why you keep bringing your cock into the equation but if it makes you happy then knock yourself out.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Lmao, yeah, box-cutting maniacs were the true and only masterminds behind this operation all right. ?Oh dear god he has a box-cutter! Whatever shall a plane full of people do??? Oh my god, the box-cutter, it?s so scary!?.
|
Well the planes full of people ended up dead. And yes I can imagine it was terrifying. But go ahead and mock them and their families if it makes you feel big.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Go back to sucking cock, you are really good at that. Not so much at debunking conspiracy theories though. =(
|
Debunking conspiricy theories is like debunking religion. Next to impossible. Both rely on blind faith with a dash of stupidity.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
I have responded every point you have raised you mother fucking faggot while you sit back and continue to jerk off. I have debunked just about everything thus far you have said using analytical thinking and just pure logic. You on the other hand keep spewing nonsense such as ?just because you haven?t seen it doesn?t mean it?s not possible LMAO?. I have not seen a giant knife wielding gorilla serial killer running around looking for his next victim either but I guess to you that?s possible eh? Guess that?s ?logic? to you? stupid fucking faggot. Oh I?m sorry, you think that?s tedious abuse. Maybe this will be a bit better for you: Guess that?s ?logic? to you? you inferior closet-concealed troll.
|
Leaving aside the introduction of knife wielding gorillas the use of the phrase analytical thinking and pure logic is followed by 'spewing nonsense such as ?just because you haven?t seen it doesn?t mean it?s not possible LMAO'
So in summary only things that we have seen are possible? For example I have never seen Sydney Opera House therefore it cannot possibly exist? Frankly it is (again) dribbling insanity to believe that the only things that are possible are things we have seen.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
*claps!* The little guy finally agrees that one of his statements was horrendously stupid. Yaaaah! Only a few dozen left to go and I can call it a night.
|
You should try reading it again.
Or was I been too subtle? Probably
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
That?s a big negatory captain re-re, it?s mainly getting the unimportant statements out of the way to keep you focused. I know that you have a reading disorder so I try to make it as easy as possible for ya assclown.
|
So its a 'Yes' then. Thought so.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
*yawns* Really reaching there kid. You are the one that said ?and others? so I was just reiterating what you said. But because of your reading disability, it?s to be expected you missed that.
|
I said 'me (and others)' you said 'people (and others)' so I ask again who are these others? Giant turtles? Knife wielding gorillas? Aliens? Was Building 7 their HQ hence the reason for destroying it? Enlighten us.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Anything else my little cum guzzler?
|
Well we pretty much wrapped it up a post or two ago but you seem to enjoy looking stupid so I guess that does it for now