Why can't most people come to a logical conclusion?

Discussion in '9/11' started by Scott, Mar 5, 2018.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The feeling is mutual, stick to the topic.

    Which ones in particular?

    What "conspiracy replies"? I don't believe anyone in this forum is involved in any conspiracy merely by posting in this thread lol.

    Be specific.
     
  2. Fenton Lum

    Fenton Lum Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    6,127
    Likes Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is how your founders set things up. The citizens were deemed too low a form of life to participate in the political process. That's why only affluent land owning white males were allowed the vote. You require an aristocracy to decide for you.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018
  3. saltydancin

    saltydancin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Seems more as an oilgarchy born out of Ground Zero declaring itself an immaculate conception aristocracy patriot act .
     
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "They must find it difficult...Those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority." - Gerald Massey
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You lack the stones to answer any simple questions just like in another thread in this section of the forum. You are also the factual evidence this topic points out that you claim is lacking. There is no substance to your beliefs just plain old faith that the authorities are being truthful.
     
  6. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    30,252
    Likes Received:
    10,697
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If I miss a reply, it's probably because I have close to 50 notifications on a given day. It's normal for me to miss a few. I also may even subliminally ignore hilarious conspiracy theories that lack the slightest bit of actual evidence. Whereas much of what you cite involves a nutty professor from some school present their theories on why jetfuel mixed with impact can't melt steel
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course, what was I thinking. Yet you manage to reply to posts you want to reply to and "miss" the uncomfortable ones.

    Plus the inconvenient ones loaded with evidence and science fact. Who are you kidding?

    Much of what I cite? Where did I cite that specifically?

    A theory? Do you know of any experiment that can show otherwise? If you do, I'm very interested, please post the link to that scientifically valid experiment.

    So he's "nutty" because you bought the official narrative without question and he raises hundreds of questions. But you agree with an anonymous poster's "sentiments" who claims he was there and also bought the admitted lies as fact. I understand.

    You haven't even addressed (or don't understand) the point of this thread, which is really about the psychology of people such as you, with regard to 9/11. But you were so concerned about derailing this thread, that was really important.

    But thanks for responding anyway.

    So when are you going to address my questions posed to you in the thread below from 6 months ago? Or is that professor (Dr. Leroy Hulsey) also "nutty" and you need to "subliminally ignore hilarious conspiracy theories"?

    Post #222:

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/page-12

    (1 of 50 notifications - LMFAO)
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2018
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Still waiting but not holding my breath. Lacking the testicular fortitude to respond to legitimate questions is pretty pathetic for a guy who calls himself "ArmySoldier". Is that what they teach you in the Army these days? When confronted by uncomfortable/inconvenient questions, run and hide?

    (another 1 of 50 notifications today)
     
  9. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    30,252
    Likes Received:
    10,697
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What are you rambling about? It's impossible to associate your comments with 'Army', as you're utterly terrified of it.

    Much like you're terrified of the truth behind the world trade centers collapsing because airplanes blew up inside them.

    What exactly are you whining about now?
     
  10. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The interesting thing is that it only took 4 months to build a model of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in 1940.

    http://www.lib.washington.edu/specialcollections/collections/exhibits/tnb



    model @ 2:47

    So failure to model the collapse of the Twin Towers in SIXTEEN YEARS is more of a travesty than their actual destruction. In 1940 there were no electronic computers to do simulations. Our engineering schools are effectively accomplices after the fact for not resolving this issue.

    psik
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's the answer to my questions? It seems it's you who's rambling but thanks for validating my point and the point of this thread, no cojones soldier boy.

    Actually you're the one terrified of the truth, there's not one theory that claims the towers collapsed because the planes blew up inside them, not even NIST makes that claim. So you need to invent your own theory. The difference between you and I is that I have zero fear about questioning EVERYTHING about the official narrative. You don't have the necessary organ to question even one thing, never mind address any of my questions, another source of your terror.
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perhaps, except for the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, Institute of Northern Engineering.

    http://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
     
  13. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Is there only one engineering professor at the University of Alaska?

    And kind of long in the tooth at that.
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Didn't you check the link? How about all the posts I've written about Dr. Leroy Hulsey?
     
  15. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I am terribly sorry but I do not pay detailed attention to everything YOU post.

    I do pay attention to what goes on in various places relating to this subject however. I emailed Dr. Hulsey in August of 2016. I simply had to do a search on his name in my Gmail account to see when it was.

    But I have not seen any mention of any other engineering professors at his school, just his two students. And because of his age I presume he is near retirement and therefore does not give much of a sh!t about who he p!sses off.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2018
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Understood but posts about Dr. Hulsey's research appear all over this section of the forum. And if I'm not mistaken you once responded to a post about him.

    Your constant mantra is that engineering schools and professors are not tackling the science of 9/11 yet you seem to know full well about Hulsey. What does it matter about Hulsey's retirement status? The key is that he is conducting a thorough investigation of NIST's investigation and conclusions about the destruction of WTC7. And he is the perfect candidate to tackle this issue. Who cares who's po'd about it, that's their problem and **** them. Those who want to hide this massive crime need to be prosecuted for obstruction and complicity.

    Regardless, you claim you emailed him. And I seem to remember that you once posted that your email consisted of questions about the twin towers and he didn't respond. To which I responded that it's not surprising since he hasn't investigated the destruction of the twin towers (I sure hope he eventually will). I certainly could be wrong about all this so please correct me if I am.
     
  17. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Younger "experts" worried about their careers might be worried about who they might possibly p!ss off and this entire conspiracy business implies that we are dealing with an organization that doesn't care who they kill. So Hulsey's age does enter the picture.

    He is focusing on the column that the NIST blames for the collapse but the NIST simulation does not look like the video of the collapse anyway. So it comes across as nitpicking over an obvious error to me.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2018
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Understood and agree.

    Well your claim is that no engineering school has taken up the science of 9/11 and that isn't the case since Hulsey did. His age is not relevant to your claim.

    If that's all it looks like to you you're reaching an extremely narrow conclusion. There are enormous implications to Hulsey's findings. I have detailed the analysis and commented quite prolifically in this thread:

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-nist-9-11-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. Do you really need to use childish name calling to support any of your arguments?
    2. I don't have any "conspiracy thread", unless you mean the fact that NIST conspired to deceive the planet about the destruction of 3 towers on 9/11.

    Please point to the exact place where that claim was made so I can review it in its proper context and how that relates to the crux of Hulsey's claims about NIST's investigation and conclusion about the destruction of WTC7. Thanks.

    That's of course false. These were the original questions and discussion:

    Post #222

    "As claimed NIST did not legitimately investigate the destruction of WTC7. Dr Hulsey listed several critical deficiencies by NIST that his team covered within their 2 year study. Many if not all of these resulted in a completely opposite conclusion. If after watching the video you still believe NIST's "investigation" was legitimate, can you please explain the basis for your belief? OTOH if you now agree that NIST did not legitimately investigate the destruction of WTC7 do you have the stones to admit you were wrong?"

    to which you responded (Post #223):

    "Calm down. I told you I was trying to get a better understanding of the thread. I'm trying to understand why this investigation seems illegitimate to you"

    to which I responded (Post #224):

    "I'm quite calm. Have you reviewed the most recent video I posted? Dr. Hulsey explains in detail what NIST did and didn't do. If there's something you don't understand please feel free to ask. I am admittedly not an expert but I have done extensive research on the subject and can point you to the appropriate experts and their articles/papers."

    And there was no further response from you (see posts 226 through 228).

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/page-12

    Thanks for responding but you still haven't answered my original questions despite your false claim. This is a discussion forum, you do nothing for my "feelings" but you sure do a lot of damage to your own credibility. You also fit the exact type of person this discussion is all about so that's the reason why I'm grilling you.
     
  20. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Does a single professor at a school speak for the school?

    Did Bazant speak for MIT?
     
  21. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    30,252
    Likes Received:
    10,697
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is the 3rd time you manipulated your questions to say that I didn't answer them. You aren't "grilling" anyone. You are trolling which is against the rules here. You should be mindful.

    You asked direct questions and were given answers. When your little feelings didn't approve of the answers, you altered the questions. The ironic part is, you keep quoiting yourself doing it.
     
  22. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since it is sanctioned by the school, using the school's website and facilities yes, unless and until the school specifically claims otherwise.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2018
  23. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    52,605
    Likes Received:
    33,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The answer is that schools in the US have abandoned the Socratic Method and adopted Critical Theory.
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,340
    Likes Received:
    1,187
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The evidence of your dishonesty is my post that YOU quoted. I posted all the questions EXACTLY as they appeared without one single alteration/manipulation. As proven, you failed to answer any of my questions, see "And there was no further response from you (see posts 226 through 228)". My "little feelings" have nothing to do with your deliberate and quite obvious evasions.

    So based on what I'm personally looking for in a sample cognitive dissonant candidate with regard to the official 9/11 narrative (that would be YOU), he/she generally meets these characteristics:

    1. Parrots the official 9/11 narrative whenever possible.
    2. Invents his/her own one sentence theory(ies) to summarize that narrative. Often because he/she doesn't even actually know the details of the official narrative.
    3. Lies liberally.
    4. Uses name calling as a defense mechanism, even for highly qualified experts.
    5. Denies/contradicts expert findings and believes he/she knows better than experts who have actually done the research.
    6. Fails to answer any inconvenient question(s) but claims he/she did.
    7. Evades questions when asked to specify (see below sample).

    (no answer - as expected)

    8. Never questions even the smallest detail of the official 9/11 narrative.

    The above are just 8 points using you as a sampling. There's more, so please keep on posting in case I missed something. Thanks.
     
  25. Fenton Lum

    Fenton Lum Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    6,127
    Likes Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That makes you entirely too fragile to be here.
     

Share This Page