Truthers, how was this engine planted?

[CurveLight]

Curve and eots.

You seem to have an issue in answering one question that I have presented a couple of times now.

I will ask it again.

Dr. Q, in his paper, has stated his conclusion that the Twin Towers collapsed from failing floor trusses due to heat from fires.

Do you agree with him since he is an "expert" in this matter?

Yes or no?

You seem to have a real problem with the fact your question has been answered. It looks like the only reason you keep asking is to hope for some type of inconsistency. You can either silently admit I've stated my position on the towers as well as why I referenced dr q or continue with false accusations.

No you haven't.

Do you agree with Dr. Q's conclusion stated in his paper, based on the evidence he has seen, that the towers collapsed due to the floor trusses failing due to heat from the fires.

Yes or no?

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

 

[Gamolon]

You seem to have a real problem with the fact your question has been answered. It looks like the only reason you keep asking is to hope for some type of inconsistency. You can either silently admit I've stated my position on the towers as well as why I referenced dr q or continue with false accusations.

No you haven't.

Do you agree with Dr. Q's conclusion stated in his paper, based on the evidence he has seen, that the towers collapsed due to the floor trusses failing due to heat from the fires.

Yes or no?

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

 

[Douger]

I planted them to show that the Mossad and CIA, alCIA duh are the problem.
I need a chicken sammish..................

 

[CurveLight]

No you haven't.

Do you agree with Dr. Q's conclusion stated in his paper, based on the evidence he has seen, that the towers collapsed due to the floor trusses failing due to heat from the fires.

Yes or no?

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

Patience Tank: Empty.

You're a fuxxing reetawrd to the divecon degree. I didn't say I don't agree with him. Exactly what part of:

"All three towers are a mystery."

is confusing to you?

What part of:

"I haven't seen any conclusive evidence for any theory."

is confusing?

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2188639-post413.html

he pointed out dr q's theory is one example of an alternative then goes on to highlight how dr q clearly called on colleagues to also come up with "real alternatives." And to repeat what you have ignored....if dr q was confident his theory is the correct one he would not demand a new investigation. He would not recommend colleagues become healthy CTs.

I have more respect for divecon because he puts his insincerity on a silver platter whereas you feign sincerity and constantly put words in others' mouths.

 

[Fizz]

once again bentdick proves what an impotent moron he is by refusing to form an opinion on anything.

 

[Gamolon]

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

Patience Tank: Empty.

You're a fuxxing reetawrd to the divecon degree. I didn't say I don't agree with him. Exactly what part of:

"All three towers are a mystery."

is confusing to you?

What part of:

"I haven't seen any conclusive evidence for any theory."

is confusing?

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2188639-post413.html

he pointed out dr q's theory is one example of an alternative then goes on to highlight how dr q clearly called on colleagues to also come up with "real alternatives." And to repeat what you have ignored....if dr q was confident his theory is the correct one he would not demand a new investigation. He would not recommend colleagues become healthy CTs.

I have more respect for divecon because he puts his insincerity on a silver platter whereas you feign sincerity and constantly put words in others' mouths.

Wow.

You say that you haven't seen any conclusive evidence for ANY theory which means that you don't think his theory has any merit because in your eyes, THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT!!!!!!

What the hell don't you get? If I told you the moon was made of shit and you you said "You don't have any conclusive evidence to prove that!", what the fuck do you think you're telling me?

 

[Gamolon]

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

Ok. What the fuck does this next QUOTED STATEMENT from eots mean???????

this is is one example he offers of an alternative scenario

This means that Dr. Q has offered other theories right?

Jesus H. Christ!!!

I'm giving you an example of the same friggin' claim and you act like an imbecile.

If I said to you "Nike is just ONE EXAMPLE of the brand of shoes that Foot Locker offers.", what that fuck could I possibly mean by that? That there are OTHER BRANDS OF SHOES that Foot Locker offers right?


What a fool!

 

[DiveCon]

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

Patience Tank: Empty.

You're a fuxxing reetawrd to the divecon degree. I didn't say I don't agree with him. Exactly what part of:

"All three towers are a mystery."

is confusing to you?

What part of:

"I haven't seen any conclusive evidence for any theory."

is confusing?

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2188639-post413.html

he pointed out dr q's theory is one example of an alternative then goes on to highlight how dr q clearly called on colleagues to also come up with "real alternatives." And to repeat what you have ignored....if dr q was confident his theory is the correct one he would not demand a new investigation. He would not recommend colleagues become healthy CTs.

I have more respect for divecon because he puts his insincerity on a silver platter whereas you feign sincerity and constantly put words in others' mouths.

and you prove you are a fucking id-eot

 

[eots]

No you haven't.

Do you agree with Dr. Q's conclusion stated in his paper, based on the evidence he has seen, that the towers collapsed due to the floor trusses failing due to heat from the fires.

Yes or no?

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

why do you ingnore the fact he says evidence was witheld .. fact finding detered ..blocked...questions unanswered..and that there is no evidence of tempatures predicted nessesary for failure ? furthermore DR Q has no conclusion.. he offered an alternative theory

 

[DiveCon]

On the collapses:
"All three towers are a mystery"
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2179866-post316.html


Why dr q was referenced:
But his work is referenced mainly because he point blank argues NIST has not found definitive cause.
Http://www.usmessageboard.com/2181342-post344.html

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

why do you ingnore the fact he says evidence was witheld .. fact finding detered ..blocked...questions unanswered..and that there is no evidence of tempatures predicted nessesary for failure ? furthermore DR Q has no conclusion.. he offered an alternative theory

and he calls you morons "crazy"

 

[eots]

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

why do you ingnore the fact he says evidence was witheld .. fact finding detered ..blocked...questions unanswered..and that there is no evidence of tempatures predicted nessesary for failure ? furthermore DR Q has no conclusion.. he offered an alternative theory

and he calls you morons "crazy"

any evedence to support your LIE/DELUSIONS ?

 

[DiveCon]

why do you ingnore the fact he says evidence was witheld .. fact finding detered ..blocked...questions unanswered..and that there is no evidence of tempatures predicted nessesary for failure ? furthermore DR Q has no conclusion.. he offered an alternative theory

and he calls you morons "crazy"

any evedence to support your LIE/DELUSIONS ?

sorry, i dont understand the moronic question
but since you are delusional and lie a lot, you must be doing more of that TPP you are so well known for

 

[CurveLight]

So. You DON'T agree with Dr. Q's conclusion even though he is an expert and has looked at the evidence because it is not conclusive?

Gotcha.

Patience Tank: Empty.

You're a fuxxing reetawrd to the divecon degree. I didn't say I don't agree with him. Exactly what part of:

"All three towers are a mystery."

is confusing to you?

What part of:

"I haven't seen any conclusive evidence for any theory."

is confusing?

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2188639-post413.html

he pointed out dr q's theory is one example of an alternative then goes on to highlight how dr q clearly called on colleagues to also come up with "real alternatives." And to repeat what you have ignored....if dr q was confident his theory is the correct one he would not demand a new investigation. He would not recommend colleagues become healthy CTs.

I have more respect for divecon because he puts his insincerity on a silver platter whereas you feign sincerity and constantly put words in others' mouths.

Wow.

You say that you haven't seen any conclusive evidence for ANY theory which means that you don't think his theory has any merit because in your eyes, THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT!!!!!!

What the hell don't you get? If I told you the moon was made of shit and you you said "You don't have any conclusive evidence to prove that!", what the fuck do you think you're telling me?

You repeat the pattern. I never said it "has no merit."

 

[CurveLight]

I also haven't seen eots say dr q himself has more than one theory. In this post:

Ok. What the fuck does this next QUOTED STATEMENT from eots mean???????

this is is one example he offers of an alternative scenario

This means that Dr. Q has offered other theories right?

Jesus H. Christ!!!

I'm giving you an example of the same friggin' claim and you act like an imbecile.

If I said to you "Nike is just ONE EXAMPLE of the brand of shoes that Foot Locker offers.", what that fuck could I possibly mean by that? That there are OTHER BRANDS OF SHOES that Foot Locker offers right?


What a fool!

You don't know how to read. Let me explain it.

"this is one example he offers of an alternative scenario"

Eots didn't say:

"this is an example OF ONE OF HIS ALTERNATVE theories.


And you are still ignoring the other points. You're done.

 

[saiweril]

If you think no plane crashed in Shanksville, then how did they plant this engine?

Hint, you're starring at it.

 

[DiveCon]

If you think no plane crashed in Shanksville, then how did they plant this engine?

Hint, you're starring at it.

ah, so they took that photo in the process of it being planted

 

[saiweril]

If you think no plane crashed in Shanksville, then how did they plant this engine?

Hint, you're starring at it.

ah, so they took that photo in the process of it being planted

Yep. Pretty clever and ballsy on their part. It went years until someone figured it out. There's a good video about it on youtube somewhere. Now looking at that photo, you can't help think how obvious it was.

 

[Fizz]

Hint, you're starring at it.

ah, so they took that photo in the process of it being planted

Yep. Pretty clever and ballsy on their part. It went years until someone figured it out. There's a good video about it on youtube somewhere. Now looking at that photo, you can't help think how obvious it was.

ahhhh... it must be true because there is a youtube video about it...

so they planted evidence right in front of the hundreds of first responders there and nobody said anything?

so where is the plane.

 

[DiveCon]

ah, so they took that photo in the process of it being planted

Yep. Pretty clever and ballsy on their part. It went years until someone figured it out. There's a good video about it on youtube somewhere. Now looking at that photo, you can't help think how obvious it was.

ahhhh... it must be true because there is a youtube video about it...

so they planted evidence right in front of the hundreds of first responders there and nobody said anything?

so where is the plane.

in broad daylight and with the media of the world watching them



TFF

 

[saiweril]

so they planted evidence right in front of the hundreds of first responders there and nobody said anything?

Go to youtube and search "shanksville engine" and you'll see the video -- I can't post any links because I haven't posted enough yet. It shows how they did it without onlookers seeing it. There was never many responders near the crater when they were digging it, only a few of the workers in the jumpsuits who were mostly FBI agents.

so where is the plane.

Not down in the ground, that's for sure. That was the biggest lie ever told about Shanksville.