| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. 18:16 - Sep 9 with 12884 views | Paddy39 |
We should have a minutes silence on Saturday to remember 9-11. Many English people lost their lives in the twin towers that day as well. 20yrs ago. |  |
| |  |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 15:27 - Sep 17 with 608 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 20:36 - Sep 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I admire your persistence with responding but he has fixed his view on this and trying to reason is not going to change it. He is trying to argue science without understanding it and without realising that there are far higher qualified responding.
You have shown the clear evidence that his arguments are from whacky conspiracy theorists. He argues he himself isn't one but how you can perpetuate the arguments of those who clearly are and not realise you are I am at a loss to understand. |
As I said. Bailing out of this now as I can clearly see where this is headed.
All very tiresome to be honest.
Anyway, back to football, What about Shefki as assistant manager? |  |
| |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 15:43 - Sep 17 with 590 views | Keaneish |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 20:36 - Sep 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I admire your persistence with responding but he has fixed his view on this and trying to reason is not going to change it. He is trying to argue science without understanding it and without realising that there are far higher qualified responding.
You have shown the clear evidence that his arguments are from whacky conspiracy theorists. He argues he himself isn't one but how you can perpetuate the arguments of those who clearly are and not realise you are I am at a loss to understand. |
The reason I opened this up is because I don’t have a fixed view on this. I’ve said that the points I’ve posted are inaccuracies I believe need greater discussion. I also acknowledged in my post that the points I posted don’t go into the science in great detail, they simply illustrate topics for greater scientific discussion.
I’ve also posted very credible , official sources as reference material so every point you’ve made is off by some distance.
Cheltenham Blue has posted some very good responses to dig deeper into the science regarding the thermal expansion theory and the fire safety standards. I find conjecture in several points he made regarding this. If there’s appetite to continue we can but it seems not. |  |
| |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 17:16 - Sep 17 with 542 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 15:43 - Sep 17 by Keaneish |
The reason I opened this up is because I don’t have a fixed view on this. I’ve said that the points I’ve posted are inaccuracies I believe need greater discussion. I also acknowledged in my post that the points I posted don’t go into the science in great detail, they simply illustrate topics for greater scientific discussion.
I’ve also posted very credible , official sources as reference material so every point you’ve made is off by some distance.
Cheltenham Blue has posted some very good responses to dig deeper into the science regarding the thermal expansion theory and the fire safety standards. I find conjecture in several points he made regarding this. If there’s appetite to continue we can but it seems not. |
Your sources - or at least a large proportion of them - have been shown not to be credible.
At the start of this you came in talking in scientific terms about fires in buildings, now you're saying, "the points I posted don’t go into the science in great detail, they simply illustrate topics for greater scientific discussion." In that case they're pretty worthless. You can have "discussion" about any old nonsense if you don't bother including the science, or bits you pick and choose. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 17:49 - Sep 17 with 523 views | eireblue |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 20:33 - Sep 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Not a fair comparison and not the place to begin this argument either. There are many issues with the molecules-to-man evolution evidence without arguing over missing links.
As I say, not the place to turn to this, though. |
It is just an analogy.
You can count lampposts or point out the gaps between lampposts.
Add a lamppost, someone will point out there are more gaps. |  | | |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 18:20 - Sep 17 with 507 views | Keaneish |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 17:16 - Sep 17 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Your sources - or at least a large proportion of them - have been shown not to be credible.
At the start of this you came in talking in scientific terms about fires in buildings, now you're saying, "the points I posted don’t go into the science in great detail, they simply illustrate topics for greater scientific discussion." In that case they're pretty worthless. You can have "discussion" about any old nonsense if you don't bother including the science, or bits you pick and choose. |
Standard TWTD response. I said I have conjecture with some of the science in the official report. Then I illustrated topics for debate about areas I had conjecture with to discuss. It’s pretty black and white no matter what case or point you’re trying to prove.
I sent a bunch of links in private that some deem fit to pour scorn on. Interestingly, they omitted anything official and jumped all over the one they felt they could best make a point about. I followed up with all the official reports and points within those reports that I had conjecture with. This is a pretty simple evolution to a conversation but you seem determined to point score for some reason.
I’ll go through Cheltenham Blue’s post and show where I disagree with him and he has inaccuracies in his points. It’s likely immaterial though as most aren’t up for discussing the points or the data in any detail, they’d rather just cry, “conspiracy theorist” for some unbeknown reason. Which bit do you want to discuss the science on? | |
| |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 19:23 - Sep 17 with 486 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 18:20 - Sep 17 by Keaneish |
Standard TWTD response. I said I have conjecture with some of the science in the official report. Then I illustrated topics for debate about areas I had conjecture with to discuss. It’s pretty black and white no matter what case or point you’re trying to prove.
I sent a bunch of links in private that some deem fit to pour scorn on. Interestingly, they omitted anything official and jumped all over the one they felt they could best make a point about. I followed up with all the official reports and points within those reports that I had conjecture with. This is a pretty simple evolution to a conversation but you seem determined to point score for some reason.
I’ll go through Cheltenham Blue’s post and show where I disagree with him and he has inaccuracies in his points. It’s likely immaterial though as most aren’t up for discussing the points or the data in any detail, they’d rather just cry, “conspiracy theorist” for some unbeknown reason. Which bit do you want to discuss the science on? |
Oh do one, you utter whack job. | |
| |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 20:00 - Sep 17 with 457 views | CoachRob |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 18:20 - Sep 17 by Keaneish |
Standard TWTD response. I said I have conjecture with some of the science in the official report. Then I illustrated topics for debate about areas I had conjecture with to discuss. It’s pretty black and white no matter what case or point you’re trying to prove.
I sent a bunch of links in private that some deem fit to pour scorn on. Interestingly, they omitted anything official and jumped all over the one they felt they could best make a point about. I followed up with all the official reports and points within those reports that I had conjecture with. This is a pretty simple evolution to a conversation but you seem determined to point score for some reason.
I’ll go through Cheltenham Blue’s post and show where I disagree with him and he has inaccuracies in his points. It’s likely immaterial though as most aren’t up for discussing the points or the data in any detail, they’d rather just cry, “conspiracy theorist” for some unbeknown reason. Which bit do you want to discuss the science on? |
Just out of interest, why did you state that you worked at The Economist? Was that to give some eminence to your illogical argument. I have had many 'discussions' with those who work in economics on climate change, you may be familiar with their crazy IAM's, and these individuals seem to believe they are omniscient despite having no training in geophysics. You seem to be following a similar pattern by believing something to be right despite no perceivable foundation to your argument, it is classic Dunning-Kruger. |  | | |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 13:21 - Sep 20 with 362 views | bluelagos |
| Remembering 9-11 with our American owners. on 20:00 - Sep 17 by CoachRob |
Just out of interest, why did you state that you worked at The Economist? Was that to give some eminence to your illogical argument. I have had many 'discussions' with those who work in economics on climate change, you may be familiar with their crazy IAM's, and these individuals seem to believe they are omniscient despite having no training in geophysics. You seem to be following a similar pattern by believing something to be right despite no perceivable foundation to your argument, it is classic Dunning-Kruger. |
Just saw this on social media and thought of this thread:
The donkey told the tiger, "The grass is blue."
The tiger replied, "No, the grass is green​."
The discussion became heated, and the two decided to submit the issue to arbitration, so they approached the lion.
As they approached the lion on his throne, the donkey started screaming: ′′Your Highness, isn't it true that the grass is blue?"​
The lion replied: "If you believe it is true, the grass is blue."​
The donkey rushed forward and continued: ′′The tiger disagrees with me, contradicts me and annoys me. Please punish him."
The king then declared: ′′The tiger will be punished with 3 days of silence."​
The donkey jumped with joy and went on his way, content and repeating ′′The grass is blue, the grass is blue..."​
The tiger asked the lion, "Your Majesty, why have you punished me, after all, the grass is green?"​
The lion replied, ′′You've known and seen the grass is green."
The tiger asked, ′′So why do you punish me?"​
The lion replied, "That has nothing to do with the question of whether the grass is blue or green. The punishment is because it is degrading for a brave, intelligent creature like you to waste time arguing with an ass, and on top of that, you came and bothered me with that question just to validate something you already knew was true!"
The biggest waste of time is arguing with the fool and fanatic who doesn't care about truth or reality, but only the victory of his beliefs and illusions. Never waste time on discussions that make no sense.
There are those who, for all the evidence presented to them, do not have the ability to understand. Others who are blinded by ego, hatred and resentment, and the only thing that they want is to be right even if they aren’t.
When IGNORANCE SCREAMS, intelligence calmly moves on. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
