What kind of political forum is this?

oralloy wrote:



What a mean and nasty thing to say. Condemning everyone no matter if US American or European or other national - condemning people from countries you probably do not know a thing about.
At least liberals let you have the right to free speach - even thou what you just said about millions and millions of people is below the beltline.

BE ASHEMED OF YOURSELF!!!!!

saab, that is oralloy. You must have known that, you quoted him.

I don't believe that it is possible to change your mind, Camlok. Maybe I am wrong about that, but I don't feel it worth my time to try. I am here for my own enjoyment; I like trying out my ideas against other ideas, and some discussions here amuse me. I have no obligation to listen to ideas or people that don't interest me.

Here is what would happen if I tried to teach you Physics. I know this would happen because I have been on the internet since the 1980s and I have done this many times. You know this would happen too.

I would explain to you where you were wrong (for example your claim that acceleration isn't possible under Newton's Third Law). You would argue back. I would try to explain to you the mathematics. You would go to Google and pick a bunch of sentences you find that you think back you up, which you would post out of context ignoring any source that told you why you were wrong.

Then it would end with you launching into personal attacks against anyone who disagreed with you.

In the end, you will have learned nothing. And, you will have changed no one's mind. As a matter of fact; that is exactly what has happened in the thread you started about the "Physics of 9/11". Almost 900 posts now, and nothing accomplished other than you telling everyone who disagrees with you how ignorant they are.

What's the point? If I really thought you were open to learning something new about Physics, I would be open to helping you (that would be something I might enjoy). You can tell me if you want this, I kind of doubt it. I am not at all interested in fighting about Physics.

I am here for my own enjoyment. The only thing I ask for is for anyone who wants an intelligent discussion to stop throwing mud. That will make civil discussion between people with different viewpoints more likely.

That is something that I would enjoy,.

Gonna raise my eyebrow at that one... Unless you were working for DARPA. BBS's were not the internet.

My first job out of college was for a military contractor. My Sun workstation was hit by the Rob Morris worm (google it if you need).

Max, you are a bunch of generalities - "all that has been refuted" ... .

When you are flat out wrong. Professor Hulsey has not been refuted.

The chance of the NIST report being accurate as to the cause of WTC7 collapse is ZERO.

The entire US gov official story [USGOS] has been refuted. A fire induced collapse at free fall speed cannot happen.

If you look at the other thread, you'll see that there was no science from the scientist, farmerman or from Olivier. You could have jumped in at any time and wowed with the physics. Why didn't you?

Why would a guy with the skills you suggest you have go the route of the grand diversion?

There is not diversion here, Camlok. I am not answering your points because I don't find them interesting. I don't care what you think that says about my intelligence; whether or not an intelligent person would take you seriously isn't relevant. You can't force someone to listen to you. You are wasting your time.

I have told you what would interest me; a plausible explanation of what might have happened on 9/11 that doesn't involve terrorists hijacking planes. If you want to provide me with this, then I will listen with interest. But you are ignoring what interests me to keep going on and on about falling buildings and thermite. Even after almost 900 posts on the topic you have made zero progress on either convincing anyone, or on learning anything yourself. I don't know why you do it, it seems awfully futile.

What you have to say about science doesn't interest me at all. I have read enough it to know that I don't think it is worth my consideration. Sorry.

As I said, Max, knock yourself out.

Oh look, I'm being addressed by someone with a history of avoiding reasoned conversation and supporting name-calling trolls.

Forgive me for not bothering to respond.

You don't find them interesting because these points scare the bejebbers out of you, just as they do the same to farmerman, McG, Baldimo, CI, blatham, pretty much every person on A2K.

If this was Russia's/China's phony baloney 911 story, these threads would be packed, a new A2K would be needed.

Incredible cowards all.

Yes, Camlok. I am an unintelligent coward and I admit it.

I don't want to talk to you about the Physics of 9/11 after almost 900 posts in that interminable thread that hasn't accomplished anything. You haven't learned a thing on this thread, and neither has anyone else. Obviously, only coward explains this.

Anyone who disagrees is unintelligent and anyone who chooses to ignore is a coward. I suppose that sums it up pretty well. But what can I do; I am what I am.

I admit that I am an unintelligent coward who hates women. Can we move on with something that interests me?

Skip the physics, Max. That is evidently beyond a US university physics graduate.

How did the alleged hijackers melt and vaporize steel, melt iron, creating iron microspheres, which are the result of thermitic reactions and the amount of which was present in unusually large volumes.

How did the alleged hijackers melt molybdenum?

Why did George Bush tell of explosives and bombs on 911 at WTC?

How did a human being come to be exploded out a twin towers window? Before the collapse?

How could the Murray St jet engine not be a match for the jet that allegedly hit WTC2?

You keep on focusing on these personal issues as a distraction so that you can avoid the tough questions.

It's so true Camlok. What more do you expect from an unintelligent coward like me.

I would love to hear your answer to these questions you raise. As you point out, none of them make any sense unless you can provide a way to explain them. I started my thread so I could understand your explanation for what really happened on 9/11. You haven't been very helpful in explaining anything.

But you are amusing to me. I hope you are enjoying our interaction as much as I am... because after all, that is what we are here for. After all, you did reach out to me and insist that I engage on this topic.

Lose the petulant whining, Max. It's starting to become you.



You have this totally backasswards, Max. I'm shocked that you, a physics graduate would continue to advance this illogical line of reasoning.

It's not me that has to explain them, it's you and all the other cowards here who can't face the fact that these facts, phrased in questions - as I am hoping upon hope that there is someone with a modicum of honesty and bravery - will address them.

They completely and unequivocally refute the USOCT.

lol

I believe that he's asking you to answer those questions. Can you explain them?

I'll take that as a no.

I think I made myself pretty clear. I don't give very much credibility to 9/11 conspiracy theories. More importantly, I have no interest in rehashing arguments that have already been rehashed ad nauseum for the past 16 years. And I have no obligation in engaging with, or answering to, Camlok in any way that doesn't amuse me.

I took a little time to go over the 9/11 conspiracy theories. I read what I thought was relevant on both sides, and I made up my own mind based on what is important to me. I decided on my own that there wasn't much there. It is actually pretty easy to find rebuttals for each point that Camlok has raised. You can google them yourself... after reading to the point I thought was worth my time, I decided that Camlok's side didn't make much sense. That doesn't make Camlok happy... but sorry, people have the ability to make up their own minds. You can't force people to accept your understanding now matter how right you know you are.

You and Camlok shouldn't take this too personally, there are lots of theories that I don't give too much credence to; vaccinations causing autism, claims that climate science has been taken over by Chinese government agents, ancient civilizations on Mars and Spaceships in the Bible. I look at the theories that interest me and I discard the ones that don't.

It would interest me if there was any plausible theory for what happened on 9/11 that didn't involve terrorists hijacking planes. This would interest me because up to this point, I haven't seen anyone do this.

The many thousands of hours of videos, arguments, websites, pictures analysis no longer interest me. I have read enough to realize that I don't buy it. This is my decision.

Right now there is almost 900 posts on Camlok's thread, not to mention all the posts he has made on this and other unrelated threads where he berates, insults and attacks anyone who doesn't think the way he thinks they should. This is ridiculous.

I don't know what Camlok thinks he is accomplishing. Either he is amusing himself (and I hope he is), or he is the kind of person who enjoys insulting other people (which would be a little sadder).

He isn't learning anything himself, and he isn't convincing anyone. If he isn't getting some amusement out of this, then he is wasting his time.

Yes, you have. You have made it clear that you are spending an inordinate amount of time and energy expressing your lack of will or intention to discuss a particular topic. And now that you have made yourself clear on that issue, all you are doing now is repeating yourself. You don't intend to answer any question, and so . . . what now?

I don't and I know Glennn doesn't either. But you should, Max. You obviously didn't get any logic in what appears to be a fake physics degree, one that you can't put to any use.