Quote:
Originally Posted by sunflower
I understand it completely. I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying, tho.
You want scientific theory regarding CD - you've posted this in the 9/1 thread. Therefore, you're talking about the Twin Towers. Am I right thus far?
I'm also not trying to hijack it...but if you're looking for science by the way of the Twin Towers' demolitions, it is axiomatic that the official story of how they fell, i.e., FEMA, NIST, Silverstein-Weidlinger, Popular Mechanics - take your pick - would be used as your argument against that scientific theory of CD.
Why don't you apply your own rules to yourself? And BTW, if you haven't already noticed, there are a plethora of threads in this very topic regarding 9/11, theory, scientific data, etc., on CD.
|
So again you only provide spam. Again you refuse to respond to the topic.
Yes, I see the plethra of other threads. Is there one that is specifically asking for data on one subject only? What seems to be so hard in focusing on the title of the thread?
Now, please either post your data that you claim to be readily available or quit trying to hijack the thread!! You've done nothing but complain about topic of the thread and demand the subject be changed to the "offical story" evidence.