Ptech

It is WAY over your titanium cranium baby. You cannot comprehend the big picture, or you choose not to, whichever the case may be.

If you were actually CURIOUS about any of this stuff, you would have spent some time at the home page, and navigated your hard little head around in an effort to educate your dissonant mind.

But you didn't, and you know the rest of the story. You would rather call people liars and assholes than engage in substantive debate.

Titanium Cat

In other words Ptech cannot explain his "logic".

You mean like all those quotes that I found that witnesses made which indicate debris at the crash site? The stuff you say that nobody saw? That sort of curiousity?

Or the fact that I knew a fair bit about the construction of the WTC towers but you, despite being home for three months with all that time on your hands to learn, had no clue as to how they were constructed and in fact didn't know that the outside of the building was composed of the perimeter columns.

Or how about the fact that I was curious enough to do the simple task of looking up the location of Lambertsville so as to place the distance from the crash site and give perspective to the comments of eye witnesses? That never even occured to you did it Ptech. It seems to me you are the one lacking in curiousity.

You are a liar and not a very bright one at that.

Let's go over it again, shall we.

You thinks the witnesses are lying because their testimony contradicts the FDR data. But you thinks the FDR data is fabricated! If the FDR data is fabricated then the witness testimony should contradict it if they were telling the truth. Yet you came to the exact opposite conclusion.

Can you explain why Ptech?

Ptech

I say again TC:

If both pieces of evidence presented by the government contradict each other, which shall you believe?

Are you able to recognize a lie when you see one?

You can take your beliefs with you to your grave child, but that does not make them true or factual.

Titanium Cat

The eyewitnesses weren't presented by the government. You concluded that using your idiotic "logic". Since you think the FDR data is fabricated, the eyewitness testimony should contradict it if they were telling the truth. Yet you claim that is why you think the eye witness testimony is false. Your conclusion is ridiculous.

I recognize yours all the time.

You mean like all the lies you have told about what the eye witnesses have said about the crash site, those kind of "facts"?

You mean like your facts false claims about how the WTC towers were constructed?

You mean like your fact false claim that the FDR data showed Flight 93 to be 10,000 feet over Lambertsville?

You wouldn't know what a fact was if it hit you in the face.

Ptech

Are you suggesting that the MSM is not the government's lapdog?

The witnesses made their statements to the MSM. I do not know if they appeared before the Zelikow Commission.

I don't know where or what you were doing on that day, but the MSM was IN FACT the pipeline through which the government told the story.

Ptech

Board Message


See if this link works TC, to get you to the thread where they are having a serious discussion about WTC towers. I hope it will work.

And you SHOULD be pleased to note that I now admit I had a misunderstanding of the construction of the towers. Fairly minor, but a misunderstanding nonetheless.

I knew there was the central core columns, and I had wrongly thought that there was a similar set of columns further out from the center, but still inside the perimeter exoskeleton. I was wrong.

There were only the central columns, then only floor space until reaching the exoskeleton.

If you wish to call the exoskeleton "perimeter columns", I know what you mean, but think the term is a bit misleading as the exoskeleton structure is not really "columns" in the traditional sense.

Titanium Cat

So now what, are you changing your reason for disbelieving the eye witness statements?

Previously you claimed that you didn't believe them because you thought their statements contradicted the FDR data which was an illogical conclusion on your part since you also claim that the FDR data is false. Are you now switching your claim to say that all of the witness statements to Flight 93 were deliberately reported wrong by the MSM including the not so mainstream local papers that covered it? Note that I used the word deliberately since we know that the MSM does not always report things accurately especially when it is of the breaking news variety. This is demonstrated by the numerous inconsistancies in news reports surrounding the Payne Stewart Learjet incident.

Please explain. You seem to have a different take on the eye witnesses each time you invoke them.

Titanium Cat

What a surprise! I am just shocked, absolutely shocked.

Actually it wasn't a minor misunderstanding at all, it was a major misunderstanding. Your incorrect knowledge of the towers construction led you to believe that none of the perimeter support columns had been severed. This was most certainly not the case and it contributed to the weakening of the towers at the fire sites as the remaining columns bowed from the weight of the sagging floors.

As you are about so many things regarding the subject.

Once again you would be wrong and I explained this to you before but your ability to learn is pretty much nil. The perimeter columns are most certainly steel support columns in the traditional sense and if you had actually read the various technical analyses of the WTC tower designs you would see that they specifically refer to them as the perimeter columns.

Ptech

Put it where the sun don't shine TC--inside your cranium.

Titanium Cat

Ahhh, finally an honest comment from Ptech.