Omni Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 Paint chips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Rue said: He has never proven what he found could only have been nano thermites and not paint chips and so until he does what you present from him is a speculated theory not a proven fact. He can not and has never denied that what he found could have been paint chips. You have to watch the videos and be able to understand English to determine these things, Rue. You Illustrate time after time you don't, or the more dismal alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, hot enough said: Continually yapping about them and always keeping them hidden has made them vanish. And severely tarnished your reputation. They are on this thread. They are not hidden. Anyone can find them. As for my reputation it was tarnished years ago. I however will deny anything Shankia Twain says about spanking me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Omni said: Paint chips. What peer reviewed scientific journal did you take that from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Rue said: They are on this thread. They are not hidden. Anyone can find them. As for my reputation it was tarnished years ago. I however will deny anything Shankia Twain says about spanking me. Yes, there are hidden, because you folks know that they are crap. Still, not a lick of evidence for anything. Edited July 2, 2017 by hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, hot enough said: You have to watch the videos and be able to understand English to determine these things, Rue. You Illustrate time after time you don't, or the more dismal alternative. Your answer suggests if I don't come up with the same conclusions you do and subscribe to the same theories youd o I don't speak English. That is not only illogical but it repeats you manifesting your narcissistic referencing that only your beliefs are valid which is hilarious. At this point you sound like some Hari Krishna devotee who tries to drown out the challenges to your theories by chanting even louder. Repeating your chants or theories over and over won't make them more credible, simply show you repeat them as a reflex reaction to people tot agreeing with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 13 minutes ago, Rue said: The past posts show all the above was[sic] directly responded to and in fact repudiated. The fact you disagreed with what was placed on this forum won't malke[sic] it vanish simply because you disagree with it. Still nothing but poorly worded bafflegab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Rue said: Your answer suggests if I don't come up with the same conclusions Still none of the volumes of science you say exists, Rue. Your desperation is manifest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, hot enough said: What peer reviewed scientific journal did you take that from? Now you engage in false inversion. In fact it was the people you quote who failed to provide scientific peer review for the theory that the components found were nanothermites. The fact the components found are found in paint is a fact that does not require any peer review just like we don't now have to prove water is made up of two parts oxygen and one part oxygen. Again at this point you are knee jerk reacting and you are getting more absurd as you go along. Please continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, hot enough said: Still nothing but poorly worded bafflegab. Well first you try deny things you disagree with exist. Now you call them bafflegab so you in fact prove they exist but you don't agree with them, OOOOPs. 10 minutes ago, hot enough said: Yes, there are hidden, because you folks know that they are crap. Still, not a lick of evidence for anything. No the fact you disagree with them and think they are crap does not make them hidden or even crap. Also its illogic to infer that I or anyone else who disagrees with you thinks are reasons for disagreeing with you are crap, you engage in projection. Because you believe anyone who disagrees with you believes in crap, you project that "crap" label on them. Its illogical. People would not provide you with differences of opinion unless they disagreed with you. If you presume they are involved in a conspiracy to deliberately tell you crap, then how did you come to that conclusion? Are you psychic? Are you saying I am a secret agent for the government engaging in deliberate misinformation? Lol. So now let's review, you engage in denial (pretend evidence does not exist when you disagree with it), name calling (calling it baffle gab, crap) and now you engage in projection (telling people their motives are to deliberately spread crap they know is crap). Please continue. Edited July 2, 2017 by Rue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Rue said: 1. Now you engage in false inversion. In fact it was the people you quote who failed to provide scientific peer review for the theory that the components found were nanothermites. 2.The fact the components found are found in paint is a fact that does not require any peer review just like we don't now have to prove water is made up of two parts oxygen and one part oxygen. You lie about 1. because I did provide proof, which you definitely have not had time to read/view and go over in any responsible, adult like fashion. There is no paint on planet Earth that is made up of nano scale particles. You obviously know nothing about any of this. That says volumes about you as a ... . Still not a lick of science from any one of you. Edited July 2, 2017 by hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 12 minutes ago, Rue said: Lol[sic] why did you put the word "sic" after "was" in your response to me. Lol. Wan[sic] to explain? No[sic] the fact you disagree with them and think they are crap does not make them hidden. They are on this thread and others in response to you. Still not a lick of science from any one of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, hot enough said: Still none of the volumes of science you say exists, Rue. Your desperation is manifest. I have never used the terms "volumes of science". Sop your comment is false. What I have stated is the references I provided and the references of others are on this thread. Denying they are not on this thread and others is illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Rue said: I have never used the terms "volumes of science". Sop your comment is false. What I have stated is the references I provided and the references of others are on this thread. Denying they are not on this thread and others is illogical. Still not a lick of science from any one of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 A peek into the minds of conspiracy theorists. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/trutherism/2011/09/the_theory_vs_the_facts.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, hot enough said: You lie about 1. because I did provide proof, which you definitely have not had time to read/view and go over in any responsible, adult like fashion. There is no paint on planet Earth that is made up of nano scale particles. You obviously know nothing about any of this. That says volumes about you as a ... . Still not a lick of science from any one of you. No you did not provide proof, you provided a speculative theory that has not been proven simply offered as a possible explanation. You also now in fact state a falsehood by stating paint is not made up if the same components as thermite and nano thermite. What next will you argue water is not made up of hydrogen and oxygen? How silly do you want to render your comments? Even the people you quote did not and will not deny what they found could be paint chips.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, hot enough said: Still not a lick of science from any one of you. Repeating what exists on this thread does not exist because you disagree with it has not erased it from this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Rue said: 1. You also now in fact state a falsehood by stating paint is not made up if[sic] the same components as thermite and nano thermite. Prove your point, Rue. Quote Even the people you quote did not and will not deny what they found could be paint chips.. Prove your point, Rue. Still no science from Rue, just unsourced drivel. Edited July 2, 2017 by hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 15 minutes ago, Rue said: Repeating what exists on this thread does not exist because you disagree with it has not erased it from this thread. Still not a lick of science from any one of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Omni said: A peek Still no science from the science denying USGOCT anti-truthers. What peer reviewed scientific journal was your goofy video from, Omni? Edited July 2, 2017 by hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 1 hour ago, hot enough said: Still no science from the science denying USGOCT anti-truthers. What peer reviewed scientific journal was your goofy video from, Omni? I wonder why, if Bush was able to orchestrate planting explosives all over the WTC towers and then keep everybody quite about it, he couldn't have sprinkled a few WMD's here and there around Iraq to justify the war he started there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 24 minutes ago, Omni said: I wonder why, Still no science from the science denying USGOCT anti-truthers. What peer reviewed scientific journal was your goofy video from, Omni? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 3, 2017 Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, hot enough said: Still no science from the science denying USGOCT anti-truthers. What peer reviewed scientific journal was your goofy video from, Omni? Maybe Bush planted all that explosive by himself so he didn't have to take anybody on board. He must have been very busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 3 hours ago, Rue said: Repeating Watch the whole thing, Rue, but watch from 10:50 on where it is explained what NANOthermite is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 16 hours ago, Rue said: Repeating w How did the eutectic steel, described by FEMA, which can only happen with thermate occur in such large quantities at WTC, Rue? How could John Gross deny this eutectic steel when he saw a lot of it at the steelyards, the steel that wasn't immediately hauled away and put on barges to the Far East? How could John Gross deny this eutectic steel when there are pictures of him touching the end of a molten/vaporized steel girder/beam? How can you, and your fellow science deniers deny such stark realities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts