Tom Peel
February 24th 06, 10:10 AM
TRUTH wrote:
> There are too many posts in to many threads to keep up. I will now only
> follow this thread.
>
> I will now wait for the self proclaimed experts in these groups to debunk
> ALL 17 points in Jones' paper. Don't even think about using red herrings
> as proof. NO bull****. You think Jones is wrong? Then explain his 17
> points. Be specific and detailed.
> http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
>
It's interesting reading, but it fails Occam's razor. The simplest
expanation is:
1. The WTC towers were hit by large passenger aircraft.
2. The WTC towers were built in disregard of fire regulations.
The last point is extremely relevant, because it raises questions of
liablity.
T.
> There are too many posts in to many threads to keep up. I will now only
> follow this thread.
>
> I will now wait for the self proclaimed experts in these groups to debunk
> ALL 17 points in Jones' paper. Don't even think about using red herrings
> as proof. NO bull****. You think Jones is wrong? Then explain his 17
> points. Be specific and detailed.
> http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
>
It's interesting reading, but it fails Occam's razor. The simplest
expanation is:
1. The WTC towers were hit by large passenger aircraft.
2. The WTC towers were built in disregard of fire regulations.
The last point is extremely relevant, because it raises questions of
liablity.
T.