View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 23rd 06, 03:22 AM posted to rec.travel.air,alt.disasters.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.military
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Physics Professor's Peer Reviewed Paper on WTC CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS on 9/11

Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news
In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

(snipped)

With your comment above, you are obiviously associating 9/11 Truth
with silly conspiracy theories. Doing this is a predetermination of
where you're beliefs will be. You cannot argue with science. And if
you dispute it, you obviously didn't look into it



*WE* are not arguing with science! It is "TRUTH" who is and is losing
-- badly!

1) "TRUTH" posits a crackpot professor's idea and claims that it has
been peer reviewed. It has -- but the good professor's peers reject
the story.

2) "TRUTH" posts in aviation newsgroups seeking validation for his (or
some other crackpot's) contention that the hijackers couldn't have
flown the 757s into the buildings and gets 100% response that they
could have done it.

3) "TRUTH" posits that no plane struck the Pentagon -- Purdue
University shows the complete engineering analysis of what happened
when the lane hit the Pentagon.

It is time for "TRUTH", "EagleEye", "Emmanuel Goldstein" and all the
rest of their ilk to go away and hide in their caves in Afghanistan,
with their buddies bin Laden and Zawahiri and await the next B-1 full
of deep penetrators which they all richly deserve.




You are proving yourself to be the idiot. You have not explained ANY of
the scientific evidence. Scienctific laws CANNOT be changed. But since
you think they can be, perhaps you believe in Martians too?