Collapse vs Demolition
in [Physics]
|
From: Ray Fischer on 17 Jul 2010 17:58 Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon(a)live.com> wrote: > rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) >> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>Ray Fischer wrote: >>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>> >>>>>>>> You claim that "melted and vaporized steel columns" could support >>>>>>>> "several times [their] own weight". >>> >>>>>>> No, I never made that claim. >>> >>>>>> Those are your words. >>> >>>>> Actually, they're your words. That's why the attributes that >>>>> refer to them read, "Ray Fisher wrote". >>> >>>> Smirk. Looks like it says "Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote". >>> >>> More proof that you lack the intelligence to follow a thread - >> >> More proof that you're a crazy dumbass. > >Stand back and look at what you've just posted. If you're hoping to >portray Henry as a wacko you just shot yourself in the foot. Maybe you just "lack the intelligence to follow a thread". And will you get the point? -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Curly Surmudgeon on 17 Jul 2010 20:41 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 21:58:10 +0000, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon(a)live.com> wrote: >> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) >>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>>> You claim that "melted and vaporized steel columns" could >>>>>>>>> support "several times [their] own weight". >>>> >>>>>>>> No, I never made that claim. >>>> >>>>>>> Those are your words. >>>> >>>>>> Actually, they're your words. That's why the attributes that >>>>>> refer to them read, "Ray Fisher wrote". >>>> >>>>> Smirk. Looks like it says "Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote". >>>> >>>> More proof that you lack the intelligence to follow a thread - >>> >>> More proof that you're a crazy dumbass. >> >>Stand back and look at what you've just posted. If you're hoping to >>portray Henry as a wacko you just shot yourself in the foot. > > Maybe you just "lack the intelligence to follow a thread". > > And will you get the point? That's why you're losing the debate. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lest we forget: Scott McInnis ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Twibil on 17 Jul 2010 22:48 On Jul 17, 5:41 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudg...(a)live.com> wrote: > > > That's why you're losing the debate. Free hints for "Curly": 1.) There is no "debate", and there's nothing to "lose" except wasted time. There are merely several fruitcakes repeating "I know you are but what am I?" to each other, over and over. 2.) Repetition can never make an untruth into a truth. This includes *your* repetitions.
From: S'mee on 17 Jul 2010 23:36 On Jul 17, 8:48 pm, Twibil <nowayjo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 17, 5:41 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudg...(a)live.com> wrote: > > > > > That's why you're losing the debate. > > Free hints for "Curly": > > 1.) There is no "debate", and there's nothing to "lose" except wasted > time. There are merely several fruitcakes repeating "I know you are > but what am I?" to each other, over and over. > > 2.) Repetition can never make an untruth into a truth. This includes > *your* repetitions. Unless you are just pushing buttons. Not that I'd ever do that. Al Gore planed and financed the 9/11.
From: Iarnrod on 18 Jul 2010 02:12
On Jul 17, 2:52 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudg...(a)live.com> wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 09:48:26 -0600, "Bob Myers" > > <nospample...(a)address.invalid> wrote: > > Curly Surmudgeon wrote: > >> From the bleachers it appears that you and Ray are the wackos. > > >> Henry sticks to the issues, you two engage in character assassination. > > > Henry "sticks" monomaniacally to a single issue, and one in which he has > > been shown to be completely wrong over and over and over again. If > > that's not a textbook definition of "wacko," what is? > > > Bob M. > > Same response as to Ray previously, make that point and stick to the > issues. Character assassination backfired and you appear to the be > lunatic. Character assassination and lunacy are the only tools in Henry's toolbox, Kurly. How come it never bothers you when you kookers use it? |