How many more unnecessary death need to occur before Sam Harris admits to the irrefutable truth of 9/11
Posted: 25 July 2012 04:23 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2012-03-22

Not only is it irrefutable, but it is such in a very simple way.

There is *NO* excuse for dodging this one Sam.  Not if you truly are a man willing to live consistently with the basic morals of our era.

The argument that it lies outside of the area of your expertise is not valid.  We’re talking about middle school level physics here, for crying out loud. 

This is an issue that is of the utmost importance. 

I urge you Sam: refute my claim logically if it can be done.  I am convinced it cannot.  Because how can any intelligent being argue against a fundamental law of physics?

I’m talking about the collapse of building WTC 7.  Here’s my logical reasonsing:

An object that drop with a freefall acceleration must be doing so through a total lack of encoutered resistance along its path.

If an object falls with freefall accerlation, it can be said with certainty that it encountered no resistance along the pathway while falling pathway, and hence, we can say beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no matter at rest in the way; and even more obvious, is that there could have been no structure composed of heavy materials with considerable strength in the path of the fall.

World Train Center Builing 7 collapsed at, not near, but AT, freefall acceleation, for the first few seconds of it’s collapse.  This has been confirmed with overwhelming evidence through the myriad film footage taken at various angles as it fell.  Even the official government report is in agreement with this rate of acceleration.

Therefore, the upper portion of the building, which remained intact during this initial collapse period, by logical deduction, did not encounter resistance, and hence, there could have been no inert matter directly beneath the outer walls as they fell.

The very of modern sky rises is such that the outer walls always have tremendously significant amounts of resistance beneath them in the form of more walls.

Hence, the only way WTC7 could have possibly collapsed in the manner in which it did is for the outer walls beneath the upper portion to have been removed from their standard position directly beneath the upper portion.

There is no conceivable force that could have achieved this result other than through controlled demotion.

If WTC7 was a controlled demolition, it means the investigation by NIST was done in a manner which was incredibly incompetent, fraudulent and corrupt.

So, at the very least, it’s time top public intellectuals stand up together for a justice!  Please support this effort by speaking out in favor of a re investigation into the collapse of WTC7.

The Twin Towers?  They were blown to bits!  But the logical arguement for that one is not as airtight, so I’ll leave it alone for another post…

C’mon Sam, show the world that aesthetics have strong morals too!  It doesn’t mean you are wrong about fundamental Islamic terroism being a real threat to the safety of us all.  But it does mean that we have some major problems in our country to face if we want to have a humane future.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 August 2012 08:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  140
Joined  2012-08-11

lol

 Signature 

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.
~ Hitch

I prefer the full-on embrace of reality to the spiritual masturbation that is religion.
~ S.A. Ladoucier

I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people
~ M. Teresa, Fruitcake of Calcutta

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed
newrelic.loglevel = "verbosedebug" newrelic.daemon.loglevel = "verbosedebug"