• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NUKES at the WTC[W:20]

Henry David said:
I'm old fashioned Z

But it did. The nuclear theory is most viable.
Click to expand...

as is any what if " theory. that is what Prager produced a "what if"

Even one of his foot notes had a scientist state the mini neutron device as 15+ years away. Your excuse was well the military is always ahead.

Prager's book did nothing to show why the elements in question could not have come from known equipment in the building.

Much like his ending on the ebook I downloaded stating: a unknown person saying they found a passenger still in the seat with the hands bound.
What credibility Prager had went down the drain with that.
 
NWO_Spook said:
I use 'notion' or 'idea' when that which is posited lacks the evidence to be considered an 'hypothesis', or a 'theory'. In the case of Nukes, I'd say the term 'story' is the most apt.
Click to expand...

Nope you just arent listening or failing to comprehend the subject matter.


NWO_Spook said:
No, I don't have to do anything. That's the beauty of my position, for I'm not the one making outrageous claims that illicit laughter. You need to prove to me that nukes were employed. None of your usual diversions, evasions, games or silly ad homs , just prove that nukes were deployed.
Click to expand...


the barium, strontium, tritium are a fact, 2 of which are produced in large quantities by a nuclear reaction, if you have a 'reasonable' alternative source that can provide those quantities in the conditions of the wtc I am all ears...... Otherwise the most logical and reasonable source is a nuclear reaction. :lamo
 
Last edited:
Henry David said:
The nuclear theory is most viable.
Click to expand...

Yep everything they do in support of the OCT is by innuendo, never have any hard evidence to counter truthers arguments and a comprehensive explanation for EVERYTHING that took place and worse the gbmnt didnt even test and the little they did they waited 3 weeks. :roll:
 
KokomoJojo said:
Nope you just arent listening or failing to comprehend the subject matter.



the barium, strontium, tritium are a fact, 2 of which are produced in large quantities by a nuclear reaction, if you have a 'reasonable' alternative source that can provide those quantities in the conditions of the wtc I am all ears...... Otherwise the most logical and reasonable source is a nuclear reaction. :lamo
Click to expand...

What isotopes?
 
zyzygy said:
I have no idea why you keep playing his game.
Click to expand...
That one word is the puzzle.

I can understand playing this game but I don't comprehend playing his (or "their") games.

At the least why not break his or their games rather than play along with the stupidities?
 
mike2810 said:
Look it up. Its in Prager's book.

at least I told you the source where you can find it.
Click to expand...

he may be a really smart guy but unless he has security clearance for every US development site that statement is not really anything you can go to the bank with mike.

whats the name of the book?
 
KokomoJojo said:
he may be a really smart guy but unless he has security clearance for every US development site that statement is not really anything you can go to the bank with mike.

whats the name of the book?
Click to expand...

Do your own research Koko. I gave you the author. (It is not like he has produced a multitude of ebooks).

How about you provide the type of nuclear device that would leave the trace elements you brought up.
 
mike2810 said:
Do your own research Koko. I gave you the author. (It is not like he has produced a multitude of ebooks).

How about you provide the type of nuclear device that would leave the trace elements you brought up.
Click to expand...

so you see praeger as a legitimate source then, no fusion nukes for 15 years?
 
KokomoJojo said:
so you see praeger as a legitimate source then, no fusion nukes for 15 years?
Click to expand...


Where did I say Prager was a legitimate source. That seems to be HD realm. Prager was quoting a scientist.


So Koko what nuclear device leaves the trace elements your posting about?
 
mike2810 said:
Do your own research Koko. I gave you the author. (It is not like he has produced a multitude of ebooks).

How about you provide the type of nuclear device that would leave the trace elements you brought up.
Click to expand...

Do you suppose that such information might be classified?
 
Or perhaps it exists, classified TOP SECRET, in the arsenals of the US and/or Israel, away from my prying eyes?
 
No sir, an appeal to Common Sense, wasted on you.
 
Fledermaus said:
What "Common sense" is there to a non-nuke nuke that releases non-nuke trace elements?
Click to expand...

but you agree that people do not glow in the dark after an xray right?
 
Henry David said:
Do you suppose that such information might be classified?
Click to expand...

Could be. didn't stop Prager from his speculation now did it.

So now we have a unknown nuclear device that will produce the trace elements found with no one haven shown it could not have come from known possible sources from items within the buildings, If the device is unknown then how did Koko and others come to the conclusion it must have been a nuclear device and not another source.
 
mike2810 said:
...If the device is unknown then how did Koko and others come to the conclusion it must have been a nuclear device and not another source.
Click to expand...
Simple if we follow the history:
HD introduce the "Nuke" idea - IMO because he realised it was so stupid that no one would take it seriously. In essence flagging "I'm Poeing - here is a clue so you wont be fooled" (Whether or not he realised that most truthers and some debunkers would be fooled is irrelevant.)

Everybody decide to run with discussing the idea - truther style discussion - working only with the details.

Nobody says "Hey folks - forest v trees"

Reality is that there is no case for CD. THEREFORE Nukes were not involved in CD. (Because there was no CD - that bit of logic should be obvious. Sadly experience says than many will miss it.)

So the same two old problems:
1) Truther arse about logic starting from a detail THEY cannot put into context RATHER than starting from known facts;
2) Debunkers accepting "reversed burden of disproof" to do the thinking which the truthers won't do.

THEN - if we didn't have those two there would be very little forum discussion. :roll:

So beggars cannot be choosers. We do have the option of giving this forum game away.

It will only get worse - most sensible discussion ended about three years back. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom