|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Rosie the Patriot on the View today
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Rosie the Patriot on the View today
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Reverend Tyler |
| my work blocks youtube :( |
|
|
| MR BACKHAND |
| rosie is a cunt :pissl: |
|
|
| clonetrooper |
Holy shit Rosie I founf the steel that Rudy shipped off to China. it's on the USS New York. Unless you don't believe that kind of shit.
http://www.nowpublic.com/uss_new_yo...from_9_11_scrap
It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center.
It is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft.
Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, LA to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there."
Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back."
The ship's motto? "Never Forget" answers.com |
|
|
| frogball |
where did she earn her structural engineering degree? |
|
|
| zimmie |
| don't you realize all these conspirators have structural engineering degrees? |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
don't you realize all these conspirators have structural engineering degrees? |
i wish i had one, then i could understand why fire isn't hot.... |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
i wish i had one, then i could understand why fire isn't hot.... |
I'm not saying I buy into all these theories but your statement is like saying fire on the sun is the same as lighting a match - and its not. |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
I'm not saying I buy into all these theories but your statement is like saying fire on the sun is the same as lighting a match - and its not. |
actually that's a really bad comparison....the statement "fire isn't hot" is a factual statement, meaning it's either right or wrong....obviously there may be some necessity to define the terms "fire" and "hot", but for the most part the majority of people will determine the accuracy of the statement based on their own experience...
you, however, have made a divergent statement, because there are a number of answers that could be provided to prove your statement to be right or wrong....i could say "the sun is like lighting a match because they they both have a flame" or i could say "the sun is not like lighting a match because a match will burn out quicker".....in both cases i used different arguments to agree with or dispute the statement...
the problem with conspiracy theorists is that they tend to ask divergent questions and provide factual answers...
"how could WTC7 collapse if it wasn't hit by a plane?"
"explosives are the only thing that could bring that building down"
thus, the proof of conspiracy... |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
actually that's a really bad comparison....the statement "fire isn't hot" is a factual statement, meaning it's either right or wrong....obviously there may be some necessity to define the terms "fire" and "hot", but for the most part the majority of people will determine the accuracy of the statement based on their own experience...
you, however, have made a divergent statement, because there are a number of answers that could be provided to prove your statement to be right or wrong....i could say "the sun is like lighting a match because they they both have a flame" or i could say "the sun is not like lighting a match because a match will burn out quicker".....in both cases i used different arguments to agree with or dispute the statement...
the problem with conspiracy theorists is that they tend to ask divergent questions and provide factual answers...
"how could WTC7 collapse if it wasn't hit by a plane?"
"explosives are the only thing that could bring that building down"
thus, the proof of conspiracy... |
sorry but your comment does not directly relate to the question being posed - the "fire" that will melt steel is much different than the "fire" from a match - obviously the correct word would be heat - if you didn't mean to over-simplify or weren't talking about "fire" melting the support beams in the WTC then what were you talking about? |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
sorry but your comment does not directly relate to the question being posed - the "fire" that will melt steel is much different than the "fire" from a match - obviously the correct word would be heat - if you didn't mean to over-simplify or weren't talking about "fire" melting the support beams in the WTC then what were you talking about? |
i was making a joke
you pounced on my statement "fire isn't hot" which was simply part of a joke about being a structural engineer....had you evaluated my statement properly and chose not to see the humor, you would have asked what being a structural engineer has to do with knowing whether or not fire is or is not hot...
unfortunately, you're choosing to make a statement for me and attempting to argue with an opinion that i didn't make...as all good CTers do, you've chosen to make a leap between what i said and what you believe: 'fire isn't hot', means 'a match is not like the sun', which means 'fire melted the support beams'....
thus, you are obviously predisposed to your own opinion and value it so highly that you are subconsciously seeking out ways in which you can champion it...
so, i'll assume that, based on your reaction, my joke wasn't funny and i'll take it as a lesson that i need to work on my material... |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
i was making a joke
you pounced on my statement "fire isn't hot" which was simply part of a joke about being a structural engineer....had you evaluated my statement properly and chose not to see the humor, you would have asked what being a structural engineer has to do with knowing whether or not fire is or is not hot...
unfortunately, you're choosing to make a statement for me and attempting to argue with an opinion that i didn't make...as all good CTers do, you've chosen to make a leap between what i said and what you believe: 'fire isn't hot', means 'a match is not like the sun', which means 'fire melted the support beams'....
thus, you are obviously predisposed to your own opinion and value it so highly that you are subconsciously seeking out ways in which you can champion it...
so, i'll assume that, based on your reaction, my joke wasn't funny and i'll take it as a lesson that i need to work on my material... |
the smilie is your friend :)
or just post here a few more times until the rest of us get your razor sharp posting stylings......
:D |
|
|
| frogball |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
the smilie is your friend :)
or just post here a few more times until the rest of us get your razor sharp posting stylings......
|
ah ha...got it...i was a heavy poster and got bored with it a few months ago...even had an official 9/11 debate, which was a lesson in futility...
sorry for the negativity! |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by frogball
ah ha...got it...i was a heavy poster and got bored with it a few months ago...even had an official 9/11 debate, which was a lesson in futility...
sorry for the negativity! |
no worries :hw: - I'm not the P&N cop anyway :dunno: |
|
|
|
|
|
