Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Login with Facebook Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID Sign In with Twitter

In this Discussion

9/11 Smoking Gun: WTC 6
  • NutzyNutzy
    Posts: 17
  • NutzyNutzy
    Posts: 17
  • heinrichheinrich
    Posts: 208
    I wouldn't put it down to his being a philosopher. Sometimes a scientist can't see the forest for the trees. Many scientists today couldn't reason their way out of a wet paper bag. But I agree with you in the broadest sense. It comes down to being able to evaluate alternate theories. If Jones et al. find evidence of nanothermite being used (those particular little flecks in the dust, etc.) then anybody who advocates a beams-from-space theory has to be able to account for those flecks. Maybe the findings were faked or misinterpreted, or maybe the 'energy weapons' could also produce them. In which case, it'd have to be explained using hard science. Regardless, a theory is supposed to fit the facts, and the facts are clearest when they come in the form of physical evidence.
  • LordBaltoLordBalto
    Posts: 219
  • heinrichheinrich
    Posts: 208
  • LordBaltoLordBalto
    Posts: 219