Re: University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11
...
First it's free fall, then when you get shown that's not true, it becomes "faster than free-fall."
First it's free fall, then when you get shown that's not true, it becomes "faster than free-fall."
Well, the overall effect was near free-fall. But to get the overall effect, some of it was accelerating faster than gravity acceleration at times, and traveling much faster than free-fall velocity at other times....
By proclamation? Because you said so, just having made that up?
That's ridiculous enough to not get you a response. You've pretty much proved you don't really have any arguments except one way or another, you believe something.
Yes! By proclamation. How can that be? Easy answer. Because all that you say is by proclamation. And I am simply answering your proclamation by proclaiming better.
Why is my proclamation better. Because it makes sense. It isn't from an 8th grader or less, like yours is... by your own proclamation.
Btw. What do arguments have to do with it? The towers fell, but not by arguments.
