Message from @The Gwench

Discord ID: 547932805724635146


2019-02-20 23:58:38 UTC  

That wasn't me being serious, for the record

2019-02-20 23:59:36 UTC  

No. However it’s approaching condescension. I don’t appreciate it.

2019-02-20 23:59:49 UTC  

It was meant to be a joke

2019-02-20 23:59:58 UTC  

Understood

2019-02-21 00:00:06 UTC  

It's a reference to a webcomic I read, which I later realized you probably wouldn't read

2019-02-21 00:00:09 UTC  

XKCD

2019-02-21 00:00:28 UTC  

No. I wouldn’t actually. 😂

2019-02-21 00:00:37 UTC  

It's pretty nerdy

2019-02-21 00:00:52 UTC  

Anyways, is that citation for the burning temperature of jet fuel sufficient?

2019-02-21 00:01:54 UTC  

Kind of. However the twin towers were never the smoking gun. It was always building 7

2019-02-21 00:02:37 UTC  

Most people don't actually bring up building 7 to me

2019-02-21 00:03:58 UTC  

In any case, if 7 was an inside job, that would mean that the other ones also had to be taken care of from the inside

2019-02-21 00:05:31 UTC  

So do you wish me to not continue on the collapse of the main towers?

2019-02-21 00:06:31 UTC  

Because I can stop

2019-02-21 00:06:55 UTC  

No. It’s always been building 7. I accepted the narrative until I learned about it.

2019-02-21 00:07:27 UTC  

It took me 12 years to learn about building 7.

2019-02-21 00:07:56 UTC  

You said it was "stretching the odds" for the collapses to be unrelated

2019-02-21 00:08:03 UTC  

Which means, in your eyes, it's all or nothing

2019-02-21 00:08:30 UTC  

So if the two primary towers weren't brought down in a controlled manner, why would 7 have been?

2019-02-21 00:08:39 UTC  

Yes. Coincidences do happen but a series of coincidences...no

2019-02-21 00:09:20 UTC  

I’ll show you why. 1 sec

2019-02-21 00:09:36 UTC  

So I take it this means you don't want me to continue

2019-02-21 00:09:57 UTC  

Nope

2019-02-21 00:10:05 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/484514023698726912/547932991171592193/image0.jpg

2019-02-21 00:10:27 UTC  

I've always been confused, is that a "no, don't continue" or a "no, continue"?

2019-02-21 00:12:00 UTC  

Don’t continue. I’ve always accepted the possibility that the twin towers may have collapsed due to structural integrity loss. Maybe but maybe not.

2019-02-21 00:12:19 UTC  

Can’t be proven either way

2019-02-21 00:12:24 UTC  

Okay. You wanted me to support my claim though...

2019-02-21 00:13:06 UTC  

Yes. I wanted to know that your research was done first.

2019-02-21 00:13:10 UTC  

Ah

2019-02-21 00:13:22 UTC  

Have I convinced you that I did research?

2019-02-21 00:13:53 UTC  

I can pull out the iron-carbon phase diagram if you want. I just need to find the version *not* filled with Greek letters

2019-02-21 00:14:29 UTC  

Sort of. I was hoping you’d look at building 7. The experts agree with my assertion.

2019-02-21 00:14:32 UTC  
2019-02-21 00:17:31 UTC  

Dick Cheney (Vice President) made huge money from the billions in defence contracts that were obtained in the resulting invasion of Afghanistan

2019-02-21 00:17:43 UTC  

Then Iraq

2019-02-21 00:17:57 UTC  

If building 7 was an inside job, the other two would have to have been as well. Why would I try to prove something about building 7 when I know more about 1 and 2?

2019-02-21 00:18:35 UTC  

Because 1 and 2 have easy explanations

2019-02-21 00:18:44 UTC  

7 does not

2019-02-21 00:19:30 UTC  

If 1 and 2 are satisfactorily explained, how is 7 a smoking gun? It's only a smoking gun if there's more evidence to point to the whole thing being an inside job.

2019-02-21 00:20:03 UTC  

1 and 2 were not necesssrily satisfactory. Just plausible