and there may be 1500 engineers and architects who believe it was a controlled demolition, but then if we don't count all the other engineers and architects all over the world who don't believe it was a controlled demolition, we're not getting the whole picture.
Going back to page one. If we re-read this discussion from start to finish, well, frankly we actually start off quite friendly, we mostly remain friendly throughout, then about two thirds of the way through it becomes some what offensive, now hopefully we can bring it back to an open rational discourse. The name calling and mud slinging isn't doing anything to actually come to an agreement between anybody.
I hope we can agree on this: There has been enough controversy surrounding this event that in order to put this baby to bed, an open, follow the money, who was accountable for 'fuck ups', 'failure of imagination', 'incompetence', 'negligence' investigation should take place, that answers all of the family members questions. There can be no fairer than that.
As an aside, what I am quoting you saying is precisely the kind of thinking I want to highlight. About a little over a year ago ae911truth (architects and engineers for 911 truth) had about 1100 members, now they stand at around 1700, thats about 50% increase in a year or so. Are people getting 50% more 'nuts' every year, or are more architects actually stumbling upon the evidence, saying 'well, that doesn't match anything I have ever seen before nor correlate to any of the hypothesises presented by the government'?
Saying 'yes, there are over a thousand architects and engineers who disagree doesn't mean anything, because there are about 1,000,000 engineers in the world who haven't said anything, therefore those questioning the event are in the minority and hence wrong' Is a nonsense argument. The only on record architects or engineers who agree with the US governments account are either US government employed or their magazine (popular mechanics) heavily invested in by the same people who run the whole show. Follow the money please.
Let's make it simple and do some basic investigation. Let's go to the source. Your source of information is from a government who has been caught lying and not giving two fucks about the average person from about everything from katrina, Iraq, the housing bubble, enron, insider trading, the economy, the patriot act, the bill of rights, hell even online poker is a target. My source of information is saying, wait "That's high school math, how could anyone figure it out."
It's fine to disagree, but saying I'm nuts simply won't cut it as a reputable form of argument any longer, as you know you're only kidding yourself by making such claims.