Reply With Quote
But you said it's drying up.
Really?besides this oil isn't traded on the open markets...
Where is it traded?
What is the difference in price?
In its very currency...the strength of the dollar isn't in its debt, but in its might....I've explained many times why there is no better reserve currency...and why debtors were willing to lend billions to the U.S. despite fears of collapse...
But you said it's drying up.
Really?besides this oil isn't traded on the open markets...
Where is it traded?
What is the difference in price?
it was until the technology to dig deeper, alot deeper, and horizontally came along...But you said it's drying up.
How does Iraqi oil being produced at the same level as during Oil-for-Food achieve that, dan?
You said they were already drilling horizontally.
...blackmarket... duh!Where is it traded?
So now you pretend to know how much oil is being pumped out of Iraq? How much?How does Iraqi oil being produced at the same level as during Oil-for-Food achieve that, dan?
Kuwait sells no oil on the open market?
So you are now saying that oil production is even higher than reported.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 05-06-2010 at 08:30 PM.
Uh, dan -- it was in the article I quoted earlier.
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-mar...24-million-b/dthe current 2.4 million barrels a day
Do you think this number is some kind of secret?
Is everything you are ignorant of part of a big secret conspiracy, dan? Because that would explain a lot.
Nuh 'uh, your argument is weak.
Just because you claim it is to make yourself feel better about your beliefs, doesn't make it so. Redistributing loads to loadbearing columns due to impact damage, then subjecting those columns to prolonged fires that weaken them at the same time is not some mysterious process unknown to human beings.
Weak is being unable to even partially account for how tens of tons of whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings got there, got wired, and was somehow fire and impact proofed to withstand the impact of the jetliners.
Weak is not having a single person who worked the pile find any evidence of whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings and all the copious wiring that would have been involved.
Weak is not having more accounts of scortched rubble from the floors and floors and floors of "thermite" or whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings going off.
That is weak.
Meh, US military usage is less than about 2% of overall US consumption.
Yet another claim that rings hollow.
I know you want everything that happens in the world to be controlled by someone somewhere, because the thought that things happen occasionally through random events scares you.
I think you vastly overestimate the ability of secret powerful cabals to effect events these days.
So now you know better than NIST? Where is the proof of this 'impact damage' your talking about? Why did NIST rule out this scenario?Just because you claim it is to make yourself feel better about your beliefs, doesn't make it so. Redistributing loads to loadbearing columns due to impact damage, then subjecting those columns to prolonged fires that weaken them at the same time is not some mysterious process unknown to human beings.
There was no wiring needed...and I've already shown how it could have been done...Weak is being unable to even partially account for how tens of tons of whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings got there, got wired, and was somehow fire and impact proofed to withstand the impact of the jetliners.
There was chemical evidence all over the place....Chumpy thinks it's red paint...Weak is not having a single person who worked the pile find any evidence of whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings and all the copious wiring that would have been involved.
....what? Mouse is funny, but he has shown numerous amounts of unexplained molten metal and 'scorched' metal ..Weak is not having more accounts of scortched rubble from the floors and floors and floors of "thermite" or whateverthe youthinkbroughtdownthebuildings going off.
Armies can't move without two things, bases and oil...the U.S. got both those things in the region with Iraq...US military usage is less than about 2% of overall US consumption.
It didn't rule it out of the twin towers. Everyone needs to be spcecific about which collapse he is posting.
Link?
The "scientists" never excluded red paint, so yeah -- Occam's Razor.
Did he ever tell us the exact composition of the molten metal? Occam again.
They already had both in the region -- and other countries are drilling for the oil. I believe Exxon-Mobil has only one of a dozen-plus contracts.
None of which proves anything other than the fact that there were fires in the buildings, big shocker. You posit massive amounts of thermite/explosives in almost every floor, but most of the rubble found wasn't really touched by fire.
The best support you have for this theory is that "there was some scorched metal in the rubble of that building that was on fire".
That's what you are hanging your hat on?
So... no wiring was needed, it just took hundreds of evil conspirators to hover over piles of aluminum dust on every floor simultaneously with matches?
I think if I was ever siding with Mouse on any argument I would immediately take a lengthy look at the position I was agreeing with.
Even a stopped clock is right two times a day.
(not quite as much truth to that in the post-modern analogue era, heh)
Monthly bump. Nothing to see here aside from the first 5 pages or so.
Bump.
Just in case.
Have any of you truthers read this one:
latest NIST report
Also, just look at WTC 6 damage. Are you guys saying it would have been impossible for debris to damage major support columns inside WTC 6, when this happened?
I believe that is actually a picture of building 5, but that just helps your point because it was further from the towers than building 6. In fact that damage to the inside corner is close to the same distance from the towers as building 7.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
