You have brought no technical reasoning to your side of the 'debate'. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch.
You have, however, stooped to mockery.
Are you kidding? This is moonbat logic.
As one sitting in the audience watching this 'debate', so far, TXnMA has handed your a$$ to you...IMHO!
Also, I'd be interested to know what you make of this:
At the bottom of the page, Gen. Partin also received a letter of support from from Rodger A. Raubach Ph.D. Here are a few snippets:
"I took the liberty of checking with the leading concrete supplier in my area in order to confirm the compressive yield figure that you used, that being 3500 psi. What I was told about concrete was very interesting ... In conclusion, General, I find myself in awe of the technical achievement that your report represents." [snip]
I have commented before on the technical merits of General Partin’s summary report. If you search the archives you will probably find the posts.
But why go into the technical details when the conclusion of the report is absurd?
Why would the “government” take the risky action of pre-positioning small charges only on one side of the third floor of building, adjacent to the truck bomb, when they knew these charges likely would not bring down the whole building? Why leave evidence that had to be brought down in haste later on?
Why leave survivors -—the same people who might have seen the small charges being placed. People willing to kill 168 people are just as willing to kill 400 to get rid of the evidence. Total destruction would have made the case against the VRWC even better.
So why place small charges that would only mimic what the truck bomb itself would do, instead of destroying the whole building? This is the question a thoughtful person would ask.
At the bottom of the page, Gen. Partin also received a letter of support from from Rodger A. Raubach Ph.D. Here are a few snippets:
"I took the liberty of checking with the leading concrete supplier in my area in order to confirm the compressive yield figure that you used, that being 3500 psi. What I was told about concrete was very interesting ... In conclusion, General, I find myself in awe of the technical achievement that your report represents." [snip]
Anyone who has taken a basic course in concrete design knows what the compressive strength of concrete is. It's in textbooks. It's on the Internet. There is no need to contact a "leading concrete supplier" to find this out. The language used by Dr. Raubach shows he knows nothing about concrete or structural engineering, so his endorsement is worthless.