ProfWag wrote:I want to point something out here to provide a hint as to why I think the supporters of 9/11 (okay, Scepcop), do not use critical thinking.
Here is one recent post attempting to convince me a 767 could not hit the WTCs :Scepcop wrote:Also, if Commander Kolstad could not hit the WTC in a 767 like the hijackers did, then how did the hijackers do it? Explain that one!
Then, approximately 3 posts later, he comes up with this timeless beauty:Scepcop wrote:So perhaps those planes were unmanned and remote controlled?
Now, I ask. I'm supposed to explain why some pilot says he couldn't hit the WTC and then I'm supposed to accept that it could be done via remote control? Scepcop, which theory do you actually pseudo-accept, can a plane hit the WTC or not???????
And you say I have stupid questions?
I just caught this. You [ scepcop ] think it's easier to flying a jet via remote control is easier to do than flying manually ? C'mon scepcop let's get real.