Thom Hartman Begs the Question

20 February, 2015 (11:30) | Politics, Science | By: admin

Having recently discovered Free Speech TV I also discovered Thom Hartman, an unashamed progressive and avid supporter of the democratic party. But I got 2 beefs with this man.

First, I see no evidence what so ever that his constant recommendation that everyone get out and support the democratic party will do anything to end our plutocracy. The democrats are neck deep in corruption as are the repugnants. Seriously, Hillary Clinton? LOL. I could never support her.

Second, he goes on and on at times about 9/11. And in these discussions he continues to assert that he saw the planes hit the trade center buildings and then he watched them collapse. Therefore he states that the planes caused the collapse.

That my folks, is the classic definition of begging the question. I am not sure why all these pols don’t understand one of the most basic of all logic forms. I hear this all the time from some of the fools at MSNBC, where they demonstrate their folly by freely substituting the phrase that “begs the question” when they really mean that “brings up the question”.

Folks, you cannot use your assertion as a proof. That is just how it works.

Furthermore Thom’s example of a acetylene torch to explain how kerosene could cause steel to melt is absurd. While he correctly claims that forcing oxygen into the mix would cause higher temperatures, where is this oxygen infusion?
No, allah was not blowing extra oxygen into the twin towers. So stop. Your example only furthers the case for how unlikely a total steel frame collapse appears. Notice, that the only molten steel is directly under the flame.

Even the 9/11 commission reports failed to explain the collapse, they only acknowledged that one event followed the other and failed to provide any meaningful argument as to how the buildings fell.

(02/24/2015) And now we have yet another example of a steel framed building sporting a raging fire in Dubai. Did the building collapse? Hell no.