Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Reading comprehension.

So you have never speculated on something which there is no definitive answer for?

I said yes there was some purpose behind the shape, look at it, and like you said, it could be just the plot that was available, but... like I said the very first comment it was a "guess" so it's really not a leap of logic and my point was he had a hard to breach compound located conveniently near a military base--a highly suspicious coincidence."Those are far more likely reasons for the design than thinking Osama fired up some CFD program and designed his stone walls to mess with the rotors of a helicopter" Strawman much? Did Osama fly the planes into the World Trade Center? No. My point was the Pakistan military could have provided the safe-house. I never said I knew whether the walls were designed to make vortex rings, or conceal OBL, or make it harder to breach by a commando team, or if it was religious--but clearly it's not a randomly designed shape.

My point is people, like yourself and prewett, get off on down-voting people, arguing over some minutia in an attempt to achieve a superiority high, and wasting everyone's time arguing about some inconsequential aspect of their comment. I never said all along I was certain I said it was a "guess" so please spare me your smug high and mightiness about "making a couple leaps of logic."

Why don't you try reading a comment in its entirety next time?



Suggestions from one of your downvoters:

1) Keep it civil.

2) If you are going to make large jumps of logic like the one you've made, then that's fine. Just spell out what you are saying and why you are saying it because as it stands, I agree that your original comment seems very offtopic.


1. Did you even read my previous comment?

2. I made no "large jumps of logic" like I said, it was open speculation. Now please get off your high horse and quit repeating things that have already been said--everything you assert in your second point is proving wrong in my previous comment.

Do you not realize you're just discouraging people asking questions? That's essentially what you're advocating.


1) Yes I read your previous comment, that's why I'm telling you that you should be more civil.

2) You asked for an explanation, so I gave you an honest one. If you don't want to hear it, don't ask next time.


In the end, isn't the compound just oddly-shaped because whoever built it bought an oddly-shaped piece of land to put it on?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: