Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,246 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,039,731
Pageviews Today: 1,302,597Threads Today: 238Posts Today: 5,009
10:17 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

 
Menow
User ID: 441617
United States
06/03/2010 05:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Nice digs!
Returner
User ID: 997
United States
06/03/2010 05:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Thanks! I downsized this year.
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 976283
United States
06/03/2010 05:54 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You have some proof that they're making uncharacteristic sky tracks with chaff, whose purpose is to fool the radar of enemy missiles?

Not exactly as you have stated it; however, I will say that at one time I read and copied documentation that strongly suggested similar capabilities . . . I had a computer crash since and lost a lot of my sources. I hope I can relocate and document much of what I am now saying.

Until I can produce said documentation just think logically. Think of an area combat commander with the capability to suppress radar identification of his forces over an entire region, say the size of Saudi Arabia or Iraq. And say for example a contractor/technology that gives you the opportunity to selectively use the particulate as a fuel additive & by using semi-permeable membranes to turn on and off dispersal . . . thus alleviating the need even for specialized air craft.

Along with radar & defensive weapon suppression throw in the added benefit of enhanced 3D imaging of the combat area with technology you were already using. With an understanding of prevailing winds, jet streams, etc. one would quickly learn when and how much dispersed particulate was required.

The need to further refine and evolve these capabilities during peace time would be overwhelming . . . as we have seen historical testing of military technology within the confines of the US and elsewhere without the longterm understanding of its effects is common.



If the chaff is big enough to damage electrical equipment and cause power outages, it certainly isn't something that could be mixed into jet fuel without causing major damage to the engines. You're talking about two completely different things here.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 218281

“The scientist claims that the two most common substances being sprayed into chemtrails are aluminum oxide and barium stearate. When you see planes flying back and forth marking parallel lines, X-patterns and grids in a clear sky, that’s aluminum oxide, according to the scientist. The goal is to create an artificial sunscreen to reflect solar radiation back into space to alleviate global warming. In some cases, barium may be sprayed in a similar manner for the purpose of “high-tech 3-D radar imaging.” (Columbus Alive Dec. 6, 2001) [link to www.willthomas.net]


Saudi Pic 1991
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B
Returner
User ID: 997
United States
06/03/2010 06:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Darn. It's time for me to go; my volunteer shift at the orphanage starts at five CST, and the children are so upset if I don't start the puppet show on time.

Clare, good night! I'll check back in later, unless the Sisters of Mercy need me to stick around and fix the roof. And then of course I'm on the schedule to cook the late shift at the soup kitchen...
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/03/2010 06:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You have some proof that they're making uncharacteristic sky tracks with chaff, whose purpose is to fool the radar of enemy missiles?

Not exactly as you have stated it; however, I will say that at one time I read and copied documentation that strongly suggested similar capabilities . . . I had a computer crash since and lost a lot of my sources. I hope I can relocate and document much of what I am now saying.


Oh, how CONVENIENT! Always the same LAME excuses from kOOks when challenged to produce the 'damning' evidence they remember seeing once on some web site!

"Strongly suggested" = IOW, "I interpreted it to mean what my delusion predisposes me to believe"

You are nothing but a typical brain-dead kOOk idiot.

I am tell the truth I have over 800 Gigs of scrambled data . . . do you really think that I would tell you that unless is was the truth? I knowing the reception I would get. I can assure you that I will find that info and much more.



The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

Makes no difference how much anecdote you have, it can be confirmed or falsified with one good experiment, an experiment the chemk00ks will NEVER perform.

No the plural of 'anecdote' is information (or even fantasy) . . . that which is gathered many times before real data and scientific analysis can be accomplished. Almost without exception theory preceds proof.
 Quoting: George B



The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data, not information, but it your case fantasy may be acceptable.
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/03/2010 06:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Since i didn't, and don't intend to, listen to her "interview" could you give a brief synopsis?


In a nutshell, about what we're getting here--maybe slightly more coherent in verbal form.

A vocal delivery similar in a lot of ways to Nancy Lieder, actually.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583



In other words, a comedy show!

Thanks!
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/03/2010 06:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
And what is that perfume you're wearing?
 Quoting: Returner 997



New stuff I think, "L00n" something or other....
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/03/2010 06:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
[link to www.globalsecurity.org]

United States
General Accounting Office
Washington, D.C. 20548
National Security and
International Affairs Division
B-279055
September 22, 1998
The Honorable Harry Reid
United States Senate
Dear Senator Reid:
This report responds to your request regarding the use of chaff by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the effects of chaff. Chaff is composed of aluminum-coated silica glass fibers that can be spread by aircraft in flight, ships at sea, and vehicles on the ground to help them evade enemy
radar. You expressed concern about DOD’s continued use of chaff for decades without sufficient knowledge of its long-term effects on the environment. As agreed with your office, this report addresses (1) the extent and locations of chaff use, (2) its reported known and potential
effects, and (3) the initiatives being taken or considered to address chaff’s unintended effects

While DOD components report that chaff is an effective means of defense for aircraft, ships, and related weapon systems, DOD and other agencies have identified some unintended and potential side effects of chaff. Chaff
can affect safety by interfering with air traffic control radar. Chaff can also affect weather radar observations and the operation of friendly radar systems, especially when vehicles stir up chaff that has settled on the
ground. It has been reported that chaff has also caused power outages and damaged electrical equipment. Potential effects cited by Defense and other organizations include those on health and the environment. For example,
the Air Force reported that chaff has a potential but remote chance of collecting in reservoirs and causing chemical changes that may affect water and the species that use it.





So get a fucking in situ sample and END the argument.

oh wait, that may ruin your fantasy, right?


[link to www.asp.bnl.gov]

Seems In-situ measurements have already been done by the DOE. . . they are the only ones with the resources to do it.


In-situ measurement of aerosol properties (at the surface or from airborne platforms) is complicated by the fact that the particles undergo loss or uptake of water as a function of relative humidity, thereby changing their size and affecting their optical properties both through the dependence of these properties on particle size and through the change in index of refraction.

April-2002
Collaborative Efforts Between ARM and ASP/Aerosol Research During the May 2003 ARM Aerosol Intensive Observational Period (IOP)
The ARM Aerosol IOP
An ARM Aerosol IOP is planned to take place at the Southern Great Plains site over a 3-4 week period centered on May 2003. This IOP is designed to enhance understanding of the effects of aerosols on the transfer of atmospheric radiation, primarily solar radiation. The IOP will examine both the direct aerosol effect, through light scattering and absorption in cloud-free air, and the indirect aerosol effect, through modification of cloud microphysical properties. The radiative forcing of climate associated with these effects is identified as a major uncertainty in climate change studies.

If I am reading this right . . . they are doing the basic research to identify problems with using particulate released in the atmosphere (ChemTrails) to facilitate climate change.
 Quoting: George B


Bullshit. Many university atmospheric science programs have the capability to do in situ measurements, as do a number of private groups, Battelle Memorial Institute to name one.

Really, you ought to study more before you shoot your mouth off, kid.

Last Edited by The Commentator on 06/03/2010 06:48 PM
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/03/2010 06:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Momentary suspension of the 'maxie' boycot.
Fuck you.
Resumption of boycot.

Look who came along and shat on Nancy's ning notice thread:

And the deflunkers are withering away and getting bannned off as we speak. Nice!!!


I guess he's all giddy about the ning. But how can we "wither
away" when only a couple of us have ever been there? Again,
it just goes to display how the light of reason terrifies anyone
who supports Nancy.
 Quoting: DrPostman



I always said luser was the prototypical ningtard.
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991635
United Kingdom
06/03/2010 06:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Bump for success over ZetaTalk!

rockon
Catseye
User ID: 991309
United States
06/03/2010 07:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So what is it chemtrails are supposed to do?

And where is Clare? I haven't had my fix of relational predisposed superpositional interstitial grass-roots homiligook today. I mean damn, did we run off the only chick in the room?


I'm mildly worried I might have "short-circuited" her with that long-ass post of mine yesterday.

Hope not. Didn't mean to "damage" anybody. :)

Anybody know how old she's purported to be? Like, I didn't just viciously engage somebody's grandmother yesterday, did I...?
 Quoting: "...Sing, I'll sway.




No, you don't need to fret over this. Considering what she's put us through, you were kind. Her atrocious grammar, ridiculous mingling of words and endless comma splicing is just not readable after awhile. Though she considers it simply "creative writing", I can't read her posts anymore. They are increasing the pain in my already painful headaches. I was finally able to pinpoint the cause, BTW: a sinus infection. I was beginning to think I had some sort of new brain condition going on, maybe a clarebolism, and I even had a CT scan of my brain done a couple of weeks ago. That's one thing I love about the DR, the CT scan only cost about a hundred dollars.

Never spray water on a jet fuel fire? Funny, I could only find 911 people saying this. The firefighting pages I looked on said they even use jet fuel in training and sometimes they even separate the fuel from the water when they are done. I'm not going to ask Clare to show me where firefighters don't spray water on jet fuel because she doesn't answer hardly any questions. And come on - missiles, witness disposal? Just the fact that people can't keep their mouths shut is enough to show that you can't just make a whole slew of people disappear, whether it is willingly (paid off) or unwillingly. Yeah, I see a few problems with the official version. But that doesn't mean it's automatically the kooky version, instead! It's not the only other option!

I can relate to the "embarrassment to your gender" comment. I see a show like The View and I just crawl with embarrassment for women everywhere. Those dippy dips sit there trying to appear all smart and "with it" and they gab on for an hour without really saying anything. It's how I came to understand the phrase "hen party". Then I find this site and a new, apt term arises: attention whore. That's all they are on The View. When I traveled long distance to stay with a friend, she insisted on subjecting me to the torture of this show every morning. I can assure you it is quite painful to watch.

One more thing. . . after reading over and over about the people who didn't smell jet fuel. . . I don't really think this fits in anywhere in the arguments, but it shows that strange things happen around accidents. One day I was approaching an intersection to turn left. The car that was waiting at the stop sign where I was going to turn had just stopped. It was an old man. I clearly saw him stop and look to the left, then slowly turn his head to the right and look again. Then instead of the standard "look back to the left again", he just went forward to cross the intersection and he drove right into the path of a small pickup truck going approximately 40 mph coming at me. I was pretty close and slowing down to turn left when the pickup slammed into the driver's side of the old Cadillac the elderly black man and his wife were in.

I was actually the first person to run over and see if everyone was okay, which they were. The ambulance and police were there in no time and I gave a statement. But what was so strange was that I kind of felt the "shock wave" or whatever you'd call it, since it was such a hard hit and it was so close to me. And for the next hour, I had the distinct taste of metal in my mouth. It began as soon as the "shock" happened, a weird feeling in my mouth accompanied by the taste of metal. Very strange. I can't explain it. I was sitting in my car with windows up and AC running when it happened.

Just some bs to show there's still another chick on the thread and that she can actually spout some grammar that's easy on the eyes.


okay, quiz time!



african

a) first lady
b) person burned by jet fuel
c) Michael Jackson before his surgeries


fisher

a) Mr. T in church
b) 911 underground witness
c) Skinny Pete


beat_brick

a) what my headache feels like
b) what really happened to the 911 plane passengers
c) what the execs at BP deserve


beated

a) oral herpes gone awry
b) 911 survivor
c) what I would be willing to endure just to not to have to watch The View again


burn_joss_

a) family guy
b) burning the candle at both ends
c) what the hell is this, anyway????


extreme_se

a) clarebolism
b) witness to what really happened at 911
c) Ralphie on Christmas day
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 969583
United States
06/03/2010 08:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here you go, Clare. Take a look at this page and explain how this would have been faked:

[link to www.dmort.org]

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583


No response to the linked accounts of the involvement of the DMORT forensic teams with their many civilian investigators.

How could this have been faked, how could all these people have been covertly recruited into the conspiracy beforehand and how would they all have all been kept quiet for a decade?

And this is just one aspect of what happened.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 815642
Taiwan
06/03/2010 08:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
There are three questions above and a simple yes or no will suffice for now, as I am simply trying to understand your position at this point.

Thanks


I should also say, when you say "all those witnesses" there are not enough witnesses at the locations on record to account for the events; but at the Pentagon anyway, they SAW A PLANE. It's just the pyrotechnics fooled the witnesses. They saw a plane, they saw a blast. They remembered (reasonably, without knowing better) a hit.

They also could not have seen the lampposts being destroyed: the plane would have careened. The lampposts were planted -- UN-planted, with their whole base out! -- and one was perfectly centred clean through a cab. Not crushing anything, a whole lamppost perfectly through the cab. It didn't even mar the seats.

:)

The plane came from the wrong direction from the only clear-view witnesses (point of view, stable reference) and there were 5 who saw that at the Citgo. The others saw something but they had no vantage point worth mentioning, plus of those others some were lying ("faces in the windows").

The black box data did show a more southerly trajectory, but a) it cuts off before "impact" -- how convenient?!! -- and b) how unusual and c) this could have been another plane. The Citgo witnesses saw the plane from their left over Arlington. That's pretty clear and concise.

Another plane could have gone by later, from the south.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Cluck cluck cluck...more chicken scratch.
User # 78/68

User ID: 991219
Canada
06/03/2010 10:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
This thread is the graveyard of the deflunkers as they all posture up and try and prove their worth to their "masters". Funny shit, indeed!

SHR picked you twerps off nicely!
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/03/2010 11:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
[link to arabesque911.blogspot.com]

Not only does CIT acknowledge that their own witnesses claimed to have witnessed the plane hitting the Pentagon, they admit that they do not have a single supporting witness to corroborate the flyover theory.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 218281

Are you really thick about law and hypothesis, both?

Each witness and piece builds with each other.

They saw a plane, yes. They would not have seen a flyover, but rather a puff of smoke.

Other suggestions (such as the silly hole, the lack of debris initially, the fire trucks which didn't spray foam except at a truck -- though maybe they did have to get jet fuel fires further in -- the lampposts and the nature of a North fly instead of South, and the black box info which stops short of anything really really close to the P ...

these show the witnesses from Citgo are valuable for having seen the North fly, and no more. From there on in, other items show if it was a hit or not likely.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/03/2010 11:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
There are three questions above and a simple yes or no will suffice for now, as I am simply trying to understand your position at this point.

Thanks


I should also say, when you say "all those witnesses" there are not enough witnesses at the locations on record to account for the events; but at the Pentagon anyway, they SAW A PLANE. It's just the pyrotechnics fooled the witnesses. They saw a plane, they saw a blast. They remembered (reasonably, without knowing better) a hit.

They also could not have seen the lampposts being destroyed: the plane would have careened. The lampposts were planted -- UN-planted, with their whole base out! -- and one was perfectly centred clean through a cab. Not crushing anything, a whole lamppost perfectly through the cab. It didn't even mar the seats.

:)

The plane came from the wrong direction from the only clear-view witnesses (point of view, stable reference) and there were 5 who saw that at the Citgo. The others saw something but they had no vantage point worth mentioning, plus of those others some were lying ("faces in the windows").

The black box data did show a more southerly trajectory, but a) it cuts off before "impact" -- how convenient?!! -- and b) how unusual and c) this could have been another plane. The Citgo witnesses saw the plane from their left over Arlington. That's pretty clear and concise.

Another plane could have gone by later, from the south.

Cluck cluck cluck...more chicken scratch.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 815642

Look at the building hypothesis: the cabbie's story is so implausible (like so much else) that we are thrown back on the simpler though untasty smoke and mirrors issue.

Why do you want a plane anyway?

I thought someone was going too far when I heard it as a NOTION, i.e., they didn't stop asking questions and they didn't NEED to go that far in their hypothesis questions ...

but they do. Deal with Citgo, lack of foam spray, no jet fuel in the first ring, the "punch out" hole in back, the improbability (impossibility?) of a single hole and no major external tail, wings, etc. (huge plane), the timing of the photos ...

and the other sites, where there was video fakery/hoaxed impressions (NYC) and Shanksville which was a laugh, the phone calls which were impossible if in the air, the silly box cutter heroics when pilots' doors lock from the inside anyway, and if they killed someone in there, how would they get him out and the place would be thick with blood ...

Oh come on.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
06/03/2010 11:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You really haven't read the Citgo testamony, have you?

They all state that they saw the PLANE plow into the Pentagon, a trajectory that would have missed the Pentagon entirely if the northern route was real. They were obviously mistaken about the northern pass, as their own testamony clearly shows.

Isn't it funny how you talk about evidence "building", but yet dismiss literally HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts that agree and go out of your way to accept FOUR that are obviously mistaken BY THEIR OWN WORDS! Are you THAT stupid?
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 976283
United States
06/03/2010 11:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
There are three questions above and a simple yes or no will suffice for now, as I am simply trying to understand your position at this point.

Thanks


I should also say, when you say "all those witnesses" there are not enough witnesses at the locations on record to account for the events; but at the Pentagon anyway, they SAW A PLANE. It's just the pyrotechnics fooled the witnesses. They saw a plane, they saw a blast. They remembered (reasonably, without knowing better) a hit.

They also could not have seen the lampposts being destroyed: the plane would have careened. The lampposts were planted -- UN-planted, with their whole base out! -- and one was perfectly centred clean through a cab. Not crushing anything, a whole lamppost perfectly through the cab. It didn't even mar the seats.

:)

The plane came from the wrong direction from the only clear-view witnesses (point of view, stable reference) and there were 5 who saw that at the Citgo. The others saw something but they had no vantage point worth mentioning, plus of those others some were lying ("faces in the windows").

The black box data did show a more southerly trajectory, but a) it cuts off before "impact" -- how convenient?!! -- and b) how unusual and c) this could have been another plane. The Citgo witnesses saw the plane from their left over Arlington. That's pretty clear and concise.

Another plane could have gone by later, from the south.

Cluck cluck cluck...more chicken scratch.

Look at the building hypothesis: the cabbie's story is so implausible (like so much else) that we are thrown back on the simpler though untasty smoke and mirrors issue.

Why do you want a plane anyway?

I thought someone was going too far when I heard it as a NOTION, i.e., they didn't stop asking questions and they didn't NEED to go that far in their hypothesis questions ...

but they do. Deal with Citgo, lack of foam spray, no jet fuel in the first ring, the "punch out" hole in back, the improbability (impossibility?) of a single hole and no major external tail, wings, etc. (huge plane), the timing of the photos ...

and the other sites, where there was video fakery/hoaxed impressions (NYC) and Shanksville which was a laugh, the phone calls which were impossible if in the air, the silly box cutter heroics when pilots' doors lock from the inside anyway, and if they killed someone in there, how would they get him out and the place would be thick with blood ...

Oh come on.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Good evening Clare . . . I see you are ready for a fight!
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
06/03/2010 11:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
and the other sites, where there was video fakery/hoaxed impressions (NYC) and Shanksville which was a laugh, the phone calls which were impossible if in the air, the silly box cutter heroics when pilots' doors lock from the inside anyway, and if they killed someone in there, how would they get him out and the place would be thick with blood ...

Oh come on.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


As a career RF engineer, this is just another kook piece of foolishness that you idiots keep trying to use. It is patently false.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/03/2010 11:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
 Quoting: mclarek 986233 to Anonymous Coward 815642


When I said "look at the building hypothesis" I mean they hypothesis being built and see what it accounts for elegantly, that the other does not: the other has to go against the spirit of many details which specifically speak of fakery and physical extreme unlikelihood or impossibility -- aerial feats combined with building physics, firefighter actions and cabbie centred, clean-through both front and back windshields without a scratch. What kind of force would put a whole lamppost perfectly horizontal and centred in a relatively speaking small object such as a car AND not scratch anything?

LOL!

OL!

OL!
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/03/2010 11:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You really haven't read the Citgo testamony, have you?

They all state that they saw the PLANE plow into the Pentagon, a trajectory that would have missed the Pentagon entirely if the northern route was real. They were obviously mistaken about the northern pass, as their own testamony clearly shows.

Isn't it funny how you talk about evidence "building", but yet dismiss literally HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts that agree and go out of your way to accept FOUR that are obviously mistaken BY THEIR OWN WORDS! Are you THAT stupid?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 991880

Nope.

They say they saw the Plane along the North toward the Pentagon.

In cross-examination it would be determined that they didn't have to actually see it hit. They could have seen it very close and an explosion.

Have you ever read court transcripts? The key issue is the trajectory is wrong. Anything else they could have been fooled.
User # 78/68

User ID: 991219
Canada
06/03/2010 11:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You really haven't read the Citgo testamony, have you?

They all state that they saw the PLANE plow into the Pentagon, a trajectory that would have missed the Pentagon entirely if the northern route was real. They were obviously mistaken about the northern pass, as their own testamony clearly shows.

Isn't it funny how you talk about evidence "building", but yet dismiss literally HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts that agree and go out of your way to accept FOUR that are obviously mistaken BY THEIR OWN WORDS! Are you THAT stupid?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 991880




Shill, you lost this argument, what, 7 years ago.

Are you really this stupid? This thread is the last refuge of the lonely deflunkers and their stupid arguments. Truly fitting, I might add!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
06/04/2010 12:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
When I said "look at the building hypothesis" I mean they hypothesis being built and see what it accounts for elegantly, that the other does not: the other has to go against the spirit of many details which specifically speak of fakery and physical extreme unlikelihood or impossibility -- aerial feats combined with building physics, firefighter actions and cabbie centred, clean-through both front and back windshields without a scratch. What kind of force would put a whole lamppost perfectly horizontal and centred in a relatively speaking small object such as a car AND not scratch anything?

LOL!

OL!

OL!
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


Where is your evidence of this?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
06/04/2010 12:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You really haven't read the Citgo testamony, have you?

They all state that they saw the PLANE plow into the Pentagon, a trajectory that would have missed the Pentagon entirely if the northern route was real. They were obviously mistaken about the northern pass, as their own testamony clearly shows.

Isn't it funny how you talk about evidence "building", but yet dismiss literally HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts that agree and go out of your way to accept FOUR that are obviously mistaken BY THEIR OWN WORDS! Are you THAT stupid?

Nope.

They say they saw the Plane along the North toward the Pentagon.

In cross-examination it would be determined that they didn't have to actually see it hit. They could have seen it very close and an explosion.

Have you ever read court transcripts? The key issue is the trajectory is wrong. Anything else they could have been fooled.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


No, they plainly said they saw it hit. As did hundreds of others.

Give it up.
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 976283
United States
06/04/2010 12:14 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Has anyone debunked this . . . if this 737 instructor pilot is not telling the truth . . . what is the truth? Start a 1:38 to get the start of the discussion.



Last Edited by George B on 06/04/2010 12:19 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 991880
United States
06/04/2010 12:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The truth is, as was posted today, HUNDREDS of eyewitnesses saw an American Airlines 757 fly into the Pentagon. NONE saw any "flyover".

End of story.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 969583
United States
06/04/2010 12:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Here you go, Clare. Take a look at this page and explain how this would have been faked:

[link to www.dmort.org]

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583




Clare, you're just going to continue to ignore this?
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/04/2010 12:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Have you ever read court transcripts? The key issue is the trajectory is wrong. Anything else they could have been fooled.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233 to Anonymous Coward 991880

The witnesses are specific cases: there are two types: ones which saw the plane go AT LEAST near and an explosion but were not at a key vantage point; the others saw something -- could have been a small missile from a plane or the plane itself in flyover -- but the hole was a perfect low hole of only 15 feet and no outside debris 'til later.

But that's only part of it.

The other impossibilities add up with the incongruities.

Too much to type.

For plane dynamics see Lear. For vid info see particulary September Clues (12 parts: the parallax stuff is mostly in Part 9, but it's the conclusive stand-alone optics proof, but he just marshalls it with everything else so it flies by, so to speak; pause it and think carefully). Then move on to all the "amateur" vids: the ones from that day and the ones put out later with false soundtracks, weird edits, same viewpoints, etc.

By the way, not everything is as solid as the rest. But there are enough solids ... which secondly combine in solid ways ... to know.

For instance, why the "punch out" painted on the inner ring hole (which again was perfect -- and to give the impression of a miraculous nose cone? -- with no debris on the outside there, except some building pieces from the blast ---- no major piece to have made the hole).

Etc.

Wake up. There's coffee brewing.

:)

It's not a pleasant thought; but the reason this has been so slammed in 9/11 Truth circles is that it OPENS THE QUESTION OF TV FAKERY AND MEDIA COMPLICITY, plus it's a direct access to knowing the whole thing was a fraud. That's why you were sold planes so strongly.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 960518
United States
06/04/2010 12:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You're unbelievable, "mclarek". In fact, I'm going to recommend this thread to a couple of my friends. And I think it's important that they tell all of their friends, too. It's important for people to know that there are individuals like you in the world. It matters. And I don't feel obligated to explain why.

First, I'm about 4 or 5 pages back, but I love this:

"it means a loop hole for no planes, given the other problems around 9/11. It can be considered suspect, so imagine for a second it is."

I mean, how does a reasonable, rational person even respond to that?

A "loop hole"? You're seriously resting your faith in a huge part of this scenario of yours on a "loop hole"?

It "CAN" be considered suspect?

So let's "IMAGINE" it is...?

My God...

You hang a substantial amount of your "proof" for this claim on a small handful of witnesses at Citgo SOLEY because they had the BEST vantage point? You make it sound like they enjoyed the ONLY vantage point.

I'm actually willing to assume, just for the sake of this "debate", that these "Citgo" people did have "the best" vantage point. Good. Great.

It doesn't mean that because there's was THE BEST that all others are considered INVALID. The witnesses stuck in traffic (you claim they're not "reliable" because they were in motion but in fact I've read many of them were stuck in traffic) had a clear view of the Pentagon. None of them say they saw a plane go over the horizon of some apartment buildings- and then a big cloud of smoke appeared.

They say, CLEARLY, they watched it fly into the Pentagon.

Butu they're not reliable because the people at Citgo were a little closer? Is that how low your standards are?

So the only reilable eyewitness to the Kennedy assassination should be the guy who was ABSOLUTELY closest to the motorcade from the sidewalk? Everyone else, including the Zapruder film, is unrelaible because it's NOT THE BEST vantage point?

You claim the knocked over light poles were staged. How? When? Where are all the witnesses to light poles being knocked over- by anything other than a plane?

I'd sure notice people here in Philly knocking over light poles. Particularly if I was driving by (or would I be "unreliable" because I was "in motion"?)

Why didn't the Citgo people see that happening? You can maybe convince me they had "the best" view of the Pentagon, but if that's the case you CAN'T simultaneously convince me they didn't notice "the suits" out there knocking over the poles.

In fact, produce ONE eyewitness to that. Or one eyewitness of suits "dropping" airplane "parts" on the lawn of the Pentagon?

Where did they hide them? Under their coats? Where did they collect these "parts" from? In other words, if they brought them to the Pentagon and "dropped them on the lawn" they must have gotten them from somewhere? Was there a big truck parked around back with a pile of fucked up, smoking airplane parts stacked in the rear?

See, it's these logistical-issues which, in the end, decimate your 9/11-"Truth"-theories. You can't account for them. Just like you can't account for the missing passengers.

And then you have the balls to clalm it doesn't matter.

And you make it sound like CGI'ing the New York videos would be "easy". Which is literally jaw-droppingly astounding.

What about the amateur videos? You're talking about "fade outs" or whatever- meanwhile nearly every person in the world watched the second plane hit LIVE without any "fade outs".

Right now I'm wondering if, by the time I'm caught up in this thread, you've had the decency to address, concretely, the dilemma of these missing passengers. I'm gonna guess- no. But we'll see.

The irony is, I'd at least respect if you could give a coherent theory as to what happened to them. Even if I don't agree with it- so what. Just to state that you've even remotely considered the question would be enough.

But in order to do that you'd have to face up to the inherent fatal discrepencies in these ideas of yours. And I don't think you'd release your grip on those for anything...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 960518
United States
06/04/2010 12:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
What does the # of pages do for you? Give you a thrill?

Most of it's just nasty posts.

It gives ZetaMax the dooldrums. He claimed that we would never
get this many pages.


I am content knowing that the horse named TLR hung himself with his own rope. Debunker self-destruction is truly a "thrill" to witness.


BTW, what happened to TLR? I missed something.


This is "purely" speculation on my part - but just recently the viewcount on this thread was SUBSTANTIALLY reduced by SHR - who reported that he suspected a script or utility was being used to increase the count. He said (to the effect) that this was equivalent to and in fact WAS a denial-of-service attack, even if the instigator had an inferior goal and didn't appreciate that this was in fact the "effect" of his (assuming a "he") "activities".

When Circuit Breaker decried the rather substantial reduction of the count, SHR countered that he should be THANKFUL the entire thread was not DELETED - an action he SERIOUSLY considered, but decided to back away from.

Ironically, TLR has NOT been seen since that incident, and more telling is the fact that a LOT of the "pet" smilies he used are no longer available. Like this one:

:excited:

Which was his famous "dancing man".

So I "suspect" that his account was deleted, and he is currently banned from GLP.

But I not saying at all that this is the case.

Merely speculation ...

Bottom line - PLAY FAIR AND FOLLOW THE RULES.




Good for SHR!!

The Lone Stranger (now) will only be missed by the morons and selfish twerps that actually like his smilies. He's a cancer at GLP and will NOT be missed by many.

And, it is truly fitting that Circuit Breaker was crying in his corn flakes ... what a flake indeed!

Dr Postspam ... grow up already!


Indeed my friend!

FUNNY how close this widely derided prediction came to being totally TRUE!!!

:nerofail:
 Quoting: ***ZetaMaX***


How come I've never seen either of you two posting in a single other thread besides this one? Ever?

And you have the balls to claim someone else is a "cancer" to this site...

News