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

And you keep insisting that holds significant meaning. It doesn't.



So you are right if only you imagine it just right?
Please stop saying 'superposition'. You have worn out the track in my brain where I can even know what it means.



In other words, you were right all along, even though you were shown to be pathetically confused and wrong over and over again for 25 pages. Got it!

My answer would be at this time . . . unless other evidence is available. Contrails/Chemtrails may act similarly depending on an almost infinite number of variables. I would say that Chemtrails are generally more persistent. I think Chemtrails are not made up of the same particulate each time. I would also venture that Chemtrails are not always visible . . . though most people concerned about them think they are. They in essence can vary dramatically because they serve different functions.

Your chronic, overbown sensitivity to alleged 'sexism' is striking. It was a joke, Clare-bear.

I don't care to wallow with you in your mire of "She-said-this-and-it-means-this-but-ohhh-on-second-thought-I​-don't-really-remember-what-she-said-nor-do-I-offer-any-citat​ion-of-her-testimony-on-the-subject-anyway".

What more persistent than normal clouds?


How can you tell?



George are you seriously now claiming invisible chemtrails?



Orly? Feel free to identify these different functions.

Perhaps it would do you some good.

I don't care to spend time responding to your convenient, unfounded declarations of alleged 'fact'.

They don't have to be in a row. Say one next Monday, then one day in the middle of the week and then the following Monday?

And THAT is where the confusion was for me AND Nancy and many others: if it stopped revolving IN FACT it would start rotating IN FACT relative to us ...

But most people don't know it DOES rotate already, just not relative to us ...

And I knew that.

So now I know both! Instead of picking on me, give me credit for DEALING with this so well. I have pointed out that Nancy was confusing points of view in not thinking it rotates NOW.

And in the end I realized you might mean it would START rotating (relative to us) if stopped in our sky. So I asked. Someone finally answered.

I think I did an amazing job of keeping the discussion straight and pointing out where people were making mistakes about others' understandings. You are basically admitting the main point I was making, hence I wasn't spouting gobbledygook.

The only thing was, I didn't know -- so didn't include -- that it would START ROTATING (in the ordinary sense, of around the Earth) if the system were stopped physically instead of mentally.

And laughing at my superposition distinctions was bad on you. I got those right when you weren't even seeing there was a difference and why you and Nancy were not making sense to each other -- on that point.



Yes, but not "imagine" as a phantasy, some hare-brained notion (Hare in the Moon, ha ha). -- You do know some people think the craters make not a Man in the Moon, but the Great Hare. --

It is instead a thought-experiment on the different motions, all undertandable from each distinct layer of accounting for them. That is what superposition means, in this context.


No.

a) I was not wrong about how it IS NOW. Nor was I wrong in making the view-point distinctions so you could see how Nancy was misunderstanding the current motions. Nor was I wrong that the current motions can be UNDERSTOOD on different accounting levels, called superpositions, i.e., different orders of magnitude for the motions seen.

b) Yes, I was wrong on what would happen if it physically stopped, and thus the tidal relationship would stop (tidal lock would "break").

Clare

Well, I smell BULLSHIT. How's that for a convincing argument, Clare? Oh, right. You only cherry pick what backs up (in your simple mind) what you already believe. You're doing a fine job of keeping this thread bumped, though you are probably turning more people away when they enter thinking the discussion is about the Zetas and find themselves watching the Clare Comedy show.

No, now you're being CONVENIENT about it.

These are facts.

April Gallop was there. That is her witness testimony (and several others outside said the same thing initially on the TV). They may have changed their statements now. The fact is that's what was witnessed. If THEY are wrong, then their claims are not fact content, but the FACT is that's what they say.

As to the physical evidence:
There were no plane parts found anywhere, except wrong types and tiny bits.

There were no miles and miles of wire.

Pilots for 9/11 Truth does not officially endorse John Lear's position of no planes, but they come close. Not only do they say the speeds and manoevres were seemingly impossible -- and implausible in why anyone would do things even close to the way claimed --

they also have done the flight box analysis for the Pentagon, and it was flying about 100 feet over the ground. A flyby.

This is just the start of the facts. They are FACT.

It is at the point where you look or don't look, but the facts in some things have been nailed down and they nail the coffin on the gov't/media tale of planes at those crash sites.

Besides, Menow, there was no environmental clean-up at Shanksville OR the Pentagon. Hm. NO JET FUEL at Shanksville or Pentagon, confirming Apil and the other witnesses. :)

Sorry -- I know it's an awful thing that they lied to us. That's a fact, too.

But since they'd make it easy on themselves, this part of their lie is not actually that difficult to understand why they had not planes, just blips and some passengers/ drill participants killed off somewhere, or gov't employees in hiding.

Clare

Hey, George, if you don't know who The Guy and SnakeAirlines are, maybe you should go back and look at some of the many existing chemtrail threads on GLP.

Most of those threads descend into vicious personal attacks rather quickly.

That cherry pick issue again. Funny.
And you smell shitty LYING LIERS is what you smell behind thinking the messenger is spouting lies. THEY LIED, not I.

So,
Okay, since these facts TRUMP the claims of the gov't "facts" ...

what of that do you not understand?

No jet fuel: no planes.
Parallax issues: media fakery.
CGI planes and jet-fuel in buildings in NYC: nice effect.

Black box flyover of Pentagon: gov't-claimed plane didn't fly into Pentagon.

Etc.

What facts are cherry picked. YOU CAN'T OBJECTIVELY GO BACK TO HOLDING THE PLANES THEORY WHEN THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR PLANES AND in the case of the lack of jet fuel cleanup at Shanksville and Pentagon, for instance, that is also EVIDENCE AGAINST PLANES AT THE SAME TIME.

But this is JUST THE TIP of the iceberg on this stuff. Once you get it, you can go looking into all the other aspects. These are just some of the simpler aspects, a simple route in.

Glad to see you still have the energy to attack the thread barons here. I am doing fine and will have to leave to host a party of neighbors in a few minutes. I don't see the Triceratops . . . maybe I don't understand?

And who, here, didn't understand that oh-so-basic fact? Oh... that would be you.


Only those who never took a 5th-grade astronomy primer.



And you stubbornly backed her up on that inspite of maybe 100 posts explaining where she and you were wrong.



"Start rotating" is a VEEEERY stilted way of looking at it. Of course, that's how you roll.



No, you were spouting gobbldygook, and I wasn't nearly the only one who noticed that.



See above. That point was addressed over and over again - just not in language YOU insist upon as being the ONLY valid terminology.



No, Clare. You weren't "getting it right".



We took the time to present MANY thought experiments which would have demonstrated the reality of the situation MANY pages ago, but you 'overlooked' them, over and over and over again.





Pathetically poor description, but it makes you 'right', so you just go with that, Clare.

If I have time I will . . . thanks for the info . . .

LOLOL!

I wasn't claiming sexism. I was claiming self-absorption in your maleness!

LOLOL!

But as to the content of your long string of "gobbledygook word salad nonsense headachy meaninglessness" -- LOLOL! --

I cited her testimony a day ago. -- Happy hunting.

But maybe looking her up on Scroogle (or Google-Spookle) yourself is too hard? Even harder than NOTICING WHAT'S SAID and claiming to be answering real questions or even making sense?

:P

Just sounding like you, Menow.

Here, hon: one of the times she spoke was on A Jones' show. It's avail. on Youtube. I will pick one and maybe it's a good one. I have heard so much on this stuff I don't know the dates of disclosures, or the best versions recorded of their claims. [link to www.youtube.com]

There. Poor baby. Now do the rest fact checking yourself. It is not so hard.

THESE ARE ALL FACTS I'm saying on this stuff.

So there was no fire at those crash sites? Any fuel would have just laid around in liquid form until somebody came to mop it up?

Fucking ridiculous.

WTF?

"So, Joe, we're going to pretend to crash a flight you were supposed to be on into the World Trade Center. You have to go live in Dubuque and can never again speak to anyone you know."

Sorry, but that's hilarious.



<sob oh sob> ?

That's exactly the attitude I'm talking about when I say you're in some sort of psychological disconnect (for lack of a better description.)

It's not a question of empathy on my part. I'm bringing up the passengers and their extended social groups to point out how ludicrous your position is.

You'd almost have to view this as some sort of giant video game to rationalize your position.

DrPostman, do you know how I get the 'send personal Msg' on my margin?

And this is bull.

There were plane parts all over Manhattan.

The pictures are everywhere.

Menow, you were not helpful in saying "It rotates, it rotates" when I knew that -- from one level. What kind of teaching-helpful person would do that? If I didn't know that the moon would START rotating (in the normal use of that phrase, as relative to Earth) but DID know it rotates (relative to other things) you should gve me credit.

Instead, with your whiney nastiness you complained, over-confident I had nothing to say on the issue.

I WAS wrong about what it would do if physically stopped.

YOU were wrong to think I was wrong about what it is doing now (that I thought it is not rotating NOW).

You never said, hey, it would break tidal relationship, but yes, it's not rotating now (relative to earth). You picked on terms and confused the whole discussion. "It rotates" was undefined in orer of magnitude and I POINTED THAT OUT.

And if you were trying to understand where Nancy or other laypeople are making errors you would have to understand how your terms confuse them and theirs you!

YOU TOO were confused. When you finally got that I was talking of how it doesn't rotate relative to EARTH, however many page and clear statements of that I made, you simply thought that wasn't the point.

Well. It was. It was how the whole problem started; and if instead you'd said, long ago, Okay Clare (and Nancy) -- it rotates reative to the Sun -- which Nancy doesn't get and I do -- but it would ALSO begin rotating relative to Earth if stopped ... I would have known exactly what you were talking of right away.

Instead it was as though you were claiming it's "rotating now" and it's NOT ON OUR LEVEL OF not only view, but the level of UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIVE MOTIONS.

As they currently are.

Dummy. So, you didn't get that because you thought that wasn't important. Just crying, "It's rotating" doesn't resolve what would happen if it stopped in a person's mind who doesn't know it would START rotating relative to us.

I know about conservation of angular momentum but wasn't sure if you were claiming it would break he tidal relationship (you hate the term "lock" but it's the usual one).

It's not my job to go chasing your alleged 'evidence' down. You apparently fail to realize(not a surprise) that your past performance has rendered almost anything you say as extremely unlikely to be valid in the minds of anyone who has been following this thread.

Come on Clare. I learned long ago that most of what the government says is lies, the parts that are true are only there to make the bullshit around them more palatable for human consumption. If you think that you are going to expose the lies, you have more self importance than any one human being should have. The important part is to realize that we are surrounded by lies and use that little revelation to be discerning about the news around us. If you waste all your energy trying to root out the "truth" you are just chasing your own tail and spending time and energy that would be better spent elsewhere. Even if you find the truth, what good will it do anyone? Will it bring back the dead? Do you honestly think your quest for truth will change anything? You are deluded if you think so.

If you like doom and conspiracy so much, you don't need to dredge up things that happened years ago. We have real bonafide doom ongoing right now in the gulf of Mexico. I am not a doom merchant, but I do recognize the potential for great doom if this leak is not stopped soon. There are lots of lies and smoking mirrors. And it is happening NOW. If people get involved as it happens, there is a better chance of affecting the outcome.

Did you know that in spite of the GOM disaster, YOUR government (not US government that you love to malign) and the premier of BC want to go ahead with plans to lift the ban on offshore drilling off the coast of YOUR country? Do you know that if we allow this to happen, someday it could be OUR waters and coastlines that are affected? Or maybe since you live in the center of the universe, far away from the Gulf of Mexico and even farther away from the BC coast, you don't care and prefer to beat old horses and conspiracy theories.

Nope.

There was a (wrong type) engine under a tarp.

No plane parts.

Sawwy.


(That's NYC. At the Pentagon, the Pentalawn was pristine until the men in suits went around "picking up parts" -- seeming laying them down, for photos are stop-motion, of course, and there was a lot of debris after. One piece, the largest one, has a piece of drifwtood in it. It was from a known crash -- has been identified. From the gov't storehouses.

Shanksville was just a pile of smouldering rubbish in a 20-foot deep hole, with wing-tips and tail fins carved out with a bulldozer. The larges piece fitted into a bulldozer. They prob. took that shot when just for the photo op.)

Shanksville is funny: they even claimed it was coming in upside down and was completely swalowed in a mine shaft. But of course, the Wile E. Coyote bulldozing of a shape in the grass isn't normal, and isn't congruent. :)

Just sloppy story telling: one story doesn't work for a few who are still following it, they give another incongruent story and finally, when they're done, it's all botchy but few are noticing. Until now.

And anyway, if there were a mine shaft, you know what you'd do: you'd pull out the lights, get out the diggers, and dig all night for many nights for survivors or wreckage ... none of that was done.

They took some trash from the local trash dump where it all went back to (some of the parts were identifiably rusty!) and blew it up in the middle of a bulldozed "plane image" on the ground.

Not so hard. And yes, sloppy. And stupid. But most of us fell for it because we believed something had to be true here: after all, we saw *something* on TV.

Hodge-podge. Look into it.
Clare

"Not rotating relative to Earth" is a hopelessly semantic way of looking at it. We, on Earth, don't SEE the physical rotation, but that is really meaningless. YOU, on the other hand, insisted upon dwelling on that in spite of MANY, MANY invitations to look at in from another way which would remove any confusion. You stubbornly REFUSED to respond honestly to the thought experiments and now want to ignore that reality.

Heh.

Good ole April. Read and weep clare
[link to www.jod911.com]


[link to debunk911myths.org]
[link to debunk911myths.org]

so explain all the little piccies then


Of course they don't. Nobody wants to endorse an internet wingnut.


Sorry, but programming any current FMS is easily learned, and amply sufficient to the task at hand for the hijackers.


I think you will find that you have precisely 0 evidence for this.


You have not got one right yet, so not an auspicious start.


Interesting claim. Got any evidence?


Sorry, but facts do not just pop into existence just cos you say so. Got any evidence?


And finally you wander off into wild speculation.

Have you any evidence at all?

Nobody, including me, EVER 'didn't get that', Clare.

Ah, I know this argument: why dredge up past lies?

Well, some of us here don't have THOSE straight, so they're sitting ducks for the next ones.

Second, history matters, period.

Third, ALL THE FORWARD WARS and CURRENT WARS are based on these lies.

Fourth, ALL LIES ARE IMPORTANT. ALL TRAGEDIES DESERVE THEIR DAY. And we are still going along with body scans and so on ... because of these lies. No planes, no 9/11 events except death. Now let's talk: what do we accept about current events?

Lastly, if your argument is less about not facing lies and more about living in the now": sure, it's all important. Feed your kids, fight the oil spill, etc. --- or whatever.
But it does not mean the bigger potential didn't happen and the bigger potential isn't plotting now.

Your inane claim repeates OVER AND OVER AND OVER Menow, was "It rotates, Clare". And every time I said It does, but not relative to Earth you didn't say, hey, that doesn't matter because it WOULD if it stopped ... NOOOOOOOO you had to suggest that it rotates.

Your unclarity in showing you got MY point led us nowhere.