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

It sounded like a braying jackass to me. No point talking to a jackass.

I'll send the cheese to the wine and champagne party the spooks are having while they run your war.

And by the way, YOU GUYS ARE NOT BEING SCIENTIFIC.

Astronut is, but his tests are inconclusive (re. the blur) and inadequate (re. the blur and the parallax/bridge movement).

So, be scientific.

TV FAKERY; NO PLANES; FEW VICTIMS.

Fake mourning, rebellion, etc. MIXED with real.

Very few identities add up at all; and some of those that add up still are fake photos so they are not likely to be real either.

That leaves us with way fewer dead. Still dead, but way fewer. Say, 100-200?

Sad. But not catastrophic.

That's the point.

I would imagine there might be some risk in using one's real name to accuse victim's families and firemen of not being real.

Do you call your local DA a jackass when she/he questions you for a murder? You could, you know. People do.

"How could I be considered?!"

So ... YOU are being the j-s.

ESPECIALLY in the middle of an intelligence op if you are supposed to be real and dead but have a fake photo, or no memorials (except one) until a bunch appear 8 years later, BACK DATED.

With that kind of shenanigans, the DA would ask every member of your family hard questions.

HARD questions.

If they check out, that's nice and good and true: you are really dead. The DA could apologize to your family OR NOT; for they are doing their duty in the light of what's highly suspicious.

If there are 100 of "your type" with seemingly faked photos and it's an intelligence op, it's likely you and 99 others, or maybe just your 99 other buddies are not real. But most have to be fake, logically speaking, when there's fakery of this kind and frequency.

And let me clarify--I mean one might be at risk from angry survivors and family,

A DA is protected by their position, not only to in the end ACCUSE, but to SUSPECT ---- and at some point you find out WHAT'S LIKELY.

Simon is real, his real name, as far as I have been able to trace it: he has a band in Italy and is from the US.

The rest use I.D.s mostly.

Like hoi.polloi

And you should speak, Anonymous Coward 969583! ROTFL!


Anyway, would you guys get off your bleeding hearts for people who are fake? We don't know which ones but most are. In why need need to be asking the tough questions of people who would "never" be involved!, one thought at first ... see ANY crime show.

Wow. I didn't think one could learn anything from TV, but you guys DO need to learn this one.

Any with fakes are the most suspect of course; but they could be real family survivors, framed with fake photos to help give the database more "life" so to speak.

Geez, it's hard to hear above the donkey noises in here. Somebody close the door!

Wishing you well. Going for coffee.

And I DO really feel for the real victims.

I don't want to hurt anyone but if their loss is being used for a lie, by infiltrators and false identities, then yes, I want the real and the fake distinguished ...

but if's not possible, person for person, to know if that person exists, then at least the relative scale of the fakery must come into view to get some sense of the overall inflatedness of the deaths. One or two real families might even be being framed with fake photos and not dare to speak on it. (I doubt that, but ...)

... in fact EVEN ONE (such as the Colaios) ...

makes all suspect, not accused. But we must accuse the totality of rough numbers of fakes: intelligence ops.

And for you, you should reasonably change your hypothesis to suspect the operation's scale of being much more of a fake large event. That is the insight.

Ad astra, fellas.

Can't answer, can ya. Still gonna post news articles about people with fake photos to prove they existed, when it would take more investigation to know --- and most statistically are astronomically unlikely to be real, if they have fake photos. What, all framed?

:)

No. Most are fake; a few families are fake (or complicit); and the rest are real.

Funny, I think I hear a troll calling for proper "proportions" in the test which already showed it's claim about "equal percentage of movement" was complete crap. As a proof of concept it proved the troll's whole concept false, it need not be some kind of miniature scale model of NYC, yet that is where the moving goalpost is headed. Troll doesn't seem to understand that it's up to them to prove their claim, something they've failed to do and have now been disproven based on their own claim. Troll will probably be upset that I'm not entertaining its demands. Oh well, so sad.

Last Edited by Astromut on 06/08/2010 05:28 PM

Anyone else know where this "Venus moving around and Saturn missing" claim comes from? What the heck is that supposed to be all about? Is it something from the ning?

Where are you seeing that?

Some of them were talking about Saturn's rings being missing.

I do see they've finally located Planet X.

It's on the back of Obama's jacket:

[link to poleshift.ning.com]

Sorry, my bad.

I think it was actually Punisher.

At least I think that's where I read it, don't know if it started with him.

Thread: SATURN lost its rings, and I think Jupiter's moon crashed into it. Go check. This is serious. Something is happening out there.

Clare troll says Saturn is missing and Venus is bouncing. That's either one hell of an active imagination, or she's getting it from somewhere else. Of course it's easily observed to be bullcrap, but I just want to know who's originating this stuff. Is it just another punisher thread somewhere, or is it the ning, etc?

Last Edited by Astromut on 06/08/2010 06:14 PM

You do know she's claimed that few if any people were actually in the WTC buildings and the names of victims were made up?

You'd think that would be especially offensive to you, Mr. Alleged 911 Survivor.

Or should we call you Ms. Bridget?

There was this:

"Do any of you remember about a year ago a possible impact mark on Venus and a ' scar ' in Saturn's rings as though somthing had passed through?"

[link to poleshift.ning.com]

Well, after all, he is a starchild. He is doing a helluva job with this Gulf of Mexico situation. Zetas wrong again!

Well, that does involve both of the right planets, but I still don't understand where the conclusion that saturn is "missing" or Venus is "bouncing" came from.

Last Edited by Astromut on 06/08/2010 06:29 PM

She doesn't know ZetaTalk any better than anything else and she's not a careful reader.

Who knows how she came up with it.

Astronut, you're comparing apples and oranges. I made a mistake in naming the way to calculate the percentages and quickly realized the error.

As to the rest: you HAVE TO TEST PROPORTIONAL DISTANCE or your test is insufficient.

You could also do it with "fancy" math for the same --

either way, the test requires proportional distance.

What you will find is that if the building movement is taken to be true (if it's not due to blur anyway), it is inconsistent with the total movement of the very faraway object, or if the faraway object is taken as the arbiter of the experiment and true then the near object would have to be much more changed and all other objects too.

This is knowable.

Test it properly (or work it out in your head roughly).

NOT debunked. Not possible TO debunk it: you can test it but it is a fact so it will show itself to you if you want to act it out (do the physical test for it).

This was a psy op.

No -- I said the VIDEO shows SOHO and STEREO-A images with the placements different. Watch the video the person posted and explain it to me if it's not moving in the IMAGES.

George: I've seen the chemtrails! I'd wondered at the streaks we've been having but never caught it in the act.

I WATCHED them spray. The clouds look like exhaust puffs for the first 10 min's, then about 30 min's they show a falling-looking wispiness, now, an hour later, they've become a mass of smog and some layers of their original direction, with some blue between some.

There were 11 I could distinguish.

Planes fly over Toronto low and high all the time, never normally leaving this stuff.

One went up and left crap all the way as it ascended.

Other planes fly right through and around this stuff without leaving anything.

And one original (before it smeared -- 'cause that's what it's like in the end, 20 or 30 min's later) had a gap where there was no stuff.

Also, a couple were very low, relatively speaking, and I could see their layer effect, and they are now two large smudges against a lot of other smudge in the East, away from the Sun to me.

In the West, it's all smudgy crappy (really "smoggy" glow now).

We have a clear day today -- low humidity. When we have humidity it's a bit smoggy naturally but not today.

POISON? SMEARING SO THE PEOPLE CAN'T OBSERVE DOUBLE SUNS? WHAT?

G8-G20 here: reduce our energy? WHAT?!

I've seen this before but though I thought it was odd, I didn't want to think spraying. Or I'd catch it already smoggy in the sky and figured these were weird clouds. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!! These were so low AND high that I knew the "cloud look" wasn't coming from normal clouds; and saw them develop from the trails. It's now been 1.5 hours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I didn't "claim" it I showed you they have to be.

I showed photo fakery (and TV fakery) and Astronut has not contradicted that work with his test.


He used a blurry image and even if there is some shift in the towers, for a faraway object against an even way faraway object, not much change in the latter would be observable. If you were closer, you would see more change in the relative positions BUT ALSO a lot more change in the closer ones (towers).

Really: wake up and be scientific. FAKE IDS are interspersed; fake images were shown.

So: why is Saturn missing in a whole block of SOHO in the video, and why is Venus in different out-of-place relative motions in the Stereo-A images in the video?!

Shall I re-post it with references because you "scientists" can't do your own research to find it and be curious about anomalies?

[link to www.youtube.com]

0:25-0:40 and 0:43-0:54.

Keep going. There are more things.

What but fakery would explain this? She's saying -- whatever else she's right or wrong about -- that Saturn, Venus etc. are being ADDED back into images after taking PX out, and they occasionally get the other aspects wrong.

Now, I know Saturn and Venus are in their right real places, but what would make NASA need to CREATE images and MAKE MISTAKES therefore?

Or do you think they are hiding something ELSE that they need to fudge the images for?? These are not natural images -- that's for Sure. Saturn doesn't disappear, and Venus doesn't bounce around in real space.

George I AM SO MAD ABOUT THIS.

As mad as when I discovered the TV fakery. This is UPSETTING>

(And no wonder some people here think

I'm mean or bad -- they're shooting the messenger because to "go there" means to first feel angry and frightened -- it's frightening!)

I am SO ANGRY AT THIS SPRAYING. It's like, NOT ANOTHER!!!!!!! thing I have to know about -- FUCKKKK.

And the people here are so g-d oblivious with their "same photo shoot" nonsense and "contrails sometimes last a few minutes in spcial atmosphere" and "I can test parallax without relative distance" --

FUUUUUUCK.

Just sharing. :)

When you know how you know and you know how it connects with other things it is frigging maddening ... so yah, no wonder people don't like hearing it.

"There must be SOME physic that explains objects moving in far space as though they are near up while the near ones don't move much or at all"

... "There must be SOME optical illusion that could explain why same-heads have a blurry mouth but all the same features on a different shirt without resorting to thinking they're pasted in"

... "There must be SOME physic which would explain why two people of 'high standing' have no mention but one from 2003, and then in 2009 they get a back-dated set of testimonials".



CHRIST!
Every new shitty thing I discover is just another thorn. I wish I DIDN'T know. And there goes another plane -- we now have marvellous high, low clouds AND smear across the horizon, where most of it shows against glare or direct view.

Whatever.

Do you have any complete argument to explain fakery as other than ....... Fakery? HMMM?

No.

What is this "mistake-filled" set of images doing? WHY the mistakes?

You guys any more reassured in that the planets are out of order or missing in some images? Or is that "compression" errors? LOL.

So, like with the vicsims, WHYYYY!

Christ. Those ugly frigging cloud-tail-crap spewed smear blobs, smog shit.



I want the old world of Newton -- or how about even jungle life.



Yah, let's go back there: healthy until you die, at least, and no big co-ordinated LIES.