| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
   |
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:29:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: 7shining7one7
no.. you're f'ing insane.
Isn't it a "forum crime" to circumvent the swearing filter, even if simply implying the word? Anyway, quoted as I'm toying with making this puppy my signature for the joyous irony of the statement.
---
Originally by: 7shining7one7
no.. you're f'ing insane.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:31:00 -
[32]
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Please stop lying. WTC7 was not hit by a plane, but it WAS hit by falling debris, as photographs clearly show.
 by any chance do have a linky to said photo.. I believe you 100%.. I just really cannot be bothered to go looking myself..
Since our tinfoil hat moron likes youtube videos... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GEEzHn4tqo
-----------
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:31:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 16/02/2009 00:22:35
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
2) Evidence that would require more than five minutes with photoshop to fake.
you calling official nasa images fake? 
This might be a relevant question if any of the images in the site you linked to actually were official NASA images. Unfortunately, they do not provide the official images, they provide copies of what they claim are official un-edited images. See if you can figure out how they could possibly edit them...
Provide images from NASA itself (hosted on the NASA website), or at least from (and hosted on) a legitimate scientific site (IOW, not a conspiracy website), and I'll look at them. Until then, nobody is going to waste their time on photoshop fraud.
Quote:
also thx for demonstrating in that other thread how much of a horror of a human being you are.. you just couldn't resist spouting out your facist dictatorial wet dreams that would've made heitler **** in his pants.
And another clueless moron who thinks that "Hitler" is a synonym for "any political position I don't like". I would ask you to explain precisely how my proposed actions are in any way in agreement with the morally offensive aspects of the nazi ideology, but I know you'd just dodge the question.
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
2. ppl allready did that in the other thread.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:39:00 -
[34]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 16/02/2009 00:22:35
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
2) Evidence that would require more than five minutes with photoshop to fake.
you calling official nasa images fake?
This might be a relevant question if any of the images in the site you linked to actually were official NASA images. Unfortunately, they do not provide the official images, they provide copies of what they claim are official un-edited images. See if you can figure out how they could possibly edit them...
Provide images from NASA itself (hosted on the NASA website), or at least from (and hosted on) a legitimate scientific site (IOW, not a conspiracy website), and I'll look at them. Until then, nobody is going to waste their time on photoshop fraud.
Quote:
also thx for demonstrating in that other thread how much of a horror of a human being you are.. you just couldn't resist spouting out your facist dictatorial wet dreams that would've made heitler **** in his pants.
And another clueless moron who thinks that "Hitler" is a synonym for "any political position I don't like". I would ask you to explain precisely how my proposed actions are in any way in agreement with the morally offensive aspects of the nazi ideology, but I know you'd just dodge the question.
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
2. ppl allready did that in the other thread.
Shining please respond to my post on page one..
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:43:00 -
[35]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 16/02/2009 00:44:09
ain't it funny how all the buildings including building 7 came down in same speed? frefall.. and in the exact same way..
wtc 7 wasn't hit by a plane.. and even if you profess for it to be hit by debries it wouldn't just make it fall down on its own footprint.
and it was first time in history that a steel framed building had been brought down by a fire.. and it happened 3 times on the same day and they fell down in the same exact way and in the same speed, both the two that were hit by planes and the one that wasn't..
just some more of those funny coincidences.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:43:00 -
[36]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
Awesome, a single picture. Too bad it isn't one of the more "convincing" ones. In fact, I'm starting to notice a pattern there... a few of them are linked directly from a NASA site, but all of them are terrible evidence, while all of the ones with something that couldn't easily be explained as a camera glitch (for example, the triangle UFO pictures at the top of the page) are hosted on their own website.
Unfortunately for you, a random white spot in a picture is not enough to overcome all of the arguments against UFOs.
Quote:
2. ppl allready did that in the other thread.
No, they did not, and I'm about to deal with that moron as well. Simply saying "you = hitler" is not an explanation, as much as you might want it to be.
-----------
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:45:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: 7shining7one7
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
Awesome, a single picture. Too bad it isn't one of the more "convincing" ones. In fact, I'm starting to notice a pattern there... a few of them are linked directly from a NASA site, but all of them are terrible evidence, while all of the ones with something that couldn't easily be explained as a camera glitch (for example, the triangle UFO pictures at the top of the page) are hosted on their own website.
Actualy that is just a mass ejection from the sun that just happens to be that shape. Nothing stange about it at all.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:46:00 -
[38]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
ain't it funny how all the buildings including building 7 came down in same speed? frefall.. and in the exact same way..
Please stop lying. The buildings only came down in freefall if you dishonestly pick your start/end points to make your conclusion come out true. If you time the collapse videos honestly, you will find that they do NOT collapse in freefall.
Quote:
wtc 7 wasn't hit by a plane.. and even if you profess for it to be hit by debries it wouldn't just make it fall down on its own footprint.
Would you like to post your physics equations and force diagrams proving this? Of course you won't.
BTW: buildings have collapsed into their own footprint in other cases, at least one of them due to nothing more than the failure of poor quality building materials. Try doing your research a bit better next time, before you make stupid claims like "this can't happen".
-----------
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:46:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
No, they did not, and I'm about to deal with that moron as well. Simply saying "you = hitler" is not an explanation, as much as you might want it to be.
ppl can just go read in the other thread about exactly how sadist and facist you truly are under the surface, thanks for providing the information, and thx for saying you wanted me killed (which is a bannable offence).
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:48:00 -
[40]
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: 7shining7one7
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
Awesome, a single picture. Too bad it isn't one of the more "convincing" ones. In fact, I'm starting to notice a pattern there... a few of them are linked directly from a NASA site, but all of them are terrible evidence, while all of the ones with something that couldn't easily be explained as a camera glitch (for example, the triangle UFO pictures at the top of the page) are hosted on their own website.
Actualy that is just a mass ejection from the sun that just happens to be that shape. Nothing stange about it at all.
Its called coronal mass ejection shining and it might just be. or it could just be an asteroid.
|
|
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:49:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Would you like to post your physics equations and force diagrams proving this? Of course you won't.
disprove it.. if you say it's nonsense then the ball is in your court..
you'll be denying how controlled demolitions look and what demolition experts know quite well.. but that's hardly a hindrance for you..
now we know your motives for protesting so much on this forum, you are a complete and utter facist, and you're proud of it too.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:51:00 -
[42]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
ppl can just go read in the other thread about exactly how sadist and facist you truly are under the surface
Simply repeating a lie does not make it true, ****ing idiot. At any time, feel free to explain just how exactly my proposals are in any way related to a fascist political system, especially given the small problem that I explicitly did not specify a political system to enforce.
Or in your delusional world, has "fascist" just been re-defined to mean "any political system I do not like"? Just like "sadist" has been re-defined to mean something that apparently has no connection to its real definition of "deriving pleasure from the suffering of others"?
Quote:
thanks for providing the information, and thx for saying you wanted me killed (which is a bannable offence).
Please, I know it's hard, but try to use some common sense. Anyone who is not a paranoid idiot can figure out that "kill person X" in a threat about what you would do if you were king of the world is probably not a real-life death threat...
-----------
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:51:00 -
[43]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Would you like to post your physics equations and force diagrams proving this? Of course you won't.
disprove it.. if you say it's nonsense then the ball is in your court..
you'll be denying how controlled demolitions look and what demolition experts know quite well.. but that's hardly a hindrance for you..
now we know your motives for protesting so much on this forum, you are a complete and utter facist, and you're proud of it too.
Since when has Science and Engineering been fascist??
Yeah go figure shining we have this small thing in science called physic`s.
Might really wan`t to check it out sometime
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:52:00 -
[44]
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: 7shining7one7
1. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/raw/casJPGFullS29/W00027526.jpg <- ?
look before your leap.
Awesome, a single picture. Too bad it isn't one of the more "convincing" ones. In fact, I'm starting to notice a pattern there... a few of them are linked directly from a NASA site, but all of them are terrible evidence, while all of the ones with something that couldn't easily be explained as a camera glitch (for example, the triangle UFO pictures at the top of the page) are hosted on their own website.
Actualy that is just a mass ejection from the sun that just happens to be that shape. Nothing stange about it at all.
Its called coronal mass ejection shining and it might just be. or it could just be an asteroid.
Nah its the sun. I saw several just like it in the last eclipse, even saw one that looked a bit like micky mouse Alot of the other pictures can be seen as asteroids. One looks just like the Shoemaker-Levy 9 comet.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:54:00 -
[45]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
disprove it.. if you say it's nonsense then the ball is in your court..
Sorry moron, but that's not how the burden of proof works. You don't just post your delusions and assume you are right unless proven otherwise, you have to actually support your claims with evidence. Feel free to do so at any time, but I don't think you understand enough of the physics involved to do it.
Quote:
you'll be denying how controlled demolitions look and what demolition experts know quite well.. but that's hardly a hindrance for you..
No, you are the one who does not understand how controlled demolitions work, since you apparently think that the WTC7 building was somehow magically rigged for demolition without any of the blindingly obvious changes to the interior that are required for controlled demolition. Such as, you know, stripping out the entire interior down to the bare structure, running cables everywhere, etc.
But I guess in magical fantasy world, people are too blinded by their trust in the government to notice that the walls of their office have been missing for the past month?
Quote:
now we know your motives for protesting so much on this forum, you are a complete and utter facist, and you're proud of it too.
Repeating a lie does not make it true.
-----------
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:55:00 -
[46]
it would sound really logical...
but it's not a picture of the sun it's a picture of saturn..
pray tell when saturn has had coronal ejections..
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:57:00 -
[47]
Edited by: baltec1 on 16/02/2009 00:58:46
Originally by: 7shining7one7
it would sound really logical...
but it's not a picture of the sun it's a picture of saturn..
pray tell when saturn has had coronal ejections..
The first picture in of an eclipse. Not saturn. I can see the corona and particals streaming away from the body.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:57:00 -
[48]
Edited by: David Kang on 16/02/2009 00:58:08
Originally by: baltec1
Nah its the sun. I saw several just like it in the last eclipse, even saw one that looked a bit like micky mouse Alot of the other pictures can be seen as asteroids. One looks just like the Shoemaker-Levy 9 comet.
You good sir.. have hit the nail on the head.
+1 pint to baltec1
Also shining
I found your mothership!
Do I get a new tinfoil hat now or????? how do conspiracy theorist reward each other???
|
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:01:00 -
[49]
This thread is giving me coronal ejections...
---
Originally by: 7shining7one7
no.. you're f'ing insane.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:04:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
This thread is giving me coronal ejections...
You must be new to a shining thread
|
|
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:08:00 -
[51]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
it's funny how no other buildings were affected by that awesome kinetic energy.. not to mention that the towers were built to withstand airplane impacts, they had to be due to their height, yet a plane flies into it, and a little while later the foundation of it is molten lava.. go figure..
Aircraft that they used for structural tests were a lot smaller back when they did it. The largest aircraft of the time they tested the design with was about 2/3 the size of the one that hit it. Also, the heat absorbant foam on the iron work was skimped to cut costs so it didn't do the job it was supposed to do.
--
There's a simple difference between kinky and perverted. Kinky is using a feather to get her in the mood. Perverted is using the whole chicken.
All this has happened before and will happen again |
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:08:00 -
[52]
Edited by: baltec1 on 16/02/2009 01:12:31
I do like This one.
That "Alien Cigar Shaped spaceship is actualy two small shepherd moons.
Object near the sun? Well any idiot can see that it is either an asteroid or comet burning up in its final moments before getting dragged into the sun.
|
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:12:00 -
[53]
Overwhelming proof that aliens exist!!!1!11
---
Originally by: 7shining7one7
no.. you're f'ing insane.
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:15:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
This thread is giving me coronal ejections...
You mean cranial ejections.
Brain matter fleeing from the savage onslaught of unadulterated delusional idiocy.
Happens to the best.
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:16:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
it's funny how no other buildings were affected by that awesome kinetic energy.. not to mention that the towers were built to withstand airplane impacts, they had to be due to their height, yet a plane flies into it, and a little while later the foundation of it is molten lava.. go figure..
Aircraft that they used for structural tests were a lot smaller back when they did it. The largest aircraft of the time they tested the design with was about 2/3 the size of the one that hit it. Also, the heat absorbant foam on the iron work was skimped to cut costs so it didn't do the job it was supposed to do.
Besides that, it's just ****ing stupid to claim that the fact that the WTC buildings were designed to survive a crash means they could not have collapsed as a result of a crash. Designs don't always work, the Titanic was designed to be unsinkable, and we know how that worked.
Or, in delusional fantasy world, was the Titanic destroyed by a secret alien/banker plot to start a one-world government?
-----------
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:19:00 -
[56]
Edited by: P''uck on 16/02/2009 01:22:24
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
without any of the blindingly obvious changes to the interior that are required for controlled demolition. Such as, you know, stripping out the entire interior down to the bare structure, running cables everywhere, etc.
I just strolled in, slightly baked, so I dont really wanna check the whole thread to see what's going on, but for a controlled demolition you do NOT need to strip the interiors; most walls don't add anything to the stability of a building, and the ones that do will NOT get removed prior to the demolition. edit: even furniture could stay, in theory, unless we're talking about huge mahagony desks, which could be left in place, if you just take some more oomph in the right places.
A "normal" controlled demolition is just pulled of in a completely stripped building because of financial and security issues, but it's not that hard to do it differently.
Dont know if that matters anything. Maybe I'll check tomorrow morning
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:21:00 -
[57]
Originally by: P'uck
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
without any of the blindingly obvious changes to the interior that are required for controlled demolition. Such as, you know, stripping out the entire interior down to the bare structure, running cables everywhere, etc.
I just strolled in, slightly baked, so I dont really wanna check the whole thread to see what's going on, but for a controlled demolition you do NOT need to strip the interiors; most walls don't add anything to the stability of a building, and the ones that do will NOT get removed prior to the demolition.
Dont know if that matters anything. Maybe I'll check tomorrow morning
Actually you do, just look at the pictures of a real controlled demolition. The building looks nothing like it would in normal use. The reason is not that the walls would prevent the building from collapsing, it's to get clear access to the structural elements to place the charges.
-----------
|
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:23:00 -
[58]
I did a quick search on google for Louis Theroux's Wierd Weekends, and I actually found his UFO program listed on an honest-to-goodness "The Truth Is Out There" website (can't link the video itself, it's copyrighted material). Some people are actually gullible enough to realise that Louis isn't ripping the **** out of his subjects, and the UFO episode (which you'll find on Disclose TV is a classic example of this. An excerpt from the website's blurb:
"Disclose.tv is a fast growing multimedia and news hub dedicated to unusual and unexplained phenomena as well as alternative topics that may be ignored, denied or inandequatly covered within the mainstream media - the first and already largest of its kind. "
Right up shiney's alley methinks
---
Originally by: 7shining7one7
no.. you're f'ing insane.
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:25:00 -
[59]
Edited by: P''uck on 16/02/2009 01:26:04
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
it's to get clear access to the structural elements to place the charges.
That's only part of the issue. Placing the charges where you want them can be done without stripping the complete building. It aint that hard to get to where you want the charges to be.
In fact it would be easier to just blow the whole damn thing up and then cart off the trash.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:31:00 -
[60]
Originally by: P'uck
That's only part of the issue. Placing the charges where you want them can be done without stripping the complete building. It aint that hard to get to where you want the charges to be.
Like I said, don't just trust me, look up some pictures of real controlled demolitions.
And even if the didn't absolutely have to remove the walls and stuff, they'd still have to place charges in plain sight everywhere. There's just no way you could hide the vast amount of setup work it requires to perform a controlled demolition. You'd have hundreds, if not thousands, of witnesses telling everyone who will listen about how the official story is a lie, and probably photo evidence as well.
-----------
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |