| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
7shining7one7
   |
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:10:00 -
[1]
Enter the portal through the two pillars...
ET's don't exist
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
We can coexist in peace, when we become wise enough to choose truth rather than lies.
|
Cierejai
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:13:00 -
[2]
They made a movie about a building that collapsed due to fire because of shoddy building practices. Not that I am saying that everyone in the US is unethical and would start penny-pinching. No one does that. Ever.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:20:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: 7shining7one7
Enter the portal through the two pillars...
ET's don't exist
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
We can coexist in peace, when we become wise enough to choose truth rather than lies.
ET's don't exist
Hate to say it but dead planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe.
Why travel all the way to sol just to see something that any alien race would probably find in there own solar system?
Also what you are probably seeing in space junk. The reason it looks intelligently made is because it is. its made by us..
We have plenty of junk floating around in space 
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:32:00 -
[4]
fyi we don't have nothing of that size in space.. it's many times bigger than the space station and you're telling me it's space junk that got torn off something..
dissapearing and reappering gigantic "space junk".. who would've thunk it..
it's the same with everything...
people tend to NOT accept the logical conclusion but instead only accept the conclusions that fit with their current view of reality.. and then they call that logical and rational.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:35:00 -
[5]
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:35:46
Originally by: 7shining7one7
fyi we don't have nothing of that size in space.. it's many times bigger than the space station and you're telling me it's space junk that got torn off something..
dissapearing and reappering gigantic "space junk".. who would've thunk it..
it's the same with everything...
people tend to NOT accept the logical conclusion but instead only accept the conclusions that fit with their current view of reality.. and then they call that logical and rational.
see when you take a picture of something here on earth you have visual land marks to help judge depth and distance.
In space it does not work the same. there for something will appear large then it is against the background.
|
Seroquel
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:37:00 -
[6]
So the logical conclusion is it must be ADVANCED ALIENS!!!!!!1
Originally by: 7shining7one7
people tend to NOT accept the logical conclusion but instead only accept the conclusions that fit with their current view of reality.. and then they call that logical and rational.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
T3 Alt
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:38:00 -
[7]
Originally by: David Kang
Hate to say it but dead planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe.
Why travel all the way to sol just to see something that any alien race would probably find in there own solar system?
Also what you are probably seeing in space junk. The reason it looks intelligently made is because it is. its made by us..
We have plenty of junk floating around in space
have no opinion on this either way but this is the dumbest thing I've read in ages
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction
The Firm.
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:40:00 -
[8]
If They were bothered, They'd say hi. If They're not, it makes no difference whether They exist or not.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:41:00 -
[9]
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:47:46
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:46:49
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:43:21
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
Hate to say it but dead planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe.
Why travel all the way to sol just to see something that any alien race would probably find in there own solar system?
Also what you are probably seeing in space junk. The reason it looks intelligently made is because it is. its made by us..
We have plenty of junk floating around in space
have no opinion on this either way but this is the dumbest thing I've read in ages
How so??? NASA is always losing tools.. satellites and spacecraft parts. Source link
I am guessing your pro alien?
The sun, you would fit in with these people nicely.. why not move to England? its full of crazy`s like you.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:43:00 -
[10]
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:43:56
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
If They were bothered, They'd say hi. If They're not, it makes no difference whether They exist or not.
Cmdr Sy you should know better then anybody else!
There shear distant to travel to meet another intellectuality advanced race is neigh on inconceivable.
To travel all that way just to look at a dead planet ... its madness...
|
T3 Alt
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:47:00 -
[11]
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
Hate to say it but dead planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe.
Why travel all the way to sol just to see something that any alien race would probably find in there own solar system?
Also what you are probably seeing in space junk. The reason it looks intelligently made is because it is. its made by us..
We have plenty of junk floating around in space
have no opinion on this either way but this is the dumbest thing I've read in ages
How so??? NASA is always losing tools.. satellites and spacecraft parts.
I am guessing your pro alien?
Right, so how do you know 'dead planets' like Saturn are common in the universe? How do you know they would find something like this in their own solar system (if they exist)?
And you seriously think those massive things around Saturn (whatever they are) are space junk from earth? LOL
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:51:00 -
[12]
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:52:14
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
Hate to say it but dead planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe.
Why travel all the way to sol just to see something that any alien race would probably find in there own solar system?
Also what you are probably seeing in space junk. The reason it looks intelligently made is because it is. its made by us..
We have plenty of junk floating around in space
have no opinion on this either way but this is the dumbest thing I've read in ages
How so??? NASA is always losing tools.. satellites and spacecraft parts.
I am guessing your pro alien?
Right, so how do you know 'dead planets' like Saturn are common in the universe? How do you know they would find something like this in their own solar system (if they exist)?
And you seriously think those massive things around Saturn (whatever they are) are space junk from earth? LOL
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:52:00 -
[13]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
--
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 |
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.15 23:56:00 -
[14]
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
well you can take your astronomy and shove it up your arse if they've been lying to you
and you think nasa didn't notice a gigantic object parked in space making the space station look like a midget? nobody's that stupid unless it's on purpose.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:00:00 -
[15]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
well you can take your astronomy and shove it up your arse if they've been lying to you
and you think nasa didn't notice a gigantic object parked in space making the space station look like a midget? nobody's that stupid unless it's on purpose.
If NASA had found something that wasn't terrestrial and was intelligently made it would be all over the media.
Shining, really bud the whole world isn't out to get you.
|
T3 Alt
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
That article only mentions Jupiter, not Saturn.
You say 'planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe' as if it's certain fact... we've only recently began finding planets outside out solar system, *nothing* is certain.
|
clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
Lotto Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:03:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
Thing is, Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane. There are people much more educated than I, with degrees in structural engineering etc, that look at building 7 and go.. what the hell happened there?
--------------------------------------------------
The Angels Have the Phone Box |
Cedric Diggory
Perfunctory Oleaginous Laocoon Mugwumps
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:05:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Cedric Diggory on 16/02/2009 00:06:57
In the strictest sense, building seven shouldn't have fallen down when it did. It did though.
Go figure, we got our math wrong!
Oh, and infrared imagery is horribly inaccurate. Statistically there's a good chance of there being life outside our solar system but really, does it fecking matter? We'll find out when we find out. Disappointing post here shiney, no real content.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:05:00 -
[19]
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
That article only mentions Jupiter, not Saturn.
You say 'planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe' as if it's certain fact... we've only recently began finding planets outside out solar system, *nothing* is certain.
Jupiter is a gas giant just like Saturn
You did do basic science in school.. right?
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:08:00 -
[20]
Originally by: David Kang
If NASA had found something that wasn't terrestrial and was intelligently made it would be all over the media.
no it really wouldn't because you see, unbenknownst to you nasa is NOT a public media free for all decent organization, it is tied to its national security military roots due to what nasa was before it became nasa...
so while most that work for nasa think it's decent and while they can tell you all sorts of stuff about the universe..
if they were to encounter something that falls under national security they will reveal it as easily as the US military would tell the world what kind of new weapons or "airplanes" they are developing..
also you're denying what's right in front of your eyes simply based on the precept that nasa would never lie to you..
that's all kinds of sad.
what's more logical, that ppl sometimes lie for their own reasons, or that ET's don't exist anywhere in the universe..
|
T3 Alt
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:08:00 -
[21]
Edited by: T3 Alt on 16/02/2009 00:08:52
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
That article only mentions Jupiter, not Saturn.
You say 'planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe' as if it's certain fact... we've only recently began finding planets outside out solar system, *nothing* is certain.
Jupiter is a gas giant just like Saturn
You did do basic science in school.. right?
Ahhhh yes, all gas giants are exactly the same as jupiter, right
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:09:00 -
[22]
Originally by: clone 1
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
Thing is, Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane. There are people much more educated than I, with degrees in structural engineering etc, that look at building 7 and go.. what the hell happened there?
Its called kinetic energy , no doubt building 7 was structurally weak and when the planes flew into the trade centres the kinetic energy which was absorbed and travel through the building to the support underground causing earthquake like damage to weaken building around the area. also factor in the additional blast wave there was plenty of physics involved and reason for that building to collapse.
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:11:00 -
[23]
Originally by: T3 Alt
Edited by: T3 Alt on 16/02/2009 00:08:52
Originally by: David Kang
Originally by: T3 Alt
Originally by: David Kang
You see we have this thing called Astronomy.
And Astronomy has shown us that Rocky planets and gas giants should be common in the universe.
In fact do not reply yet. I will get the NASA page up for you
That article only mentions Jupiter, not Saturn.
You say 'planets like Saturn etc are common in the universe' as if it's certain fact... we've only recently began finding planets outside out solar system, *nothing* is certain.
Jupiter is a gas giant just like Saturn
You did do basic science in school.. right?
Ahhhh yes, all gas giants are exactly the same as jupiter, right
Jupiter and Saturn are just names given to celestial objects. they are actually they same just a different collection of gasses. they both formed under the same circumstances.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:13:00 -
[24]
Re: no aliens: come back when you have the following:
1) A plausible explanation for the behavior of these aliens (that is, coming here for no apparent reason, failing miserably at hiding, but not announcing their presence to everyone, etc).
2) Evidence that would require more than five minutes with photoshop to fake.
Re: WTC7:
Please stop lying. WTC7 was not hit by a plane, but it WAS hit by falling debris, as photographs clearly show.
-----------
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:16:00 -
[25]
Originally by: clone 1
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
Thing is, Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane. There are people much more educated than I, with degrees in structural engineering etc, that look at building 7 and go.. what the hell happened there?
Its called kinetic energy , no doubt building 7 was structurally weak and when the planes flew into the trade centres the kinetic energy which was absorbed then traveled through the building to the support structures underground, causing earthquake like damage to weaken buildings around the area. also factor in the additional blast wave there was plenty of physics involved and reason for that building to collapse.
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..
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:17:00 -
[26]
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..
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:19:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
2) Evidence that would require more than five minutes with photoshop to fake.
you calling official nasa images fake?
also thx for demonstrating in that other thread how much of a horror of a human being you are..
oh yeah stating that you wanted to kill me was a nice finishing touch.
but oh wait.. you are the defender of sanity (ahaha..) and rational logical truth.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:26:00 -
[28]
Thats not an alien ship its a mass ejection from the sun.
The rest of the pictures are comets, moons, small bits of dust on the camera, ice that broke away from the craft and space junk.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:27:00 -
[29]
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.
-----------
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 00:29:00 -
[30]
Edited by: David Kang on 16/02/2009 00:34:40
Edited by: David Kang on 16/02/2009 00:32:15
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Originally by: clone 1
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
Thing is, Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane. There are people much more educated than I, with degrees in structural engineering etc, that look at building 7 and go.. what the hell happened there?
Its called kinetic energy , no doubt building 7 was structurally weak and when the planes flew into the trade centres the kinetic energy which was absorbed then traveled through the building to the support structures underground, causing earthquake like damage to weaken buildings around the area. also factor in the additional blast wave there was plenty of physics involved and reason for that building to collapse.
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..
Ok bud were now moving onto Thermal dynamics, Material science, and applied mechanics.
Ok the material in question
Steel melts or liquidises at 1370 degrees C (2500¦F).
The fire from within the trade centre been in an enclosed fuel rich environment with highly flammable materials was around 1,000¦C.
This would of caused the steel to soften, reap contort and to finally give way.
It was designed to withstand a plane hitting it, but the modern materials inside the offices created a new problem they gave the fire plenty of fuel to burn for much much longer.
If the fire had been quick burning and used all its consumable fuel quickly it would of been a different story they would still be standing. But due to prolonged fires and shear resources that fire had it was only inevitable that they gave way.
Also shining after the collapse all surrounding buildings around the trade centre had to be structurally checked.
|
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.
-----------
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:33:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
they'd still have to place charges in plain sight everywhere.
false
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
There's just no way you could hide the vast amount of setup work it requires to perform a controlled demolition.
while this is probably true. to be honest, I never thought about it... but I think if you really really push it, its probably doable, but very unlikely.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:38:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 16/02/2009 01:38:07
Originally by: P'uck
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
they'd still have to place charges in plain sight everywhere.
false
True. Please, just look up how a real controlled demolition is done. To get the building to collapse precisely, you have to place the charges exactly on all of the key the structural elements, all the way from basement to rooftop. Since all of those elements are not carefully hidden away in special rooms where nobody ever goes, common sense tells us that at least some of the charges would be visible.
The only way to hide them would be to tear out the interior, place the charges, then put it all back. I think you probably agree that this would also be incredibly obvious to anyone working there.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
while this is probably true. to be honest, I never thought about it... but I think if you really really push it, its probably doable, but very unlikely.
It is true. A real controlled demolition requires weeks/months of planning and setup time. While it is very easy to blow something up with no real preparation (for example, put a big enough truck bomb in the basement), you won't get a precise collapse like the delusional moron is talking about.
-----------
|
WhiteSavage
Gallente
Altruism.
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:38:00 -
[63]
Edited by: WhiteSavage on 16/02/2009 01:38:32
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 15/02/2009 23:59:32
people tend to NOT accept the logical conclusion but instead only accept the conclusions that fit with their current view of reality.. and then they call that logical and rational.
...accepting the conclusions that fit with our view of reality... and calling it logical... and rational...
Def. Locical: According to or agreeing with the principles of logic
Suggesting that a fuzzy oval on a fuzzy picture taken of something hundreds of thousands of miles away with an incredibly weak black-and white camera (Yes any colors are added logblossums) that depends on light reflections and as such has a huge ratio for error... is OBVIOUSLY proof of an amazingly advanced alien spaceship... is in fact, from the REALITY that we understand today... quite illogical.
Every camera we have is incredibly weak, relative to the distance it is set to function with.
It would seem you believed in ET well before you went out to discover any such proof of his existence?
However if you have some amazing scientific breakthrough that proves all fuzzy shapes are most definately spaceships... then by all means explain!
AMAZING |
WhiteSavage
Gallente
Altruism.
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:42:00 -
[64]
Edited by: WhiteSavage on 16/02/2009 01:43:43
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
It is true. A real controlled demolition requires weeks/months of planning and setup time. While it is very easy to blow something up with no real preparation (for example, put a big enough truck bomb in the basement), you won't get a precise collapse like the delusional moron is talking about.
Since this guy's entire arguement (in vid) revolves around the "obvious" controlled precision collapse, Merin's statement pretty much sums it up.
But most conspirarists care more about the conspiracy rather then the facts.
AMAZING |
P'uck
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:51:00 -
[65]
Edited by: P''uck on 16/02/2009 01:55:43
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Please, just look up how a real controlled demolition is done.
Yes, yes, but a lot of the work required just doesnt come from because "it HAS to be done that way from a demolitions point of view." For instance, charges on the supports are placed where they are in a real demolition because that's just easiest and quickest way to do it once the building is empty.
For instance there WILL be double ceilings, lights, ventilation shafts, housings for the wiring or however you call it and non-important walls close to the main supports. It's impractical to blow up a "complete" building and its very close to impossible to hide (outside of a book or movie probably just impossible but I dont want to rain on any conspiracy theories) the preparations, but if we're just talking physics, it's doable.
edit: I guess this is about 9/11 so we're obviously not talking about "real" demolition work, this is clearly about a 007/mission impossible/MiB style job. no doubt.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:59:00 -
[66]
Originally by: P'uck
Yes, yes, but a lot of the work required just doesnt come from because "it HAS to be done that way from a demolitions point of view." For instance, charges on the supports are placed where they are in a real demolition because that's just easiest and quickest way to do it once the building is empty.
No, they're placed where they are because placing them anywhere else won't lead to a nice neat controlled demolition. To bring down a building neatly, you have to destroy very precise structural elements with very precise timing, or you get a huge mess.
Like I said, blowing up a building? Easy and simple. Put a big bomb in the basement and get to a safe distance (or don't, if you want to martyr yourself). Blowing up a building so that it collapses neatly onto itself without any flying debris? Long and complicated process that is impossible to hide.
-----------
|
Slade Trillgon
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 01:59:00 -
[67]
Discovery channel has a new series on building demolition. This is the only good link that I can find on demolition on a cursory search. Considering the amount of charge needed and the fact that support beams in steel buildings are much more difficult to bring down then concrete, I would ponder that whole floors would need to be acquired to get the coverage for proper support destruction. All the wires and explosive would be hard to hide in my mind on a floor full of employees, but acquiring whole floors is not inconceivable.
Slade
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Please go sit in the corner, and dont forget to don the shame-on-you-hat!
≡v≡ |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 02:01:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Slade Trillgon
Discovery channel has a new series on building demolition. This is the only good link that I can find on demolition on a cursory search. Considering the amount of charge needed and the fact that support beams in steel buildings are much more difficult to bring down then concrete, I would ponder that whole floors would need to be acquired to get the coverage for proper support destruction. All the wires and explosive would be hard to hide in my mind on a floor full of employees, but acquiring whole floors is not inconceivable.
See, here's the problem: the delusional moron is claiming free-fall collapse. To do that, you can't just set your charges on one floor (if you do, you'll have a slower collapse and the moron's claim is thrown out right away), you'd have to set them on every floor, blowing the supports at precisely the right time.
-----------
|
Vak'ran
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 02:09:00 -
[69]
/me strolls in, dons tinfoil and gets popcorn...
-----
Vak'Ran is your local official non-dedicated part-time advocate of reading comprehension and proliferation of intelligence on the EVE Online Forums. |
rValdez5987
Amarr
32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 05:35:00 -
[70]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Enter the portal through the two pillars...
ET's don't exist
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
We can coexist in peace, when we become wise enough to choose truth rather than lies.
Alright here ill settle this once and for all.
Other life IS out there. It may or may not be intelligent, but mathematical probability says that there should be at least one other reasonably intelligent life form out there. The universe is nearly infinitely huge.
9/11 may or may not of been a false flag operation. You as a citizen won't find out the truth for at least 50 years, IF the truth is ever released, or everything that happened on that day was legit.
Anyone who disagrees with the above points, is biased. You as a human being and a citizen of whatever country your a citizen of, do not possess the knowledge or know-how to refute either point one way or the other completely. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of life, or that 9/11 was or was not a false flag operation, anymore then you can prove or disprove the existence of GOD.
/end thread.
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 06:04:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: Slade Trillgon
Discovery channel has a new series on building demolition. This is the only good link that I can find on demolition on a cursory search. Considering the amount of charge needed and the fact that support beams in steel buildings are much more difficult to bring down then concrete, I would ponder that whole floors would need to be acquired to get the coverage for proper support destruction. All the wires and explosive would be hard to hide in my mind on a floor full of employees, but acquiring whole floors is not inconceivable.
See, here's the problem: the delusional moron is claiming free-fall collapse. To do that, you can't just set your charges on one floor (if you do, you'll have a slower collapse and the moron's claim is thrown out right away), you'd have to set them on every floor, blowing the supports at precisely the right time.
In addition to this, anyone insane enough to demolish an entire building for the sake of propaganda isn't going to be bothered how it collapses and how many get killed in the process. If it was an attempt to discredit extemeist group, (and lord knows why since they do a good enough job of discrediting themselves), the more people who get killed, the better since it would anger more people.
After speaking to an architect friend of mine, he said that there is more chance it was designed so that, in the event of catastrauphic structural damage that would cause collapse, it would fold in on istelf to limit collateral damage. In short; A designed weak point. He did actually try to explain with a daigram for me but it still went over my head since I'm no architect myself but I could understand the physics of it.
--
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 13:14:00 -
[72]
Originally by: rValdez5987
Other life IS out there. It may or may not be intelligent, but mathematical probability says that there should be at least one other reasonably intelligent life form out there. The universe is nearly infinitely huge.
There are two places in our own solar system that have a good chance of having life. The latest studies of mars are showing localised pockets of methane gas. Not 100% proof of life but there is a good chance. Then there is Europa, which looks like it has a liquid ocean under the ice and holds the best chance of having life outside of earth, possibly even complex life around black smokers.
|
jason hill
Caldari
Clan Shadow Wolf
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 14:01:00 -
[73]
anyone got any popcorn left ?
destroy everything you touch |
baltec1
Antares Shipyards
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 14:03:00 -
[74]
Originally by: jason hill
anyone got any popcorn left ?
help yourself
|
jason hill
Caldari
Clan Shadow Wolf
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 17:22:00 -
[75]
cheers mate
destroy everything you touch |
ReaperOfSly
Gallente
Zetsubou Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 17:56:00 -
[76]
Originally by: David Kang
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:43:56
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
If They were bothered, They'd say hi. If They're not, it makes no difference whether They exist or not.
Cmdr Sy you should know better then anybody else!
There shear distant to travel to meet another intellectuality advanced race is neigh on inconceivable.
To travel all that way just to look at a dead planet ... its madness...
Madness? THIS IS SATUUUUUUUURRRRN!!!
Sorry. I know it's late, but I couldn't resist that one. 
____________________
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
Terradyne Networks
Terradyne Networks Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 17:58:00 -
[77]
Faster than the speed of gravity!
|
David Kang
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 18:42:00 -
[78]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
Originally by: David Kang
Edited by: David Kang on 15/02/2009 23:43:56
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
If They were bothered, They'd say hi. If They're not, it makes no difference whether They exist or not.
Cmdr Sy you should know better then anybody else!
There shear distant to travel to meet another intellectuality advanced race is neigh on inconceivable.
To travel all that way just to look at a dead planet ... its madness...
Madness? THIS IS SATUUUUUUUURRRRN!!!
Sorry. I know it's late, but I couldn't resist that one.
i lol`d
well played.....
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 19:50:00 -
[79]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
Madness? THIS IS SATUUUUUUUURRRRN!!!
Sorry. I know it's late, but I couldn't resist that one.
...and another alien life got kicked into a gravity well. Earth and water, you'll find enough of both down there.
--------
Ideas for: Mining
|
OutOfTheBox Cyborg
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 20:43:00 -
[80]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 15/02/2009 23:59:32
fyi we don't have nothing of that size in space.. it's many times bigger than the space station and you're telling me it's space junk that got torn off something..
dissapearing and reappering gigantic "space junk".. who would've thunk it..
it's the same with everything...
people tend to NOT accept the logical conclusion but instead only accept the conclusions that fit with their current view of reality.. and then they call that logical and rational.
judging by the size and shape of the object it would appear to be an alien spacecraft of unknown origin which is parked near the ring disguising itself, we can conclude due to its size that it's either a very task specific ship, a storage ship, or a carrier ship of some kind which can deploy additional smaller ships.. or all of the above.
it is possibly observing something because it is stationary and a while later is no where in sight, which means that aliens in fact do exist and that they are most likely observing us and that they have either cloaking technology and/or some sort of ultra fast propulsion for space travel which means that they are much more advanced than we currently are.
Of course it is totally valid to deduce advanced aliens, cloaking tech, spying on us, from this photo Who exactly is it here who is reaching conclusions that fit with their current view of reality..???
Secondly, if aliens did want to hide from us and spy, why the hell would they choose to park up by one of the handful of heavily watched things in the solar system. Space is awesomely vast. They could park up in the middle of nowhere, or even right up relatively close to Earth, and the chance of anyone seeing them on a telescope would be so small as to be irrelevant. Instead of that, they choose to 'hide' right next to the rings of Saturn??? LOL.
|
Kyguard
Knockaround Guys Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:02:00 -
[81]
The photograph taken by Armstrong of a cigar-shaped object near a crater looks like a photoshop and hardly real 
-
|
Bish Ounen
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 00:31:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Dantes Revenge
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Building 7 collapsed due to fire
This is really sick how people use these comparisons to fuel conspiracy theories. Comparing buildings that were on fire to the twin towers that were hit by large aircraft and pretending that the fire did all the damage. Now punch a large hole 1/4 of the way down the Mandarin hotel tower and try that again, let's see how fast it collapses then.
More than that, the construction techniques used in the Mandarin towers were very different than those used in the WTC towers. So they really aren't comparable at all.
Popular Mechanics has already completely and utterly debunked the various 9/11 myths. But dumb-ass morons like 7shining7one7 won't accept reality and prefer to live in their f-ed up little bubble world so that their miserable little lives can have relevance.
7shining7one7: You're just another Oswald waiting to happen.
Fix the Wardec System! |
zibelthurdos
Hoshi's Mining and Logistics
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 05:19:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Kyguard
The photograph taken by Armstrong of a cigar-shaped object near a crater looks like a photoshop and hardly real
no it's absolutely a real image.
it just happens to be a photograph of lunar craters with an out of focus floodlight boom in the foreground
-----------------------------------------------
Don't think of it as dying, Think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush |
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:08:00 -
[84]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 17/02/2009 08:18:46
Originally by: Bish Ounen
7shining7one7: You're just another Oswald waiting to happen.
that's impossible i'd never hurt anyone.
also, it is rich coming from your hateful mouth, you are likely the person who would kill someone over small or irrational things because your hate indeed makes you delusional. also everyone knows oswald was a patsy unless you believe in magic bullets, an ironic example to use.
why you have so much hate towards people wishing others well is something you will have to figure out, but i can assure you it has nothing to do with me and everything to do with what you harbor inside, regardless how much you proclaim it to be otherwise.
you speak of attempting to feel significant, well what is it you do but attempt to elevate yourself above me and others by talking your hate and contempt and taking pleasure in your spiteful remarks... who is the friend and who is the angry fool?
you could all do well thinking about that, unless you are too busy pretending.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:15:00 -
[85]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
more incoherent babbling
That's nice. How about you actually answer some of the many posts (from both myself and multiple other people) where your claims have been shown to be pure bull****?
Of course you won't, because you can't handle a factual debate, you just spam your delusional ramblings and run off to smoke some more pot when anyone starts to ask difficult questions.
-----------
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:31:00 -
[86]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 17/02/2009 08:33:29
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
i robot/implant
i understand.
|
7shining7one7
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:39:00 -
[87]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 17/02/2009 08:43:46
i humbly wish you all peace love and understanding. not hatred, conflict or anger as some seek to create.
may you find your own way.
|
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp
KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 08:46:00 -
[88]
It's a CONSPIRACY!!!!!1111!!!!
nuff said
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |