July 2008 Stundies [Archive]

gumboot

2nd July 2008, 06:43 PM

Heiwa on his miraculous house:

Yes, the forces are equal. Cannot be otherwise. Luckily the roof of my house, built 1590, is very strong and anything dropping on it bounces off since then. Except a Swedish cannon ball 1640 (the town + my house was under attack by the Swedes) but it just punched a hole in the roof and broke an internal wooden spandrel. And nobody has bothered to fix that broken piece since. I can send you some photos, if you like. The hole in the roof was of course fixed. To stop the rain. In Saxony we like tight roofs. Glück auf!

What seals the deal here is that he was responding to this post:

Dunno what your problem is here, pom.
Action = reaction, right?
So, when a 10 million tonne asteroid travelling at 10,000kph strikes your house, clearly the forces are equal. Newton said so.
So the asteroid comes to a halt on your roof. It's pretty damn clear ... why must you fuss so about basic Newtonian physics??

That's right, a 10 million tonne asteroid travelling at 10,000km/h would bounce off his house (or possibly punch a hole in the roof and break an internal wooden spandrel....).

Cuddles

3rd July 2008, 10:10 AM

Wow, Heiwa's getting in early this month.

I nominate Heiwa for the following post:

WTC1:s structure was very much like a cheese. Something slammed into it and made a hole in the cheese, fire erupted and the cheese started to melt around the hole. Above the hole was a big, upper block of 33 000 tons of cheese. Below the hole was a much bigger block of cheese! 250 000 tons.
Now we are told the upper block started to move down, releasing potential energy, as the cheese below was melting around the hole. The upper cheese block, 33 000 tons, hits the lower cheese block, 250 000 tons, and compresses it. The hole disappears and molten cheese is squeezed out. What happens then?

Cheese structure has built in strength that can absorb potential energy. The strength can be likened to the amount of strain energy the hard cheese can absorb before being crushed. The amount of strain energy is almost constant per ton of cheese. Same in the upper and lower cheese parts.

Simple math shows that 33 000 tons of cheese above cannot compress 250 000 tons of cheese below when both parts absorb the same amount of strain energy at the compression. No global collapse.

Unless you fit some extra stuff in the lower cheese. But then cheese rubble and debris are ejected in all directions and reveals the bluff.

I'm not nominating the cheese, since I'm fairly sure that was around last month. However, apparently Heiwa is so sure that the WTC was made of cheese that he wants to let as many people know as possible, even if it requires nominating himself for literary awards.

Horatius

3rd July 2008, 09:51 PM

I'm not even going to try and make fun of this one:

I agree with the A-Train. The evidence shows that the FBI altered this report report, hence, they can't be trusted. DRG doesn't trust the FBI either, so he is vindicated. Anyone who disgrees with me of the A-Train cannot be trusted. Anyone who does agree can be trusted.

From now on, no information from the FBI shall be considered valid, unless it is confirmed by an independent source.

If you disagree with this post, then that means you disagree with me or the A-Train, so what you say cannot be trusted in advance.

Shrinker

4th July 2008, 05:53 AM

I'm not even going to try and make fun of this one:

I think I'd like to nominate anyone who's still trying to debate Galileo after reading that post of his.

Cl1mh4224rd

4th July 2008, 09:15 AM

I think I'd like to nominate anyone who's still trying to debate Galileo after reading that post of his.

Indeed. He's quite obviously trolling.

Confuseling

4th July 2008, 11:46 AM

Indeed. He's quite obviously trolling.

Somehow... uncanny sensation... couldn't conceivably have met him before? :D

gumboot

5th July 2008, 05:39 AM

Dabljuh explains the materials used in buildings:

Fire can be a problem in that it destroys individual floors and of course the interior when it bends steel, and when it does that, it is more likely to spread and cause even more damage still, which is why special heat-resistent steel is used in the construction of skyscrapers, and this heat-resistent steel is again fire- and heatproofed with foam.

gumboot

5th July 2008, 10:05 AM

MaGZ revives his "missile into WTC7" theory and turns it into the Magic Missile theory.

I have speculate that shrapnel from the missile caused this fire in WTC 1 and likely the fires in WTC 6 and WTC 7. .

(For background, the AIM-120 has a 50lb warhead and the AIM-9 has a 20lb warhead, and as you can imagine WTC6 and WTC1 are a substantial distance from WTC7 where the missile allegedly hit after missing an attempt to shoot down UA175).

No, I'm not making this up.

bonavada

5th July 2008, 10:45 AM

Make of this what you will:-

Orac HERE AT LCF (http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/400449/1/#new) (Post 21 about the BBC and WTC7)

Someone was manipulating that signal to cut it off without it looking like being cut off, which means to the digital technology observer, that it WAS being cut off

BV

Blender Head

5th July 2008, 10:47 PM

Fluorideinwater states why the WTC fires would not be hot enough:

A fire deprived of oxygen makes a significant amount of smoke. This means that conditions for the fires weren't optimal.

And says the Windsor Tower fire was "healthy":

If you want to see a healthy fire, look at video of the Windsor Tower in Madrid. Now that's a fire.

After I show pictures of a lot of smoke at the Windsor:

Did I suggest that the conditions in the Windsor Tower were optimal? No

As of this writing I can support the quoted statements with a screencap.

Pato2747

6th July 2008, 10:11 AM

Probably not a stundie, but kind of a redudancy that's typical from Stundie:

"he [Alex Jones] never talks about UFOs and I believe in them. He likes to avoid the speculative as much as possible."

I will edit when I find the source, silly me closed the link ._.

Minadin

6th July 2008, 11:04 AM

Dabljuh explains the materials used in buildings:

Yeah, that fellow really understands the principles and materials used in building design and construction, and especially in regard to the WTC, as he also demonstrates (and I nominate) here:

Argument from Ignorance. The WTC wasn't a "Tube in Tube" Design. It had a ridiculously sturdy central core with the exterior holding only very little of the weight.

Wildy

7th July 2008, 12:29 AM

Are the stundies only open to forum posts?

Undesired Walrus

7th July 2008, 01:15 AM

No.

'I don't care about his ****ing experience'
Dylan Avery, WTC7 program

Blender Head

7th July 2008, 04:50 AM

ChildlikeExpress:

i don't know if [Jon Gold] thinks CD is a possibility. I think it is, but i think it is very unlikely and, here i think Gold and i agree, it is not the best point to make to people[...]

I did my best Tim "The Tool Man" Taylor impersonation upon reading that.

cyclonic

7th July 2008, 12:58 PM

LAIN1962 defending richard gage and his cardboard boxes.

"Precisely, the load of the building was supported by the 47 central columns and the outer mesh of steel, it is impossible for that to collapse unless you remove the support from below, the floors only needed to support people and machinery for that level and provide an extra support not the principal support, THE 22ND AND 77TH FLOORS WERE SOLID STEEL,YOU CAN'T BREAK ALL THAT UP."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DFVoencqfZw

Mel Odious

8th July 2008, 10:31 PM

Does anybody know what the holdup is with the June Stundie finals?

JamesB

8th July 2008, 11:28 PM

Aldo from CIT, err... CSI, in the comments on SLC, responding to my question as to how evidence could have been planted at the Pentagon:

How do you suppose the perps of Operation Northwoods would have faked the DNA of the college students on holiday or the fighter pilot, James???

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user= screwloosechange &comment=8962114595542986174

Uhh, yeah, DNA matching wasn't exactly state-of-the-art in 1962...

Mobyseven

9th July 2008, 12:21 AM

Golden, every one. :D

tsig

9th July 2008, 01:53 AM

Aldo from CIT, err... CSI, in the comments on SLC, responding to my question as to how evidence could have been planted at the Pentagon:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user= screwloosechange &comment=8962114595542986174

Uhh, yeah, DNA matching wasn't exactly state-of-the-art in 1962...

All truthers seem to live in the ever present now, how things are are always the way the they have always been maybe it's youtube.

Dave Rogers

9th July 2008, 04:50 AM

MaGZ commenting on the BBC Conspiracy Files programme on WTC7 (which he presumably hasn't even seen):

Reading from you post, the BBC obviously had a mindset when they made this.

As opposed to the more traditional truther approach of making a documentary without thinking at all.

Dave

VespaGuy

9th July 2008, 11:01 AM

Admin, Lin Kuei, over at LCF is encouraged to ban a member (Hamba) simply for expressing a different opinion.

Lin Kuei responds: http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/409466/4/

hey gaged we don't just ban people for debating, but in fairness Hamba you can do it to your heart's content in the skeptic's forum.

So they don't just ban folks from debating... they just encourage them to post in the Skeptics forum?

Four minutes later, Lin Kuei edits his post to add some clarification:

Hamba your account is now limited to this section

So, they don't ban people from the forum for debating, they just ban them from all of the sections of the forum (except one) for debating.

Cl1mh4224rd

9th July 2008, 05:20 PM

So, they don't ban people from the forum for debating, they just ban them from all of the sections of the forum (except one) for debating.

LCF's Free Speech Zone...

Grizzly Bear

9th July 2008, 10:14 PM

In response to the Wtc 7 photo of smoke: there is no fire in the windows where the smoke is supposedly being emitted? Here is proof taht the smoke was not produced by building 7 but rather it was produced by wtc 5 and 6 http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/200307building7.htm

Is anything like this stundie worthy?

Mel Odious

9th July 2008, 10:47 PM

Is anything like this stundie worthy?

That's classic Stundie material, but I believe nominees must have been published in the current month to be eligible.

R.Mackey

9th July 2008, 11:53 PM

Dabljuh explains the materials used in buildings:

Let me just point out for sake of education that there are so-called "heat resistant" steel alloys for use in buildings. These alloys (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4224062.html) have a different makeup than normal structural steel; the melting point is a little higher, but more importantly the Young's modulus as a function of temperature doesn't plateau until a higher temperature. Where A36 is down 50% in strength by 600oC, heat resistant steel is only down about 30%.

Nonetheless, use of these steels is pretty rare, and none were used in either WTC 1, 2, or 7. Those were predominantly A36 and A42, though eight other high-strength grades were used in the Towers -- none of them specially heat resistant.

Carry on.

Alareth

10th July 2008, 06:16 AM

That's classic Stundie material, but I believe nominees must have been published in the current month to be eligible.

No, they are eligible as long as they have not been nominated before.

Horatius

10th July 2008, 11:18 AM

Evidence I have presented supporting the Missiles at Ground Zero:

Footage by Fox News taken by local cameraman. (To be discovered and released at a later date)

...

What an .... interesting ... definition of "presented" he has.

rwguinn

10th July 2008, 11:23 AM

Let me just point out for sake of education that there are so-called "heat resistant" steel alloys for use in buildings. These alloys (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4224062.html) have a different makeup than normal structural steel; the melting point is a little higher, but more importantly the Young's modulus as a function of temperature doesn't plateau until a higher temperature. Where A36 is down 50% in strength by 600oC, heat resistant steel is only down about 30%.

Nonetheless, use of these steels is pretty rare, and none were used in either WTC 1, 2, or 7. Those were predominantly A36 and A42, though eight other high-strength grades were used in the Towers -- none of them specially heat resistant.

Carry on.
I'll Take Inconel for 100, Alex...
Want to see the budget for that...

Sabrina

10th July 2008, 06:04 PM

Mancman

10th July 2008, 06:04 PM

From the 9/11 Truth Facebook group:

In response to testimony of people in the WTC lobbies smelling jet fuel:

Just because people assumed what they saw was from the jet fuel doesn't mean it was.

Hardly any of the elevators run from where the planes were to the lobby (2, 3 max), Bryan is right.

Anyways, why don't you move onto my other points, i see your point, but i disagree. You have no proof that it was jet fuel. I don't care if it smelled like kerosene, obviously the planners could have thought to put kerosene in the explosives to make people think it was jet fuel.

Screenshot (http://i38.tinypic.com/2dqqd1u.jpg)
Link - requires Facebook account. (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2204686781&topic=5466)

Blender Head

10th July 2008, 07:43 PM

From the 9/11 Truth Facebook group:

In response to testimony of people in the WTC lobbies smelling jet fuel:

Screenshot (http://i38.tinypic.com/2dqqd1u.jpg)
Link - requires Facebook account. (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2204686781&topic=5466)

That is hilarious! I imagine the fact that no one noticed hooded perps carrying containers of jet fuel-scented air fresheners hasn't put a damper on his belief?

My nomination is "CNN911Fake" on this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoHitIiabrM) video:

"[The FDNY] could have spen[t] [their] time saving people instead of setting up a useless monitoring device and evacuating the area."

Yeah what were they thinking trying to determine WTC 7's condition?!

gumboot

11th July 2008, 12:58 AM

LCF's Free Speech Zone...

They accidentally set up a Speech Free Zone instead. Easy mistake to make.

gumboot

11th July 2008, 09:03 PM

Cheap Shot recounts his interviews with the Department of Justice:

Since it was the interview with me personally by the DOJ that was the cause of the new timeline being generated for the 9-11 Commission, I don't remember them water boarding me to get info out of me, or pulling out my finger nails, I beleive I was in a nice cozy room, with my Union Rep sitting near by. As far as Guatanomo Bay are we stretching here or what.

Homeland Insurgency goes looking...

So you had a minder in the room?

He scores!

Yes, a "Union Rep" is a "minder". :covereyes

1337m4n

12th July 2008, 02:17 AM

There may be nothing inherently Stundie-worthy about the statement itself, but when you consider the source, I think we have a winner:

I suppose what you do is insinuate or imply. Be man enough to have the courage to just state it plainly. No use lying about it.

Unsecured Coins

12th July 2008, 01:55 PM

Dubbi

12th July 2008, 02:50 PM

gdnp

12th July 2008, 03:29 PM

"For the first time in the history of the twin towers, a power down occurs one week before the events of 9/11 occurred."

source: http://e3s.ca/t911truth/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=0

"Top 20 Anomalies
Written by Richard Harris
Wednesday, 07 November 2007"

This is something you read once you click on "9/11 facts".

Wow. It gets you thinking.

You know, I ate a bag of Doritos for lunch last week, and today Derek Jeter hit a home run.

Coincidence? I think not!

defaultdotxbe

12th July 2008, 03:30 PM

"For the first time in the history of the twin towers, a power down occurs one week before the events of 9/11 occurred."

source: http://e3s.ca/t911truth/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=0

"Top 20 Anomalies
Written by Richard Harris
Wednesday, 07 November 2007"

This is something you read once you click on "9/11 facts".
can i nominate the fact that there are 22 items in that top 20 list?

Dubbi

12th July 2008, 03:57 PM

``What I dont get is... why are you here... If you think this is all bunk.. then it makes NO sense to me whatsoever, why you would go out of your way to "debunk" it...``

-Richard Harris (leader of TorontoChange)
source:http://e3s.ca/torontochange/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=200&Itemid=9

Note: the whole debate is stundie worthy.

It all began when a TorontoTruther who thinks I`m an (agent, relative of Mel Lastman (makes me part of a Jewish conspiracy etc)) posted this blog about me. I caught his bluff.

``NIST's ELITE
Written by Burt Tranious

Well people,

I was informed by a mutal friend (thankx ED) that I should start educating myself more on the direct evidence that was brought forth from the NIST Report. So, I decided he was right and begun contacting and researching all of the members that were a part of the NIST. I decided to go even a step further and contact certain Education Instatutes that many of the NIST members were employed, so that I may speak with many of the students to get an input on their opinion on the NIST Report given by one of their Professors. The later event turned out to be more prominalbe, since the majority of the students I chatted with consider all the members of the NIST Team SELLOUTS, for a few weeks on NASA's SUPER COMPUTER. Is that not sad?

BECOME INTERESTED BECOME EDUCATED BECOME INVOLVED``

Elizabeth I

12th July 2008, 05:57 PM

Wow. It gets you thinking.

You know, I ate a bag of Doritos for lunch last week, and today Derek Jeter hit a home run.

Coincidence? I think not!

A BAG OF DORITOS FOR LUNCH? Shame on you. You need a more balanced diet. Next time add some bean dip.

Blender Head

12th July 2008, 08:46 PM

I just got this on M. Loizeaux's video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxOfatzx3SI) from '911MurderersAreLoose':

HOW INTERESTING! If you stop the video at any time when this presumed expert Mark Loizeaux is speaking (say 1:23 for example but there are plenty of other times) and compare him and the background with the picture that the author of this video uses on his channel homepage, you'll see they are one and the same! Yet he describes himself as "Just a guy looking for real truth from the 9/11 Truth Movement", apparently not Mr. Loizeaux. DECEPTION REVEALED, guess he wanted a photo and was lazy!

I...I don't know what to say...

1337m4n

13th July 2008, 10:24 AM

I think we have a winner! http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3857156&postcount=296

See, real scientists don't demand proof, only dumbass college dropouts believe they need "proof" to "prove something".

gdnp

13th July 2008, 11:04 AM

ooh...that one will be tough to top.

defaultdotxbe

13th July 2008, 01:26 PM

I just got this on M. Loizeaux's video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxOfatzx3SI) from '911MurderersAreLoose':

I...I don't know what to say...
perfect example of how much research truthers are willing to do

from the video uploaders profile (whom 911MurderersAreLoose accuses of being deceptive)
Just a guy looking for real truth from the 9/11 Truth Movement. Presenting a video series showcasing contradictions, evasions, omissions, misrepresentations and the downright falsehoods of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

911MurderersAreLoose even quotes the first sentence, apparently thats as far as he read

Sunstealer

13th July 2008, 04:10 PM

How about I just tell you again that I don't know how it was done. But that it was done doesn't depend on my not knowing how.

Follow me?http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=100535/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=600.html Can anyone follow his logic?

Minadin

13th July 2008, 04:28 PM

I think we have a winner! http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3857156&postcount=296

Actually, I think that should be a 4-part quote, mostly because it's even funnier in context. Below are (exerpts from) 4 posts from 1337m4n's nominee, from the same thread, shown exactly in order.

You're not. Look it up yourself. Prove me wrong. That's your job. If you fail to do so in the long run, you're obliged to call me "Daddy".

See, real scientists don't demand proof, only dumbass college dropouts believe they need "proof" to "prove something".

How about, you prove for a change that there was no thermite?

You got to be ******** me. You propose the existence of something. I propose the nonexistence. I can't show evidence supporting my claim. You can show evidence supporting your claim. You bring the evidence, or fail to do so.

Waste of time.

OldTigerCub

13th July 2008, 07:11 PM

A winner for sure! :D Turbofan has found a witness (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3858220&postcount=729)to a "Pentagon Fly-over":

WRONG! We have at least one very credible witness called a FLIGHT DATA
RECORDER!

I don't like your witnesses either, do you see me crying about it? You can't
even get over the fact that the FDR shows the plane didn't hit the Pentagon...
so you keep trying to change the subject.

PB&J

13th July 2008, 07:31 PM

This gem is from TC/Dom over at LCF:

nothing is aerodynamically impossible when you don't know the true flight path of the plane.

I don't know the true FPs of all the commercial flights I take, so I guess they were fully capable of traveling to the moon and back!

gumboot

14th July 2008, 06:26 AM

I just got this on M. Loizeaux's video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxOfatzx3SI) from '911MurderersAreLoose':

I...I don't know what to say...

How is that a stundie?

gumboot

14th July 2008, 07:05 AM

Give this man a stundie. Now.

dfGJo6Ov38Y

"I'm telling them the absolute truth"

"A lot of people say that NORAD is to blame, and that is actually true... all the Air National Guard pilots and all the planes were over the Dakotas and the mid western states for training exercises in domestic terrorism and practise runs, and that was not planned, that just fell into place for Bin Laden like a jigsaw"

"Getting to the World Trade Center collapse, unfortunately we now live in a world where people now believe that a 747 going 800MPH into a skyscraper, rupturing fuel tanks and setting fire to everything on those levels, is not enough to make a building fall down."

"The plane was going 800MPH with a full fuel tank. Can anyone guess how many gallons of fuel the average 747 can hold? Can anyone guess? A hundred and twenty thousand gallons of jet fuel. But they say "well jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel". Well guess what, last time I checked it's fire, and fire, last time I checked also, is hot. And 120,000 gallons of gasoline on fire is pretty hot."

"There's nothing in the world than can stand [a 747 going 800MPH], there's nothing in the world that could handle that kind of pressure. So that is why the World Trade Center collapsed; because fire burning everywhere at 13,000 degrees."

"A recent report on BBC says the hijackers are still alive and well [my note: this YouTube video was uploaded in July 2008 - 7 years and 10 months after the BBC report aired]. Well guess what, it's the friggen BBC, the British Broadcasting Corporation. The most liberal, the most anti-American news outlet on the planet."

gumboot

14th July 2008, 07:30 AM

Curlyrocks1 at YouTube.com reveals the secret performance of the CF-18:

and even if america wasn't ready (which they where) Canada too has F-18's fuled and ready to fly at all times and it only takes 40 minutes at full speed for an F-18 to go from the arctic circle to the lower end of mexico.

By my calculation that's an average speed of about 5250MPH or Mach 6.9 at sea level.

You Canadians have been holding out! :mad:

ETA: Linky http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xjBbqRJT7Q&feature=related

tsig

14th July 2008, 09:39 AM

Actually, I think that should be a 4-part quote, mostly because it's even funnier in context. Below are (exerpts from) 4 posts from 1337m4n's nominee, from the same thread, shown exactly in order.

He seems to be arguing both sides and losing both.

Myron Proudfoot

14th July 2008, 03:19 PM

Curlyrocks1 at YouTube.com reveals the secret performance of the CF-18:

By my calculation that's an average speed of about 5250MPH or Mach 6.9 at sea level.

You Canadians have been holding out! :mad:

ETA: Linky http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xjBbqRJT7Q&feature=related

Don't you see, that's how Canada is going to overwhelm the US to force us into the dreaded North American Union! One day they have a jet that goes 5,000 mph, the next thing you know we're playing curling and drinking beer with Spanish names! :boxedin:

defaultdotxbe

14th July 2008, 04:28 PM

How is that a stundie?
see my comment a few posts up

just click the arrow ^^

he claims to have revealed the "deception" of the guy who posted the video (by showing that he has mark loizeaux as his avatar) but if you read the profile (of the guy who posted the video) there is no deception at all, hes clearly not a truther and isnt pretending to be

for some reason it gives me an image of am onty python-esque sketch that may or may not actually be a monty python sketch

Horatius

14th July 2008, 05:24 PM

Don't you see, that's how Canada is going to overwhelm the US to force us into the dreaded North American Union! One day they have a jet that goes 5,000 mph, the next thing you know we're playing curling and drinking beer with Spanish names! :boxedin:

Oh, great, now we have to take you out too.

Dress nicely, we're going to a fancy restaurant. ;)

Hey, we're Canadian, what did you think we meant?

16.5

14th July 2008, 05:46 PM

Our own late, and lamented obsessive Billy Rea completely misses the concept of a "joke" over at LC:

"PS - rwguinn ironically commits his own little Stundie within the July Stundies here... Does he not know that Inconel alloys are nickel based and NOT steel based?"

Billy Rea must be a hoot at parties: alternatively explaining why it is difficult for a chicken to cross the road, and then mumbling obsessively over in the corner about evil JREF operatives...

Grizzly Bear

14th July 2008, 06:43 PM

gumboot

14th July 2008, 07:57 PM

see my comment a few posts up

he claims to have revealed the "deception" of the guy who posted the video (by showing that he has mark loizeaux as his avatar) but if you read the profile (of the guy who posted the video) there is no deception at all, hes clearly not a truther and isnt pretending to be

for some reason it gives me an image of am onty python-esque sketch that may or may not actually be a monty python sketch

I believe the poster's point was that the poster of the video had Mark Loizeaux's face selected as his own personal avatar, but the poster of the video is not Mark Loizeaux. I honestly don't see how that's Stundie-worthy. Yes, it's stupid to think that an avatar must depict yourself rather than another person, but to call someone for using someone else's image as your avatar is hardly stundie-worthy, IMHO.

Cl1mh4224rd

14th July 2008, 08:20 PM

From the Screw Loose Change blog:

This blog has always had a bit of an infantile side to it, but here I think you guys have done yourselves one better.
I agree. These people seem to mistake their smug sliming for argument. They might as well be mastrubating in public.

What's so funny about this? They're the first two comments on a post that Pat made where he simply embedded a truther video (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2008/07/more-evidence-inside-job-1111111.html) and nothing more. (comments (http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=%20screwloosechange%20&comment=9096381270180829839))

The Truth Movement is in such bad shape that the Screw Loose Change blog is "infantile" and engaging in "smug sliming" simply by posting truther videos.

defaultdotxbe

14th July 2008, 08:38 PM

Blender Head

15th July 2008, 04:09 PM

I believe the poster's point was that the poster of the video had Mark Loizeaux's face selected as his own personal avatar, but the poster of the video is not Mark Loizeaux. I honestly don't see how that's Stundie-worthy. Yes, it's stupid to think that an avatar must depict yourself rather than another person, but to call someone for using someone else's image as your avatar is hardly stundie-worthy, IMHO.

Really?!

Anyway, hopefully this won't abuse Gumboot's Always Rightitude about the Stundie nomination process:

What evidence have you given me? Seriously, what evidence other than your mathematical equation of the amount of thermite that needed to be used have you given me? Nothing! You haven't proven anything at all.

Video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA&)

Blender Head

15th July 2008, 04:15 PM

15th July 2008, 09:54 PM

I finally have a nomination that I haven't been beaten to:

Well, the twin towers weren't real controlled demolitions. They were blown up from top to bottom. My original question was if the towers were blown up top down, how would the destruction of each tower look different from what was actually observed?

Thread is here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3864480#post3864480).

gumboot

16th July 2008, 04:36 AM

Really?!

Anyway, hopefully this won't abuse Gumboot's Always Rightitude about the Stundie nomination process:

Huh?

gumboot

16th July 2008, 04:37 AM

Except for the NORAD comment none of this is Stundie material.

Why not?

Horatius

16th July 2008, 12:35 PM

And now for something completely different. Here's a nom from a non-CT forum post, but it seems tio deal with the whole "Evolution as a plot of the scientists" theory:

This wasn't a troll thread. And I was accused of being a creationist simply for expressing skepticism about something general about Evolution.

If I posted I was skeptical about electricity I doubt I'd be called a creationist.

The Creationist lable is attached to anyone questioning Evolution.

I'm not posting any more here. I've proven my point though you wish to claim otherwise.

Emphasis added.

Myron Proudfoot

16th July 2008, 03:00 PM

Oh, great, now we have to take you out too.

Dress nicely, we're going to a fancy restaurant. ;)

OK! Dibs on the maze on the placemats! :p

Bobert

16th July 2008, 05:24 PM

Dom/TC claiming over at the LCF that if you believe that Al Qaeda attacked the US you are a Al Qaeda supporter:
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=107767&t=441676
and i meant supporters of the al qaeda did it all alone theory by al qaeda supporters.
there was nothing before "and".

Horatius

16th July 2008, 06:59 PM

OK! Dibs on the maze on the placemats! :p

Placemats? It's not that fancy! What, you think Canada is made out of money, or something?!?

Blender Head

16th July 2008, 07:02 PM

Huh?

You dictate what is, or is not, a Stundie, so I was hoping that entry did not disturb your sensibilities.

Minadin

16th July 2008, 08:49 PM

You guys must be getting really bored with the abject lameness of the conspiracy theorists and their alleged arguments if you're going to start fights over the momma-humping stundies.

gumboot

16th July 2008, 11:54 PM

You dictate what is, or is not, a Stundie.

No I don't. Unsecured Coins does.

Blender Head

17th July 2008, 07:13 PM

Sigh, that went straight over your head.

Anyway...

xtremesteven33 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2665175&postcount=137), I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

if you cannot see that 9/11 was an inside job than you are either blind or have a case of cognative dissonance

fullflavormenthol

17th July 2008, 07:54 PM

Not a Troofer qoute, but I felt it was worthy of a Stundie by virtue of the misunderstanding of what is meant by freedom of speech in regards to political speech. Meaning this is a Stundie nomination that is put here by a debunker who, while not agreeing with Troofer ideas, is defending their right to posses them.

I am not trying to change my argument. Back on page 1 of this thread I brought up the CPUSA as a precedent. How am I changing my argument? The CPUSA was running a candidate in each election until 1952 when they were outlawed in 1954. They didn't run another candidate until 1968 and essentially after 1961 they were not anything like they were pre 1954. Eventually, after the 1984 election they never ran another candidate again. Now how does not allowing them to run as a political party mean free speech was stifled? You are wrong...

gumboot

17th July 2008, 09:39 PM

Sigh, that went straight over your head.

I understand exactly what you're trying to say. I just refuse to lower myself to your level of petty argument.

Sabrina

18th July 2008, 09:28 AM

Roundhead on the OKC bombing thread:

I fail to see what difference it makes as to who it is sourced from.Its a letter i copied verbatim....but, here is the source

http://www.riflewarrior.com/chief_william_citty.htm

Now if you have information this 27 year cop didnt write this letter, or its misquoted, lets see it.

(emphasis added) This was in response to someone asking him to source a supposed letter written by a retired cop about the police captain, or something... I just find it funny that they're ignoring the fact that they need to support their theories with evidence. *LOL*

ETA: Linky (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3865707#post3865707)

Mancman

18th July 2008, 03:27 PM

Eugh.

"The BBC can't have no expert of the caliber of an Alex Jones or a Jason Bermas.."

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=49170.msg224047;topicseen#msg22404 7

Elizabeth I

18th July 2008, 10:15 PM

"The BBC can't have no expert of the caliber of an Alex Jones or a Jason Bermas.."

Well, that's a relief.

Horatius

19th July 2008, 05:28 AM

Well, that's a relief.

When you consider the effect of the double negative, I'm actually quite relieved. Not that he meant it that way....

CptColumbo

19th July 2008, 08:51 AM

When you consider the effect of the double negative, I'm actually quite relieved. Not that he meant it that way...."'Double Negative?' You mean there are pictures."

Sabrina

19th July 2008, 05:31 PM

"That sounds like a confession to me! In fact, the double negative has turned to proof positive; I'm afraid you gave yourself away!"

Heh... I love Clue... and Tim Curry RULES.

CptColumbo

20th July 2008, 04:00 AM

"That sounds like a confession to me! In fact, the double negative has turned to proof positive; I'm afraid you gave yourself away!"

Heh... I love Clue... and Tim Curry RULES."Are you trying to make me look stupid in front of the other guests?"

"You don't need any help from me, sir."

"That's right!"

TjW

20th July 2008, 09:52 AM

Flight Data Recorder "expert" Turbofan:

There is no software in the FDR.

OldTigerCub

20th July 2008, 07:33 PM

More wisdom from Turbofan: (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3878393&postcount=819)

I don't ignore other data, however nobody here has touched upon the
following:

- The small entry hole into the Pentagon
- Norman Mineta's testimony against Cheney
- E4-B video by CNN
- Lack of significant plane debris
- Lack of serial identification of plane debris
- Incorrect date on Pentagon video

My favorite part, though....:p

My understanding of the FDR function and data transfer is mountains over
anyone here. Like I said, I've shown everyone with documentation from
L3 Communications and ARINC 717 why Anti's thoery is wrong.

What do you have to hold onto now?

Wildy

21st July 2008, 05:58 AM

I've got one from Christophera on Myspace (http://forums.myspace.com/t/3973385.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread&PageIndex=131&SortOrder=0).

(Over there he's called Chris):

Of course you have no theory that is feasible. No one does, so in your impotence, all you can do is "text up", with nonsense.

It's in response to my C&P link (http://wildyms.blogspot.com/2008/06/christophera-and-his-phenomena.html), although I don't know if people who have never encountered him will find it funny.

gumboot

22nd July 2008, 01:48 AM

Only three pages! Looks like a slow month for the Truth!

Travis

22nd July 2008, 05:54 AM

It's the heat. In the same way Truthers don't do much when it's raining, snowing, cold, looks like it might be cold, windy, breezy or calm with clear skies they also don't do much when it's hot.

The Silver Shadow

22nd July 2008, 06:33 AM

The Facebook group "there is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons" is a hotbed for Stundies. I found this quote from one of the truthers there that made me laugh

the fact that u think u have evidence means ur an idiot

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/143064885d3779d767.bmp (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=13139)

Horatius

22nd July 2008, 02:22 PM

Because witnesses are subjective and it would lead to a logical impossibility if we took the statements literally.

Because witnesses are subjective and it would lead to a logical impossibility if we took the statements literally.

Of course you don't. You and other Jrefers have a propensity to miss the crux of the matter.

Said while attempting to debunk Reheat's calculations about the turns that would be required to fly any flightpath consistent with CIT's flyover theory - the whole point of which was to demonstrate that their theory, in relying on witness testimony, requires an impossibility!

Mancman

22nd July 2008, 07:05 PM

From the frontpage of the Facebook group '9/11 Truth Movement'

Dude you are arguing with a SCIENCE MAJOR...i know everything there is to know about Physics, Chemistry, Biology and even Earth Sciences. And I am telling you..........Molten Metal MOLTEN METAL...JUST LISTEN TO THE NAME....MOLTEN....MOLTEN......VERY HOT......HOTTER THAN JET FUEL....JET FUEL BURNS AT 2000 DEGREES MAX.....METAL MELTS AT 4000 DEGREES.....so lets say your stupid structure failure was true...that means fire would have to burn floor after floor after floor after floor..and there were a lot of floors in the WTC....and I would say it would take a lot longer than 56 and 102 minutes to burn all of that steel.

http://i34.tinypic.com/34e9ekj.jpg

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

gdnp

22nd July 2008, 07:16 PM

From the frontpage of the Facebook group '9/11 Truth Movement'

http://i34.tinypic.com/34e9ekj.jpg

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

Definitely a contendah.

burn, melt, phase transitions: it's all the same when you know everything about physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science...

fullflavormenthol

22nd July 2008, 08:01 PM

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

Oh man, it seems he is also too educated to realize the benefit of a proof read. Still at my college there are a slew of science majors that believe in intelligent design and one of the professors "pwned" me on Facebook for being critical of the local Ghost Hunters group. Needless to say, being a "science major" doesn't make you right.

Stundie material all the way.

rwguinn

22nd July 2008, 08:41 PM

Oh man, it seems he is also too educated to realize the benefit of a proof read. Still at my college there are a slew of science majors that believe in intelligent design and one of the professors "pwned" me on Facebook for being critical of the local Ghost Hunters group. Needless to say, being a "science major" doesn't make you right.

Stundie material all the way.

Whattenhell is a "Science Major"?
Is that sorta like "University Studies" ?

OldTigerCub

22nd July 2008, 08:46 PM

Only three pages! Looks like a slow month for the Truth!

Things are looking up for Teh Stundies since the pfffft boys are actively pursueing the woo in the 9-11 section!:D

From TheLoneBedouin (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3884041&postcount=257):
I have never analyzed FDR data. I don't know if any FDR data was recovered from the Pentagon- for that I would need to know the chain of evidence.
The FDR data provided by FOIA does not seem to be from the Pentagon since it places the plane NOC.

fullflavormenthol

22nd July 2008, 10:00 PM

Whattenhell is a "Science Major"?
Is that sorta like "University Studies" ?
I know. I like it when people describe themselves in very generic terms, which is amusing because any of the "science majors" I know that made it past freshman year refer to themselves by their specific area of study. I usually call b.s. on internet "science majors".

The Silver Shadow

22nd July 2008, 10:58 PM

I'm a human biology major...

This kid's either a freshman or is just accepted into university and extremely hot-headed for getting accepted. I wonder what his attitude towards life will be in one year's time...

OldTigerCub

22nd July 2008, 11:51 PM

Turbofan is on a roll:
All of the evidence is on teh interwebs!
All I have to tell you is that AA77 didn't hit the Pentagon. That's proven
by the photo links, and FDR.

Ok...so maybe a little stale....:o

PhantomWolf

23rd July 2008, 02:12 AM

I can't believe that no one has nominated roundhead for this gem:

I find it hilarious you jref types think the wings on AA77 wouldnt have been completely broken off at impact and been laying on the Pentagon lawn.
Its incredible seemingly intelligent people would think otherwise.

I guess we just take it for granted now that CT physics was learned from Roadrunner repeats

Furi

23rd July 2008, 04:31 AM

From the frontpage of the Facebook group '9/11 Truth Movement'

http://i34.tinypic.com/34e9ekj.jpg

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

Table: basic information about and classifications of METAL.

Name (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/name/): METAL!!!
Symbol (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/name/): Wu
Atomic number (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/atomic_number/): Like you would understand
Atomic weight (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/atomic_weight/): More than you,
Standard state (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/standard_state/): solid at 298K however instantaneously changes state at 4000C/K/F take your pick they are all the same
CAS Registry ID (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/cas_registry_id/): ID-10-T
Group in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Sheep
Group name (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): METAL!!!
Period in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Science MAJOR (period)
Block in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Big Tower Block
Colour (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/standard_state/): Not Molten
Classification (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/classification/): Metallic, and cannot be melted by Jet Fuel EVER!,

Horatius

23rd July 2008, 05:43 AM

Travis

23rd July 2008, 08:56 AM

Did we figure out who's doing the Stundies this month?

Safe-Keeper

23rd July 2008, 04:26 PM

"For the first time in the history of the twin towers, a power down occurs one week before the events of 9/11 occurred."I vote for this one:D.

Table: basic information about and classifications of METAL.

Name (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/name/): METAL!!!
Symbol (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/name/): Wu
Atomic number (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/atomic_number/): Like you would understand
Atomic weight (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/atomic_weight/): More than you,
Standard state (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/standard_state/): solid at 298K however instantaneously changes state at 4000C/K/F take your pick they are all the same
CAS Registry ID (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/cas_registry_id/): ID-10-T
Group in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Sheep
Group name (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): METAL!!!
Period in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Science MAJOR (period)
Block in periodic table (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/group_number/): Big Tower Block
Colour (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/standard_state/): Not Molten
Classification (http://www.webelements.com/periodicity/classification/): Metallic, and cannot be melted by Jet Fuel EVER!,Hilarity.

Sword_Of_Truth

24th July 2008, 01:22 AM

Aken Aton over at the Facebook group "There Is No 9/11 Conspiracy You Morons" (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=5386&post=18664&uid=2211830485#/topic.php?uid=2211830485&topic=5386&start=60&hash=e4fd4bc117239ae38d0c0d4f8d76ffaf) ties himself into knots and even attempts to reverse the flow of time itself while trying to poison the 911myths well:

You reference 911myths for almost everything you post and whether or not you want to admit it... The NEW site = The OLD site. You post the old one like it proves anything for your case. Obviously I had to access the old one to find the new one. Eventually the New site will be all that is left, not the other way around. If you can EDIT the New site, it places your entire resource as being void. I like how he ends his FAQ page lol, the same can be applied to that entire site. I'm sure you already know that being the Anti-Gentile/Pro Israel smear artist that you are. When you figure out what Zionism is, we can have a debate on this further.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c345/Kilstryke/AkenStundieNom.jpg

Maybe I'm wrong, but he appears to be arguing that EFFECT (invalidation of the information on 911myths.com) is preceding the CAUSE(future plans to change to a wiki format).

JonnyFive

24th July 2008, 11:50 AM

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

He is clearly way too to educated for the likes of me.

I mean, he's a master of every science there is. Even earth science!

Holy crap... earth science. Bro, stop its for your own dignity.

TheLoneBedouin

24th July 2008, 11:52 AM

The FDR data provided by FOIA does not seem to be from the Pentagon since it places the plane NOC.
That should be the Ntsb animation that places the plane NOC.
Btw, what is the point of these 'stundies'? Do you think it constitutes discussing these alternative theories in a "friendly and lively way"?

aggle-rithm

24th July 2008, 12:11 PM

That should be the Ntsb animation that places the plane NOC.
Btw, what is the point of these 'stundies'? Do you think it constitutes discussing these alternative theories in a "friendly and lively way"?

Nope, not the purpose of this thread.

There are PLENTY of other threads that discuss alternative theories, ad nauseum. I have grown sick of them and stopped contributing, but you're welcome to give it a shot.

dudalb

24th July 2008, 03:25 PM

I can't believe that no one has nominated roundhead for this gem:

I guess we just take it for granted now that CT physics was learned from Roadrunner repeats

That , and Marvel and DC comics
I am fond of both Roadrunner cartoons (Wile E Coyote falling down a cliff never fails to crack me up for some reason) and Marvel and DC comics, but I realise they are not reality. The CTers seem not to understand that.
And the Twoofers and "The Matrix" films are a topic in themsleves.

Alareth

24th July 2008, 07:50 PM

Turbofan is on a roll:
All of the evidence is on teh interwebs!

Ok...so maybe a little stale....:o

I miss the truther proposal from a year or two ago that they all disconnect their computers from the internet to keep all the amassed evidence from being changed or erased.

24th July 2008, 08:02 PM

From the frontpage of the Facebook group '9/11 Truth Movement'

Dude you are arguing with a SCIENCE MAJOR...i know everything there is to know about Physics, Chemistry, Biology and even Earth Sciences. And I am telling you..........Molten Metal MOLTEN METAL...JUST LISTEN TO THE NAME....MOLTEN....MOLTEN......VERY HOT......HOTTER THAN JET FUEL....JET FUEL BURNS AT 2000 DEGREES MAX.....METAL MELTS AT 4000 DEGREES.....so lets say your stupid structure failure was true...that means fire would have to burn floor after floor after floor after floor..and there were a lot of floors in the WTC....and I would say it would take a lot longer than 56 and 102 minutes to burn all of that steel.

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

One word:
Mercury.

OldTigerCub

24th July 2008, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Mancman
From the frontpage of the Facebook group '9/11 Truth Movement'

Originally Posted by Joseph Pierce
Dude you are arguing with a SCIENCE MAJOR...i know everything there is to know about Physics, Chemistry, Biology and even Earth Sciences. And I am telling you..........Molten Metal MOLTEN METAL...JUST LISTEN TO THE NAME....MOLTEN....MOLTEN......VERY HOT......HOTTER THAN JET FUEL....JET FUEL BURNS AT 2000 DEGREES MAX.....METAL MELTS AT 4000 DEGREES.....so lets say your stupid structure failure was true...that means fire would have to burn floor after floor after floor after floor..and there were a lot of floors in the WTC....and I would say it would take a lot longer than 56 and 102 minutes to burn all of that steel.

...he also goes on to say

"I'm way to educated bro so stop its for your own dignity"

;3889434']One word:
Mercury.

As in ingestion of?:rolleyes:

JonnyFive

25th July 2008, 07:08 AM

;3889434']One word:
Mercury.

Mercury is an illusion, you brainwashed sheeple... er... sheerson.

dudalb

25th July 2008, 05:56 PM

Tweeter, in our won 9/11 Conspiracy section,has his own defenition of "Truther".

Anyone that questions the government is a truther/CT in my book.

Cl1mh4224rd

25th July 2008, 06:07 PM

Tweeter, in our won 9/11 Conspiracy section,has his own defenition of "Truther".

That's, like... everyone. Who's left to pull off 9/11?

* Cl1mh4224rd looks up.

Maybe it was the... aliens...

Par

25th July 2008, 06:47 PM

This isn't exactly a Stundie, it's just disgusting.

So, yes, your witnesses [the fire fighters] are lying, or are in serious need of glasses.

http://counterknowledge.com/?p=108

Par

25th July 2008, 07:37 PM

Make of this what you will:-

Someone was manipulating that signal to cut it off without it looking like being cut off, which means to the digital technology observer, that it WAS being cut off

Orac HERE AT LCF (http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/400449/1/#new) (Post 21 about the BBC and WTC7)

BV

Banger.

Par

25th July 2008, 07:38 PM

From the 9/11 Truth Facebook group:... Link - requires Facebook account.[/URL]

Salford Lads' Club.

TjW

26th July 2008, 07:16 AM

Turbofan demonstrates his sense of humor, and his understanding of physics.
Or lack thereof.
Is this appropriate for JREF? Cartoons?

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/anonymous/strip/2007/04/27/free-fall.png

Make your own!

http://stripgenerator.com/create

Here is someone that doesn't understand physics much.

What happens if you drop a brick and a golf ball AT THE SAME TIME from the top
of a ladder to the ground. Which one do you think will hit the ground first?

Hint: Sort of a trick question.

orphia nay

26th July 2008, 10:08 PM

Chai at Freedom Crow's Nest (http://www.freedomcrowsnest.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=71517&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=3165):

If you look closely at this photo [of Mars] at 200%, you see airplanes, roads, cars, and surveillance drones, not to mention, people.

gdnp

26th July 2008, 10:24 PM

Chai at Freedom Crow's Nest (http://www.freedomcrowsnest.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=71517&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=3165):

It's even worse than that! there's something that looks like a spaceship right in front! how could they have missed this!

orphia nay

26th July 2008, 10:45 PM

If I could provide a source for it other than my memory, I'd nominate my crazy lady from work who thought we had troops on Mars.

UC, can I nominate it anyway? Something that ludicrous DESERVES a Stundie!

That could have been Chai (in the post I just posted) - she has rung NASA and other organisations, so she could have rung you guys as well.

Par

27th July 2008, 08:40 AM

Turbofan shows us that he's a formidable scientist:

["It is scientifically impossible for both sections [of the towers] to be breaking apart upon descent simultaneously with a gravity induced collapse."]

Why don't you try it for yourself. Grab four bricks. Stack three of them end to end. Get your video camera rolling... Take the fourth and throw it down onto the three stacked bricks. Observe the damage, and notice the debris left over. Also be aware that you are throwing the brick much faster than free fall, so the impact force will be much greater.

Mancman

27th July 2008, 04:21 PM

Salford Lads' Club.

Accurate.

stateofgrace

27th July 2008, 06:55 PM

I would like to nominate this.

One possibility to consider, that most of the people who were able to make 'phone calls' did indeed make the calls themselves and were members of the hijacking teams.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/409037/1/#new

There are no words I can type to sum up this level of stupid.

None.

gdnp

27th July 2008, 07:10 PM

I would like to nominate this.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/409037/1/#new

There no words I can type to sum up this level of stupid.

None.

another strong contender: Illogical, offensive, and pointless all in one.

Grizzly Bear

28th July 2008, 06:22 PM

You guys should all get together before posting and come up with one
solid theory before you post. It makes you look less foolish that way.

P.S.

Hey, if I shake my computer up and down real hard and create enough
negative g's, will the power go out?

:D

Nominated just for the shear irony... :D

Minadin

28th July 2008, 10:52 PM

That could have been Chai (in the post I just posted) - she has rung NASA and other organisations, so she could have rung you guys as well.

After reading the last 10 or so pages of that thread, I think that Ms. Chai is not mentally well and should probably be left alone. But, in other news, someone recently finally won a game of Orphia's Truther Credo Bingo -

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3899288#post3899288

I'm not sure if I should grats Orphia or Turbofan, really . . .

orphia nay

29th July 2008, 03:39 AM

After reading the last 10 or so pages of that thread, I think that Ms. Chai is not mentally well and should probably be left alone.

Funny you should say that, because I just made a post in another thread at that forum saying the kindest thing is to keep pointing out all the ways she is wrong, so that she doesn't go ahead with her Qui Tam lawsuit against NASA and embarass herself all over the internet, and so she doesn't keep spending 18 hours a day at her computer seeing things that aren't there. But I see your point too, because she does seem to feed off the attention. It's a sad case. :confused:

But, in other news, someone recently finally won a game of Orphia's Truther Credo Bingo -

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3899288#post3899288

I'm not sure if I should grats Orphia or Turbofan, really . . .

:big:

That's hilarious! Grats to you for making the card for me! :clap:

Alareth

29th July 2008, 08:04 AM

This Chai person reminds me of a trollish fellow that was on alt.sci.astro when I used to try keeping track there that would link to rover photos every day and make claims about seeing fossils and other pareidolia induced wonders in the Martian landscape

ETA: Woah ....

She believes in just about EVERYTHING http://www.abidemiracles.com/

steve s

29th July 2008, 09:50 AM

She believes in just about EVERYTHING http://www.abidemiracles.com/

My favortite part is in the paragraph about Michael Pollan...

What if we are all just pawns in corn's clever strategy game, the ultimate prize of which is world domination?

Those damn sneaky corn plants have tricked us into planting thousands of acres of them. And now with the ethanol craze, we're sure to increase that. Curse you, corn!

And in the part about Shechaiyah...

I'm just a Grandma --not glib nor particularly fluent--...

Phil Hartman would be happy to know someone is keeping his "I'm just a caveman" shtick alive.

Steve S.

leonAzul

29th July 2008, 10:52 PM

Thus papasmurf answers the appeal for reasons and explanations in a thread that he started.

I would say that in one of the videos, squibs can be seen at about 4 different floor levels until collapse. Granted you would see more in a normal demolition, but they would want to disguise this one as much as possible, for obvious reasons. There a number of explanations that can account for this. I'll pull a few out of my ass right now.

OldTigerCub

30th July 2008, 06:34 PM

"Pathological scepticism"....is there such a condition?
Apparently so, at least deep44 thinks so...and it is an affliction unique to JREFers!:rolleyes:

Interestingly enough, when I stop coming to this forum, pathological skeptics cease to exist

From this post (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3905009&postcount=32)

Reality Believer

31st July 2008, 08:27 PM

In response to a JFK "Secret Societies" speech debunking I did here:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=928_1217456062

Mr. Gswifty had this to say:

It's not that it's dishonest, it's just that it's cherry picked.:boggled:

Unsecured Coins

1st August 2008, 10:01 AM

closed!

dbalsdon

2nd August 2008, 03:33 PM

No August thread yet? Guess here will do.

From Bebo:

http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5709940539

And Avery Is A God !!!

Since the site might be blocked for non-regisered users, heres the screencap

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_206054894d23c9fa60.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=13289)

Dubbi

3rd August 2008, 07:23 PM

Dubbi

3rd August 2008, 07:26 PM

I think I found the stundie goldmine. Here is a sample:

"This has always baffled me. Did they know it was going to collapse? Were they blown out of the windows by a bomb? I just don't get it, why purposely end your life like that?

Has anyone looked into this?"

-brainstormer

source: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=441720&postcount=1

On the optimistic side, this might eventually lead him to learn of the actual heat distribution in the towers.

Wait, he might have just out-twoofed himself here: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=441831&postcount=3

"Thing is, none of the people that jumped were burning or burned. It just doesn't add up, nobody would throw their life away that easily.

It's also interesting to note the services didn't use inflatable landing mats. Which should have been out as soon as they realised people were jumping."

gdnp

4th August 2008, 06:04 AM

Wait, he might have just out-twoofed himself here: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=441831&postcount=3

"Thing is, none of the people that jumped were burning or burned. It just doesn't add up, nobody would throw their life away that easily.

It's also interesting to note the services didn't use inflatable landing mats. Which should have been out as soon as they realised people were jumping."

This one is good. very good.