Poomeroo

[jackchit]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.

[NBachmann]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.

I suggest you start the thread in the proper context with building 7 etc. Then they can't delete it.

[WildCat]

:confused:

[Quad4_72]

Whats he talking about

[beachnut]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.
jackchit, I thought someone had stolen your id at LCF, but you are posting there about things you do here. What is the real "truth"?

Do you not understand how scientist have proven Bumble bee can not fly? It is simple and every student has seen the proof, have you?

And while on the Bumble Bee stuff, I thought you said your LCF account had been hacked. Was that just a story you made up. Cause you are asking the same question on LCF as here but here you can not post the personal attack and bigotry you posted over at LCF.

So you never hear of the bumble bee theory?

[Undesired Walrus]

Jackchit,make no mistake, I'd say this to a Jref'er if they were like this: Are you delusional?

[Brainster]

The Bumble Planes scenario was first posed by someone with the internet nick of Snake Plissken. Apparently when bees are swarming around a hive, you cannot focus on one because another will fly in front of it. The Bumble Planes idea postulates that for each of the "alleged" hijacked planes, another plane was flying either right behind or right in front of it, so that the two planes looked like one. Then when each of the "alleged" hijacked planes landed, the other one took its place, leaving an apparently seamless flight path as observed by radar. Is that what you are referring to, JC?

[jackchit]

so still no sign of an answer from poomeroo?

[Horatius]

Still no sign of a question?

[beachnut]

so still no sign of an answer from poomeroo?
Does this mean you are just kidding about someone taking your account over at LCF?

Which bumble bee subject is it?

[Lisa Simpson]

Obviously, the question is "Who is the mastermind behind the attacks on 9/11?"

George Bush? No.

Osama bin Laden? No.

Larry Silverstein? No.

This man?

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/1181/bumblebeexj2.jpg

The answer is yes.

[Totovader]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.

Threatening the "admins" is such a great way to start a thread...

I guess you haven't felt like reading the rules- can't really blame anyone but yourself, in that case...

[Guile]

Threatening the "admins" is such a great way to start a thread...

I guess you haven't felt like reading the rules- can't really blame anyone but yourself, in that case...

I hardly see that as a threat.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.
Perhaps you could make a post with some substance, instead of dragging the events from some other forum over here and a lame attempt to garner attention.

[Totovader]

I hardly see that as a threat.

Ok... I do...


I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.


He's threatening that if they don't do as he says and either keep the post or report to him why it was deleted, they will be perceived as being unfair or uninterested in fair debate.

What would you consider it?

[SezMe]

A simple request. Hardly a threat at all. Sheesh.

[Totovader]

A simple request. Hardly a threat at all. Sheesh.

Was my explanation insufficient?

threat
n.
1. An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment.
2. An indication of impending danger or harm.
3. One that is regarded as a possible danger; a menace.

His comments are clearly meant to inflict harm- a harm of reputation. Is that not clear to anyone else? I would think that really wouldn't be debatable. Moderators control this forum, not conspiracists...

[Guile]

You're right...I would feel intimidated by Jackchit's 'threat' that I would fear deleting it if I were an admin on these forums. Lisa Simpson, do you fear deleting Jackchit's post despite his 'threat' that you may very well be perceived as being unfair or uninterested in fair debate?

At most, I would say he is just being slightly immature and talking-back to the admin. Or you can follow SezMe's logic and consider it a simple request....or keep your reasoning and loosely define it as a threat. I suppose they all work.

[~enigma~]

You're right...I would feel intimidated by Jackchit's 'threat' that I would fear deleting it if I were an admin on these forums. Lisa Simpson, do you fear deleting Jackchit's post despite his 'threat' that you may very well be perceived as being unfair or uninterested in fair debate?

At most, I would say he is just being slightly immature and talking-back to the admin. Or you can follow SezMe's logic and consider it a simple request....or keep your reasoning and loosely define it as a threat. I suppose they all work.
Given his past lies and behavior I think it's safe to call it a threat.

[Minadin]

I don't see that as a threat, but demanding something of the admins/mods might not be the most productive method for making a request.

He seems to be insinuating that similar threads have been deleted in the past, without actually going to the trouble of making that accusation. Perhaps he had trouble with the LCF admins and now assumes that all boards are moderated in such a manner.

[Lisa Simpson]

You're right...I would feel intimidated by Jackchit's 'threat' that I would fear deleting it if I were an admin on these forums. Lisa Simpson, do you fear deleting Jackchit's post despite his 'threat' that you may very well be perceived as being unfair or uninterested in fair debate?

At most, I would say he is just being slightly immature and talking-back to the admin. Or you can follow SezMe's logic and consider it a simple request....or keep your reasoning and loosely define it as a threat. I suppose they all work.

If I felt threatened by everyone who claims unfair moderation, I would be feeling threatened pretty much non-stop. I was amused by jackchit childish demands (I have survived three sons going through the "terrible twos". I know childish.) as he still doesn't understand the difference between "moved" and "deleted".

[~enigma~]

I have survived three sons going through the "terrible twos". Gentlemen, we have superwoman in our midst.

[WildCat]

he still doesn't understand the difference between "moved" and "deleted".
I was wondering about that. I didn't think any threads had been deleted, that is pretty common over at the LC forum though.

[Foolmewunz]

Oh, dear, this one will get moved..... (more likely deleted).

Jack, are you a copraphiliac?

Jack*hit. Ha ha! So clever.
Poo-meroo! Yet another!
Are we going to get posts about "movements"? Yuk yuk, wink wink, nudge nudge, get it?
Anyone missing the them, BM me! Whoa! I slay myself! The cacaphony of raucous laughter rings out!

[Thunder]

Maybe Pomeroo doesn't care about Jackchit's question. I sure wouldn't.

Truthers get really frustrated when they are ignored. Its humorous to watch.

"Look at me....Look at me..Im a truther...pay attention to me...I have a bullhorn damn it!!"

[Björn Toulouse]

Maybe Pomeroo doesn't care about Jackchit's question....



His last post was over 20 hours ago. It is Saturday night in the real world. Maybe he has a personal life that we don't have.

[Lisa Simpson]

His last post was over 20 hours ago. It is Saturday night in the real world. Maybe he has a personal life that we don't have.

Personal life? I do not understand what these words mean...

[SezMe]

Was my explanation insufficient?

Yes, it was.

But this is such a side issue of no importance whatsoever, I'm just going to drop it.

[Metullus]

So, is there a question awaiting response? JC? Is there any point at all to this thread? I'm going back to P&CE...

[Horatius]

This explains it all:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8713

He's trying to be "clever".

[Slayhamlet]

Could you please answer my questions regarding the bumble bee scenario?
I'm having no luck over at LC so I thought I'd try here.
@admins if you delete this thread please could you give reasons in the pm's you send me informing me of the deleting. I would imagine you would want it to be clear in the interests of fair debate.
Thank you.

I don't get it. Why not just PM him? No one else knows what the hell you're talking about.

[Slayhamlet]

Was my explanation insufficient?

threat
n.
1. An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment.
2. An indication of impending danger or harm.
3. One that is regarded as a possible danger; a menace.

His comments are clearly meant to inflict harm- a harm of reputation. Is that not clear to anyone else? I would think that really wouldn't be debatable. Moderators control this forum, not conspiracists...

It's sort of a weak veiled threat, but I certainly don't think it's the kind of "threat" that would be against the rules. Of course, we all know he's capable of making those kind as well.

[Metullus]

This explains it all:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8713

He's trying to be "clever".So there is nothing on the table.

[Slayhamlet]

This explains it all:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8713

He's trying to be "clever".

By the looks of it, it's another failure. Sad.

[WildCat]

Sorry jackchit, none of your threads have ever been deleted here. Poor little troll... :rolleyes:

[Foolmewunz]

Sorry jackchit, none of your threads have ever been deleted here. Poor little troll... :rolleyes:

This isn't about getting deleted, censored, or banned. This is typical of a number of Hey Look At Me posters, not exclusive to CT... think of Yrreg.

I don't see it as a threat, so much as a delusion of self-importance. That this thread, with whatever the opening question is all about, would be a threat to the JREF infrastructure, stability and well-being... The thought is absurd.

If you read the LC comments, they're all still caught up in the concept that this is solely a CT site and that the mods, administrators, and owners are all out to censor their brilliant insights.

[T.A.M.]

I don't get it. Why not just PM him? No one else knows what the hell you're talking about.

I suspect this has to do with the Mark Roberts Versus Fetzer debate, and the analogy Pomeroo made to Bees.

I also suspect it is not being done via PM, because jackchit sees a chance to humiliate Ron, and like a lion waiting for his kill, has placed himself here in waiting.

But...I could be wrong.

TAM:)

[chillzero]

Jackchit, this thread has been placed in the CT forum, but your OP does not clarify what you wish to speak about.

Can you please make a post identifying the questions that you would like pomeroo to answer? This will be the best way to put this thread on topic, and not result in a move.

Alternatively, if you would like this thread to continue as it has done so far, you could always start a new thread, with an OP (and title) that makes it clear what your questions are, and I will move this one to flame wars, or AAH if it gets ugly.

[Zep]

*sigh* Not even worth kittens or recipes...

[beachnut]

jackchit, you could discuss the bee. Once a scientist proved a bee cannot fly. Like Fetzer and truthers proving the WTC could not have fallen by gravity alone.

They were wrong, a bee can fly and Fetzers ideas cannot fly. The truth movement on 9/11 is wrong. If you need help next time you watch any LC video, it is all wrong.

jackchit you are in a movement of lies. You have fallen for the theory a bee cannot fly and you are lost. Bees can fly and by simple observation you can see.

Proving a bee can fly is simple. You do not even need math or physics. However, trying to prove any claim by truthers is impossible even with math and physics.

BTW, I thought someone had taken over you identity at LCF, but your post here and your post there watching your post here, proves that was a lie. Is this standard truther methods?

[gumboot]

For anyone who's interested in the bumblebee thing...

According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beat per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary. Jokingly, not being aware of scientists proving it cannot fly, the bumblebee succeeds under "the power of its own arrogance" (McFadden et. al. 2007). The origin of this myth has been difficult to pin down with any certainty. John McMasters recounted an anecdote about an unnamed Swiss aerodynamicist at a dinner party who performed some rough calculations and concluded, presumably in jest, that according to the equations, bumblebees cannot fly.[4] In later years McMasters has backed away from this origin, suggesting that there could be multiple sources, and that the earliest he has found was a reference in the 1934 French book Le vol des insectes by M. Magnan. Magnan is reported to have written that he and a Mr. Saint-Lague had applied the equations of air resistance to insects and found that their flight was impossible, but that "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the calculations don't square with reality".[5]

It is believed[citation needed] that the calculations which purported to show that bumblebees cannot fly are based upon a simplified linear treatment of oscillating aerofoils. The method assumes small amplitude oscillations without flow separation. This ignores the effect of dynamic stall, an airflow separation inducing a large vortex above the wing, which briefly produces several times the lift of the aerofoil in regular flight. More sophisticated aerodynamic analysis shows that the bumblebee can fly because its wings encounter dynamic stall in every oscillation cycle.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumble_bee#Bumblebee_myths)

-Gumboot

[Cl1mh4224rd]

This explains it all:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8713

He's trying to be "clever".

Revolutionary91 made me chuckle.

2 Hours tops, 1 hour minimum.

1 day for a new record. :o
A new record? lol... There are truther threads from May 2006 still in this forum. Someone needs to pay attention.

The same, of course, goes for jackchit's reply to TxGuy/~enigma~. Wow...

[~enigma~]

Revolutionary91 made me chuckle.


A new record? lol... There are truther threads from May 2006 still in this forum. Someone needs to pay attention.

The same, of course, goes for jackchit's reply to TxGuy/~enigma~. Wow...
Funny part is I was replying to PDOPE and jackchit just doesn't know how to read.

[fuelair]

The bumblebee can't fly thing is right - if the bumblebee could not meve its' wings. The idjit who first did this used mass and wing surface area figures for fixed wing aircraft. The bumblebee is not fixed wing.

[beachnut]

The bumblebee can't fly thing is right - if the bumblebee could not meve its' wings. The idjit who first did this used mass and wing surface area figures for fixed wing aircraft. The bumblebee is not fixed wing.
That is where the analogy comes in. The truth movement is using the same faulty logic and models and junk science. The truthers fail to see the WTC falling due to gravity as it did. Then without employing the correct model they are using a "fixed wing" model when they need to be using the correct model.

In absence of any explosions, the truthers have failed to use their heads.

Anyone could answer jackchit's question about the bee, even a 4 or 5th grader. But jackchit is not interested in the answer, he was still challenged to find his moved posts which he can not find. I suggest reading the rules, and if you have problems with comprehension you should ask some questions.

Your post was not moved becasue it acutally is a question about the CT debate. Wow, did you mean to be on a topic worthy of the CT sub forum? Or did you mess up? Have we answered your question?

[slowly read]
Have we answered your question?
[/slowly read]

[Horatius]

Funny part is I was replying to PDOPE and jackchit just doesn't know how to read.



In his defence, the totally lame quoting function they have over there has caused misunderstandings on more than one occassion.

But yes, you'd expect them to eventually realize that problem, and allow for it before they get all huffy about some responses.

[Bobert]

I have been waiting years for this topic to be discussed.
My life is now complete.
You had me at HELLO!!

[pomeroo]

I'd like to keep the mystery intact a while longer, but, frankly, it's a pretty dumb and boring mystery. The Verizon cable to my apartment building went on the fritz Friday afternoon. A repair technician assured me late Saturday morning that my phone and internet service would be restored by evening, but we should never be taken in by such assurances. Now, they promise that everything will be back to normal by sometime Monday afternoon. I'm typing this at my girlfriend's apartment.

Jackchit has been trying desperately and insanely to make something of my comment to Fetzer in the first debate alluding to a scientfic paper "proving" that bumblebees can't fly. I was suggesting that when your work leads you to such a manifestly false conclusion, it's time to take a deep breath and start over. Simple stuff--but not simple enough for our boy.

Jackchit is following the fantasists' time-worn path of attempting vainly to show that he has some sort of point. He does, and we all know where it's located.

[mortimer]

Jackchit,

Did you really mean to title the thread "Poomeroo"?

Dude, that is the funnyist things EVAR!!!11@1

You should totally tell that one in homeroom!

p.s. you said Poo. lol.

[Lisa Simpson]

I'd like to keep the mystery intact a while longer, but, frankly, it's a pretty dumb and boring mystery. The Verizon cable to my apartment building went on the fritz Friday afternoon. A repair technician assured me late Saturday morning that my phone and internet service would be restored by evening, but we should never be taken in by such assurances. Now, they promise that everything will be back to normal by sometime Monday afternoon. I'm typing this at my girlfriend's apartment.

Obviously a conspiracy on the part of Verizon to keep you from answering these deep, deep questions of jackchit.

[T.A.M.]

Verizon is one of the top 5 NWO companies...it is listed on the NWOZDAQ.

TAM;)

[LashL]

Verizon is one of the top 5 NWO companies...it is listed on the NWOZDAQ.

TAM;)

:dl: @ NWOZDAQ.

You owe me a new monitor, TAM!

[T.A.M.]

I am still waiting on mine, which I am sure a dozen or more posters here should chip in on...

Glad you enjoyed it...sorry your monitor took the brunt.

TAM:)

[A W Smith]

I am still waiting on mine, which I am sure a dozen or more posters here should chip in on...

Glad you enjoyed it...sorry your monitor took the brunt.

TAM:)

if you save up and get a larger monitor you can keep it further away and out of range :)

I recommend Samsung SyncMaster (http://www.samsung.com/Products/Monitor/DiscontinuedModels/NB19BSHBV.asp). (I have three)

[strathmeyer]

What is up with Loose Change and deleting threads? It's the most perverted form of group think that I've ever seen. What's next? Nazis talking about all of the Jews that those evil Jews have killed. Wait...

Is it just that these people have no memory? Someone posts a thread on JREF and links to it on Loose Change. People post on Loose Change saying it will be deleted in an hour, even though a number of JREF posters point out on their that they never delete threads (because they're good at holding people's hands like that). After an hour passes, somebody says they bet it will be deleted in a day. A day passes, but by then there's other Loose Change threads to read, no use on reading that old one. Oooh, this thread looks like fun. Somebody just posted a nonsensical thread on JREF, I bet those bastards will delete the thread soon, because that's just something those evil JREFers would do.

[Zep]

What they fail to understand is that by us keeping their threads alive here, and them linking into us from there, they are forcing their own posters to come over here to actually keep an adult(?!) conversation going.

So who is that good for? ;)

[DarkMagician]

Obviously, the question is "Who is the mastermind behind the attacks on 9/11?"

George Bush? No.

Osama bin Laden? No.

Larry Silverstein? No.

This man?

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/1181/bumblebeexj2.jpg

The answer is yes.

I was always suspicious of 'im. Does this mean Spanish TV is behind 9/11?

[jackchit]

I'd like to keep the mystery intact a while longer, but, frankly, it's a pretty dumb and boring mystery. The Verizon cable to my apartment building went on the fritz Friday afternoon. A repair technician assured me late Saturday morning that my phone and internet service would be restored by evening, but we should never be taken in by such assurances. Now, they promise that everything will be back to normal by sometime Monday afternoon. I'm typing this at my girlfriend's apartment.

Jackchit has been trying desperately and insanely to make something of my comment to Fetzer in the first debate alluding to a scientfic paper "proving" that bumblebees can't fly. I was suggesting that when your work leads you to such a manifestly false conclusion, it's time to take a deep breath and start over. Simple stuff--but not simple enough for our boy.

Jackchit is following the fantasists' time-worn path of attempting vainly to show that he has some sort of point. He does, and we all know where it's located.

Incivil remark removed.
Please answer the question in a little more depth or admit you dropped the ball. I asked over at LCF but you chose to ignore that.

[Horatius]

Not really a question.

Please ask the question in a little more depth.

[Undesired Walrus]

jackchit, are you willing to admit you did not get your account hacked over there?

[pomeroo]

Obviously a conspiracy on the part of Verizon to keep you from answering these deep, deep questions of jackchit.




Shhhh! It was my idea. Verizon is my patsy.

[pomeroo]

Quoted remark removed.
Please answer the question in a little more depth or admit you dropped the ball. I asked over at LCF but you chose to ignore that.




I'm ignoring you because,Incivil remark removed.. The question is silly and uninteresting. Listen to what I told Fetzer: you are not making any point.

[Pardalis]

Verizon?

:eusa_think:

sounds Hebrew... definitely a conspiracy there. ;)

[chran]

A bumble bee DOES fly.

Unless it doesn't. So there's that.

[Slayhamlet]

What the heck is this question anyway?

[Lisa Simpson]

What the heck is this question anyway?

The question is -

A. did George Bush use explosive bumblebees to bring down the Twin Towers

OR

B. was it radical Islamic bumblebees who flew in formation in the shape of two airplanes that brought down the WTC.

I'm going with B. as I think bees are sneaky bastages.

[pomeroo]

What the heck is this question anyway?



I could ask you to watch the first installment of the Roberts-Fetzer debate, but I'll save you the time. Fetzer was going on about the lunatic notion of Morgan Reynolds that the video record of Flight 175 hitting the WTC contains "physical impossibilities." As Flight 175 did, in fact, crash into one of the towers, whatever Reynolds imagines he is seeing cannot be impossible because the event really occurred. I alluded to a paper that supposedly "proved" that bumblebees violate laws of aerodynamics and are therefore unable to fly. My point--obviously--is that Reynolds may be every bit the great thinker Fetzer considers him, but his work here is utter rubbish. Bumblebees do fly and planes did crash into the Twin Towers.

Jackchit apparently finds all of this terribly complicated, and believes that he has discovered a flaw in my reasoning. It isn't complicated, and he has discovered nothing.

[pomeroo]

The question is -

A. did George Bush use explosive bumblebees to bring down the Twin Towers

OR


B. was it radical Islamic bumblebees who flew in formation in the shape of two airplanes that brought down the WTC.






Are you suggesting that they buzzed the towers?




I'm going with B. as I think bees are sneaky bastages.



Some of them are real sons of bees.

[rwguinn]

The question is -

A. did George Bush use explosive bumblebees to bring down the Twin Towers

OR

B. was it radical Islamic bumblebees who flew in formation in the shape of two airplanes that brought down the WTC.

I'm going with B. as I think bees are sneaky bastages.

False dichotomy.
You left out the possibility of Africanized Honeybees, which, despite their smaller stature, more than make up for it in agressivness and general easiness-to-P.O.
Also there are more of them, and they have a very bright radar signiture due to the metallic armor they have evolved since arriving in redneck country of Texas and New Mexico...

Ok, I made the last bit up...

[jaydeehess]

http://www.news.cornell.edu/chronicle/00/3.30.00/insect_flight.html

The whole "scientists proved that bumblebees cannot fly is a misconception, a twisting of facts. Earlier in the last century scientists attempted to understand how insect flight was acheived and could not explain how they did it. This IS NOT a proof that a bumblebee could not fly, all that can be said is that using the scientific understanding of aerodynamics they had available to them that they could not explain how it was accomplished.

Pomeroo's point here is that Reynolds is doing much them same. He is using science that either does not go deep enough or that is too simplified to explain things and when this results in not being able to explain how the buildings fell, he assumes they could not have done so without additional energy input. In the case of the bumblebee Reynolds would not argue a plot to equip bumblebees with secret devices that allow them to fly simply because the original physics of aerodymanics could not explain their flight yet he is all too willing to ascribe all manner of conspiracy simply because he cannot explain how the buildings fell.

[Lisa Simpson]

False dichotomy.
You left out the possibility of Africanized Honeybees, which, despite their smaller stature, more than make up for it in agressivness and general easiness-to-P.O.
Also there are more of them, and they have a very bright radar signiture due to the metallic armor they have evolved since arriving in redneck country of Texas and New Mexico...

Ok, I made the last bit up...

Yes, but only if they were Islamic Africanized honeybees. Obviously the Christian Africanized Honeybees would not want to attack America. 'Cause god likes us best.

[AZCat]

What is the average air velocity of an unladen Islamic Africanized honeybee?

[Lisa Simpson]

What is the average air velocity of an unladen Islamic Africanized honeybee?

42

[Slayhamlet]

The question is -

A. did George Bush use explosive bumblebees to bring down the Twin Towers

OR

B. was it radical Islamic bumblebees who flew in formation in the shape of two airplanes that brought down the WTC.

I'm going with B. as I think bees are sneaky bastages.

I agree it was bees that brought down the WTC, but the bumblebees were obviously just unwitting patsies. The flight formations clearly resembled those of mechanized wasps, not bumblebees, which were probably commissioned by Al-CIApis to be used in a false flag op as a pretext for Bushco to illegally invade the bees' sacred combs so Honiburton could harvest them. It's all so obvious!

No blood for honey!

[Slayhamlet]

I could ask you to watch the first installment of the Roberts-Fetzer debate, but I'll save you the time. Fetzer was going on about the lunatic notion of Morgan Reynolds that the video record of Flight 175 hitting the WTC contains "physical impossibilities." As Flight 175 did, in fact, crash into one of the towers, whatever Reynolds imagines he is seeing cannot be impossible because the event really occurred. I alluded to a paper that supposedly "proved" that bumblebees violate laws of aerodynamics and are therefore unable to fly. My point--obviously--is that Reynolds may be every bit the great thinker Fetzer considers him, but his work here is utter rubbish. Bumblebees do fly and planes did crash into the Twin Towers.

Jackchit apparently finds all of this terribly complicated, and believes that he has discovered a flaw in my reasoning. It isn't complicated, and he has discovered nothing.

Oh. So it's just jackchit JAQ'ing off again. Gotcha.

[kookbreaker]

"well Mr. President, its the BEES and SPIDERS again!"

[JimBenArm]

"well Mr. President, its the BEES and SPIDERS again!"
"I ain't been inside for a week!"

[Pardalis]

Bumblebee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee_%28Transformers%29) was my favorite Autobot, he would never do such a thing.

[scissorhands]

Oh dear, why would Willie be interested in something so off topic?
The stupidity over there seems to be infectious.

William_Rodriguez
Posted: May 5 2007, 12:10 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Member No.: 3,302
Joined: 23-March 07

(regarding Mark and Ron)


Is that true? are they gay? anybody have info on that?
Not that it is relevant to our debate but it will explain a lot of things if true.

William

[rwguinn]

42

That answer reminds mw of the story about the , 5'9" tall, 98 pound baseball umpire.
The first batter was 6'3 and 250 lb. The catcher was 6'1" and 220 lb.
At the first pitch, he called "Strike 1" The batter turned around and glared at him in a threatening manner.
Next Pitch: "Ball 1!" The catcher hiked up his belt and glared.
Next pitch: "Two!" Cried the ump.
"Two What?" the batter and catcher screamed.
"Too da&n close to call" was the reply.

[HyJinX]

I think it's rather obvious that Bumble Bees can't fly....but they do apparently swim.

[Horatius]

Bumblebees do fly and planes did crash into the Twin Towers.

Jackchit apparently finds all of this terribly complicated, and believes that he has discovered a flaw in my reasoning. It isn't complicated, and he has discovered nothing.



I think I get it now.

Since planes didn't crash into the WTC, you must believe that bees can't fly.

Gotcha!

:)

[Undesired Walrus]

Poomeroo. lol

lol: Poo lol.

Poo. ROLFCOPTER.

[Lisa Simpson]

Of course bees can't fly! Do you really think they could see over the yoke?!?!?!

[Stellafane]

I think I get it now.

Since planes didn't crash into the WTC, you must believe that bees can't fly.

Gotcha!

:)

Is the latest theory that kamikaze bumblebees flew into the WTC and the Pentagon?

[Terry]

Of course bees can't fly! Do you really think they could see over the yoke?!?!?!

Or reach the rudder pedals, for that matter.

[Mobyseven]

Oh dear, why would Willie be interested in something so off topic?
The stupidity over there seems to be infectious.

Er...what in the name of Ed would that explain??? What is with the truth movement and being fascinated with homosexuality???

On another note - I'd like to officially withdraw the provisional apology I put forward to jackchit in another thread, as the provisions have not been met. Jackchit is back to his old ways, and it is clear that his apology to all of us was a farce.

Back to your bumblebees.

[Horatius]

Is the latest theory that kamikaze bumblebees flew into the WTC and the Pentagon?



No, they were mind-controlled zombie bumblebees. The kamikaze thing is just disinfo meant to slander the Japanese honeybees.

[Lisa Simpson]

Mind-controlled Islamic zombie bumblebees. Every good war needs a villain and we can't start the beehad without a fall-bee.

[PhantomWolf]

:cheerleader5 :lfault :cheerleader5


:iblamelisa:

[mortimer]

Poomeroo. lol

lol: Poo lol.

Poo. ROLFCOPTER.

Smeek! (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2580204#post2580204)

[pomeroo]

Mind-controlled Islamic zombie bumblebees. Every good war needs a villain and we can't start the beehad without a fall-bee.



I just can't get the image of John Belushi in that bee costume out of my head.

[qarnos]

42

42?

8,468 posts and all you can come up with is 42?!?!?!

[Guile]

42?

8,468 posts and all you can come up with is 42?!?!?!
Hmmm, 42 seems to be the answer to something.

[MRC_Hans]

Another bumblebee anecdote:

As lore has it,
the famous aeronautic engineer Sikorsky hung a sign
in his office lobby that read, “the bumblebee, according
to our engineers’ calculations, cannot fly at all,
but the bumblebee doesn’t know this and flies”.

From here: http://www.kcapa.org/PDF/Fall%202004.pdf (http://www.kcapa.org/PDF/Fall%202004.pdf)

Hans

[gumboot]

Hmmm, 42 seems to be the answer to something.

Life...

-Gumboot

[tsig]

Threatening the "admins" is such a great way to start a thread...

I guess you haven't felt like reading the rules- can't really blame anyone but yourself, in that case...

Yep first thing you do on a new job is to kick the boss in the shin.

Rules, we don't need no stinking rules!

[The Great Hairy One]

How many roads must a man walk down?

Cheers,
TGHO

[Lisa Simpson]

How many roads must a man walk down?

Cheers,
TGHO


Mother Simpson: [sings] How many roads must a man walk down / Before you can call him a man...
Homer: Seven.
Lisa: No, dad, it's a rhetorical question.
Homer: OK, eight.
Lisa: Dad, do you even know what "rhetorical" means?
Homer: Do *I* know what "rhetorical" means?

[pomeroo]

Jackchit starts a thread that is totally pointless. He notices that he has nothing to say and silently departs.

Would anyone care to suggest a moral?

[R.Mackey]

"They say the empty can rattles the most?"

Too pithy?

[Horatius]

Jackchit starts a thread that is totally pointless. He notices that he has nothing to say and silently departs.



I don't think it was totally pointless. It did totally debunk (once again) the LCF thread where they all act like we're the ones that always delete threads.


Would anyone care to suggest a moral?

"They say the empty can rattles the most?"

Too pithy?


Cute, but it ignores the "silently departs" bit.

I've always favoured, "It's the nail that sticks up that gets hammered down." Or maybe, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease." Hammer == grease == debunking the heck out of you.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I don't think it was totally pointless. It did totally debunk (once again) the LCF thread where they all act like we're the ones that always delete threads.






Cute, but it ignores the "silently departs" bit.

I've always favoured, "It's the nail that sticks up that gets hammered down." Or maybe, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease." Hammer == grease == debunking the heck out of you.

"Best to remain silent and have people wonder if you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

[gumboot]

A fool and his thread are soon parted?

-Gumboot

[Horatius]

A fool and his thread are soon parted?

-Gumboot



We have a winner!

[Disbelief]

Jackchit starts a thread that is totally pointless. He notices that he has nothing to say and silently departs.

Would anyone care to suggest a moral?

Don't drink and park. Accidents cause people.

[Whiplash]

I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

[TjW]

For Jackchit, an immoral would probably be more appropriate.

[Lisa Simpson]

http://www.roflcat.com/images/cats/270913946_efa38ec3d8.jpg (http://www.roflcat.com)

This is a classic thread, in the style of the great 1inChrist. He was a great troll. These new trolls just aren't the same. And get off my lawn you rotten kids!

[qarnos]

Where's gangster kitty when you need him?

[Rich M]

Where's gangster kitty when you need him?

Hunting bees, probably. At least, my cat has added bees to the list of creatures it kills. Surely can't be a good idea.

SO, let me just get this straight: Bees can't fly, therefore planes cannot fly either. Logic therefore dictates that cats did 9/11. Possibly cats wearing bee costumes, to disguise the jetpacks.

[MRC_Hans]

Jackchit starts a thread that is totally pointless. He notices that he has nothing to say and silently departs.

Would anyone care to suggest a moral?Even a blind chicken ....

Even Jackchit does something sensible at times (such as silently departing).

Hans

[Horatius]

Logic therefore dictates that cats did 9/11. Possibly cats wearing bee costumes, to disguise the jetpacks.


Logic nothing. My cat has told me he did 9/11. "Meow Mraow. Blert purr muroooowr."


Plain as day! Just look at him:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/94904555496e8385d.jpg


Pure terrorist.

Now I just have to figure out how he time-travelled to do it, since he's only 2 1/2 years old.....

[qarnos]

Logic nothing. My cat has told me he did 9/11. "Meow Mraow. Blert purr muroooowr."


Plain as day! Just look at him:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/94904555496e8385d.jpg


Pure terrorist.

Now I just have to figure out how he time-travelled to do it, since he's only 2 1/2 years old.....

I love that cat! :D

[jackchit]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Perhaps you could make a post with some substance, instead of dragging the events from some other forum over here and a lame attempt to garner attention.
QFE

[Lisa Simpson]

Answer the question ron or shut up.


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2580156#post2580156

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just missed Pomeroo's answer.

[jackchit]

QFE

Forum donor eh? what did you donate? a dollar or your personality plus 50c in the interests of equity.???



This post violates your membership agreement, along with others you've done recently. I am forwarding all of your recent posts in violation of your agreement to the moderation team to determine what actions are appropriate.

Do not post any more uncivil messages, nor violate your membership agreement in any other way.

[beachnut]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.
No, you missed all the facts, you missed the answers, and like a good truther you missed everything that was said.

The fact is you need to try again. Your question was answered by person you wanted to answer it, and by others. Why are truthers unable to comprehend what they read. I have found this to be the basic problem with truthers; reading comprehension.

I hate to do it, you know ask a question. But jackchit, do you suffer from a learning disability? You could get some help. Just asking a question.

[ihaunter]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.

"Trying to divert from the original question"? I've read your opening post. I've re-read it. What the [Rule 8] is the original question?

[jackchit]

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2580156#post2580156

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just missed Pomeroo's answer.

I saw it. wasn't really an answer was it? even you should be able to see that.
I would like a comprehensive answer but that would back him into a corner he couldn't get out of.
If that rubbish is good for you then no wonder you swallowed the OCT, hell if you wanna stay asleep please do you will be little loss to the world.


This post violates your membership agreement, along with others you've done recently. I am forwarding all of your recent posts in violation of your agreement to the moderation team to determine what actions are appropriate.

Do not post any more uncivil messages, nor violate your membership agreement in any other way.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

:words:
So, your answer would be a 'No' then?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I saw it. wasn't really an answer was it? even you should be able to see that.
I would like a comprehensive answer but that would back him into a corner he couldn't get out of.
If that rubbish is good for you then no wonder you swallowed the OCT, hell if you wanna stay asleep please do you will be little loss to the world. (Bolding mine)
You're not making innuendos of violence again are you?

[Horatius]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.



Not to spam too much, but I think he really needs to see this:

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/anonymous/strip/2007/05/07/ask-questions-demand-answers.png


Well, he gets the Demand Answers part right, at least.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=81431

[Horatius]

I saw it. wasn't really an answer was it? even you should be able to see that.
I would like a comprehensive answer but that would back him into a corner he couldn't get out of.
If that rubbish is good for you then no wonder you swallowed the OCT, hell if you wanna stay asleep please do you will be little loss to the world.


You're not making innuendos of violence again are you?



Re-bolded. I'd say it's more of a innuendo of drugging him. But that's just me.

[Lisa Simpson]

Re-bolded. I'd say it's more of a innuendo of drugging him. But that's just me.

Him? He was responding to me. I'm a she.

[Horatius]

Him? He was responding to me. I'm a she.




I'ms a gooder reader than that, I is. Usually.

Just don't drink anything Jack gives you. Not that you would, anyways.....

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I'ms a gooder reader than that, I is. Usually.

Just don't drink anything Jack gives you. Not that you would, anyways.....
I can do science me!

[beachnut]

I saw it. wasn't really an answer was it? even you should be able to see that.
I would like a comprehensive answer but that would back him into a corner he couldn't get out of.
If that rubbish is good for you then no wonder you swallowed the OCT, hell if you wanna stay asleep please do you will be little loss to the world.
Anyone, even an engineer who can not write well, familiar with the topic at hand can see Poomeroo answered the question.

Some may have problems finding the answer, but most people could, if familiar with the topic, find the answer.

What is your problem, finding the answer? Do you need some help?

[Slayhamlet]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.

No one gives a damn about your lame, pointless question.

[T.A.M.]

I am sensing another "suicide by mod" coming...cant say I'll be sorry about this one.

TAM:)

happy now...lol
;)

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The proper phrase is "suicide by mod". :)

[pomeroo]

Well this thread was aimed at poomeroo who decides not to give an answer but then he has all his apologists trying to divert from the original question and then saying .. ooo jackchit has departed....
Answer the question ron or shut up.
To all the others who posted here, I admire your loyalty but "facts" seem to be missing from your posts, so post facts not opinion as your opinion is moot due to your partizanship.



Well, Lisa is lot more polite than I am. It's apparent that you have, once again, made a horse's ass of yourself. My answer to your disingenuous question does, in fact, appear in post # 48. I say that you have absolutely no point to make.

[pomeroo]

[quote=jackchit;2588847]I saw it. wasn't really an answer was it? even you should be able to see that.
I would like a comprehensive answer but that would back him into a corner he couldn't get out of.
If that rubbish is good for you then no wonder you swallowed the OCT, hell if you wanna stay asleep please do you will be little loss to the world.





You'd like a comprehensive answer? That presupposes a coherent question, no?

I have a thought: Why not back me into your corner? Your attempt ought to be good for a few laughs.

[Lisa Simpson]

He can't answer you. He is suspended.

[pomeroo]

He can't answer you. He is suspended.


Good!

I mean, bad--I want him to try squirming out of this one.

Oh, hell--good riddance!

[Slayhamlet]

He can't answer you. He is suspended.

How tragic. :(

I'm sure Jack would have been entirely forthright in his response to Pomeroo and have quit obfuscating, making his point obvious and thus clearing everything up.

Or not.

[jaydeehess]

Actually pomeroo answered best with:
I could ask you to watch the first installment of the Roberts-Fetzer debate, but I'll save you the time. Fetzer was going on about the lunatic notion of Morgan Reynolds that the video record of Flight 175 hitting the WTC contains "physical impossibilities." As Flight 175 did, in fact, crash into one of the towers, whatever Reynolds imagines he is seeing cannot be impossible because the event really occurred. I alluded to a paper that supposedly "proved" that bumblebees violate laws of aerodynamics and are therefore unable to fly. My point--obviously--is that Reynolds may be every bit the great thinker Fetzer considers him, but his work here is utter rubbish. Bumblebees do fly and planes did crash into the Twin Towers.

Jackchit apparently finds all of this terribly complicated, and believes that he has discovered a flaw in my reasoning. It isn't complicated, and he has discovered nothing.

I added:

http://www.news.cornell.edu/chronicle/00/3.30.00/insect_flight.html

The whole "scientists proved that bumblebees cannot fly is a misconception, a twisting of facts. Earlier in the last century scientists attempted to understand how insect flight was acheived and could not explain how they did it. This IS NOT a proof that a bumblebee could not fly, all that can be said is that using the scientific understanding of aerodynamics they had available to them that they could not explain how it was accomplished.

Pomeroo's point here is that Reynolds is doing much them same. He is using science that either does not go deep enough or that is too simplified to explain things and when this results in not being able to explain how the buildings fell , or the planes entered the buildings, he assumes they could not have done so. In the case of the bumblebee Reynolds would not argue a plot to equip bumblebees with secret devices that allow them to fly simply because the original physics of aerodymanics could not explain their flight yet he is all too willing to ascribe all manner of conspiracy simply because he cannot explain how the buildings fell or the planes entering the buildings.(which IMHO illustrates that Reynolds is an economist and not a scientist.)

,,, and gumboot and others also added to this.

jackchit has nothing to argue about, he completely misses the whole point of pomeroo's statement. Becuase of this he got frustrated and upon getting frustrated he became angry and displayed all the maturity of a petulant child.

ETA;
I looked through the first two pages of this thread and never did see a post in which jackchit actually asked the question, insteda always referring to the question posed on a thread on another forum. Many of us here have disagreed with those on LC and have subsequently found ourselves banned for no other reason other than making statements contrary to the LC mantra that 9/11 was an inside job.
jackchit will have to learn to do better next time since those of us wjo cannot go to LC will be unable to know what he is referring to. Instead he left it up to pomeroo to inform us what the subject was. A very odd debating style to say the least.

[chillzero]

Actually pomeroo answered best with:


I added:

(which IMHO illustrates that Reynolds is an economist and not a scientist.)

,,, and gumboot and others also added to this.

jackchit has nothing to argue about, he completely misses the whole point of pomeroo's statement. Becuase of this he got frustrated and upon getting frustrated he became angry and displayed all the maturity of a petulant child.

ETA;
I looked through the first two pages of this thread and never did see a post in which jackchit actually asked the question, insteda always referring to the question posed on a thread on another forum. Many of us here have disagreed with those on LC and have subsequently found ourselves banned for no other reason other than making statements contrary to the LC mantra that 9/11 was an inside job.
jackchit will have to learn to do better next time since those of us wjo cannot go to LC will be unable to know what he is referring to. Instead he left it up to pomeroo to inform us what the subject was. A very odd debating style to say the least.

Preceisely,
Which was why I posted this:

Jackchit, this thread has been placed in the CT forum, but your OP does not clarify what you wish to speak about.

Can you please make a post identifying the questions that you would like pomeroo to answer? This will be the best way to put this thread on topic, and not result in a move.

Alternatively, if you would like this thread to continue as it has done so far, you could always start a new thread, with an OP (and title) that makes it clear what your questions are, and I will move this one to flame wars, or AAH if it gets ugly.

I should have checked back in a bit more often, and done as I said I would. Never mind.

[Cuddles]

ETA;
I looked through the first two pages of this thread and never did see a post in which jackchit actually asked the question, insteda always referring to the question posed on a thread on another forum. Many of us here have disagreed with those on LC and have subsequently found ourselves banned for no other reason other than making statements contrary to the LC mantra that 9/11 was an inside job.
jackchit will have to learn to do better next time since those of us wjo cannot go to LC will be unable to know what he is referring to. Instead he left it up to pomeroo to inform us what the subject was. A very odd debating style to say the least.

So, did we ever find out what the actual question was? It seems to have involved bees and their ability to fly, but I'd still like to know what he actually asked, rather than just the answer. What do you mean "How do you keep an idiot in suspence"? Tell me dammit!

Incidentally, bees actually can't fly. It's all just falling with style. Or in the case of the ones banging their heads against my window for hours on end, with a complete lack of style.

[Darth Rotor]

Personal life? I do not understand what these words mean...
Time to call Child Protective Services, it would appear, on a woman who neglects her three children to fulfill a role on an online forum. This would appear to be the correct protocol among the JREF CT forum community, given the episode regarding an LC member, a call to CPS, and the ensuing threat on Gravy's life?

DR

[JimBenArm]

Time to call Child Protective Services, it would appear, on a woman who neglects her three children to fulfill a role on an online forum. This would appear to be the correct protocol among the JREF CT forum community, given the episode regarding an LC member, a call to CPS, and the ensuing threat on Gravy's life?

DR
>sniff<
What's that smell? Smells like rotting flesh. Like a corpse being dug up for no apparent reason.
Ah, well. Probably nothing to worry about.
Carry on.

[Darth Rotor]

The question is -

A. did George Bush use explosive bumblebees to bring down the Twin Towers

OR

B. was it radical Islamic bumblebees who flew in formation in the shape of two airplanes that brought down the WTC.

I'm going with B. as I think bees are sneaky bastages.
Nope. Bees are not made of the proper material to hold the thousands of gallons of fuel that were required to start the fire that led to weakened steel, even if they could manage the formation flying skills (as could Canadian geese) to fly in the shape of a Boeing passenger jet, 757 or otherwise.

Please don't get infected by CSS: CT Stupidity Syndrome.

DR

[Horatius]

He can't answer you. He is suspended.



And, true to form, he's now claiming that he's been banned, not just suspended:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8672&view=findpost&p=13470805

[Lisa Simpson]

And, true to form, he's now claiming that he's been banned, not just suspended:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8672&view=findpost&p=13470805

Why do they always do that? It seems like every one of them cannot understand the difference between suspended/banned and moved/deleted. Perhaps they are all infected with parasitic brain bees.

[jaydeehess]

And, true to form, he's now claiming that he's been banned, not just suspended:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8672&view=findpost&p=13470805


Well, he does not have the intellectual power to discern the difference between a post that has been removed and one that has simply been moved to another sub-forum. So it is no great mystery that he does not have the intellectual power to understand the difference between banning and suspension of privilages.

Can we expect that he is continuing to view this thread?

If so then upon the end of your suspension of privilages jackchit, perhaps you will care to actually post what the exact question was that you have posed to pomeroo. If you believe that pomeroo has avoided answering your question and you wish others here to understand that he has been avoiding it, then you have to let us know what the question was.

If all you wanted to do was pursue pomeroo accross different forums and could not care less what others here think about pomeroo's supposed avoidance of the question, that is the behaviour of a bona fide troll and would be worthy of getting you truly banned.

I suspect that there are many here who believe that part of your plan is to get banned from this forum and to wear that as a badge of honour.
Many here do so in relation to having been banned from LC or P4T.

The difference is that most here get banned from LC or P4T simply and soley for disagreeing with the dogma and mantra on those sites that 9/11 was an inside job whereas you would follow many others who have been banned from this site soley and simply because they cannot abide the rules concerning language and personal attack. there are others though, who continue to to post here who do believe that 9/11 was an inside job, such as MirageMemories and Lyte Trip.

The difference between them and you is that they have never threatened anyone, are willing to abide the rules and if they occasionally cross the line and get warned they pull back. You ignore all warnings and make no apologies for it. That will get exactly what you want, banning.

[Disbelief]

Why do they always do that? It seems like every one of them cannot understand the difference between suspended/banned and moved/deleted. Perhaps they are all infected with parasitic brain bees.

How could he play the martyr if he said he was suspended?

[Lisa Simpson]

How could he play the martyr if he said he was suspended?

But...but...how can he be a martyr once he's unsuspended? Or won't that matter?

[aggle-rithm]

Why do they always do that? It seems like every one of them cannot understand the difference between suspended/banned and moved/deleted. Perhaps they are all infected with parasitic brain bees.

I dealt with that issue here:

http://www.johnmreese.net/apprentice27.jpg

[Darth Rotor]

Why do they always do that? It seems like every one of them cannot understand the difference between suspended/banned and moved/deleted. Perhaps they are all infected with parasitic brain bees.
More likely infected with CSS: CT Stupidity Syndrome.

DR

[Horatius]

there are others though, who continue to to post here who do believe that 9/11 was an inside job, such as MirageMemories and Lyte Trip.

The difference between them and you is that they have never threatened anyone, are willing to abide the rules and if they occasionally cross the line and get warned they pull back. You ignore all warnings and make no apologies for it. That will get exactly what you want, banning.



And of course, this puts the lie to j911ob/Pd'oh's next line:

Yes they always find a way to ban truthers in the end.


Once again, twoofers ignoring the plainly obvious, as they prefer to spin out another fantasy. A lie/mistake begets a fantasy, and their worldview is reinforced just a little bit more.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Why do they always do that? It seems like every one of them cannot understand the difference between suspended/banned and moved/deleted.

Well, when they "grow up" on a forum that seems to only ban members and delete posts/threads, I'm sure they subconsciously believe every other forum does the same thing...

Or they're just angsty and need something to rage against.

[jaydeehess]

Pd'oh is jdx/Rob Balsamo is he not?


Yes they always find a way to ban truthers in the end.

At any rate I know that jdx is quite blatant about banning anyone who disagrees with him. Sometimes he will take a statement by a skeptic that is indeed an ad hom and use that as the basis for banning while ignoring several other ad homs by his own cadre but as often as not he simply bans because the poster disagreed with him or one of the golden people at P4T.

I was banned from P4T. I wrote to jdx and asked
"May I ask exactly what the reason is for my being banned? I did not question any point in the work you have done concerning Flight 77 FDR.

What was it that irked you about my suggestions?"

His response(quoting mining me)
"Undertow is suggesting that you do not "tell him about this one ".
If you want debate or clear understanding of your work why hold back?

What i find interesting about this is that you people claim to have the 'proper experts' for this type of work, yet you cannot get the same information.

Ok, i spent my day on the net debating you people who make excuses. You have offered nothing of substance but to show the ignorance, apathy in research, assumptions of conclusions.. to rebut our work.
If you want to debate, start with a point by point debunk of Pandora's Black Box - Chapter Two. Found pinned in the multimedia section of this forum.
I can see why you people do not want to have a proper debate in person. You have offered nothing. You hide behind your screen. You have shown your so-called anonymous 'experts' are unable to get the same information we can yet you say we dont have the expertise.. its apparent you want to distract us from our work. You will be banned when i have the motivation to go into the admin cp and get it done.
For now, enjoy your short stay.. and enjoy chasing us around as we ignore you while going after the govt for answers..."

My suggestions that I refer to were other ways to get his message out to the public. I had in that series of posts then questioned why he did not want Undertow to release the new data they had to Mark Roberts.
All I did was question his method of getting the message out, not the message itself and not him personally.

That, he would tell you, is what got me banned, asking questions.
how ironic

[T.A.M.]

PDoh = Paul Doherty of England.

Not JDX

TAM:)

[jaydeehess]

PDoh = Paul Doherty of England.

Not JDX

TAM:)

Thanks. My point was in response to the 'Yes they always find a way to ban truthers in the end. ' accusation against JREF. I edited the above to more indicate it as such.

my bad in not making it clear.

[T.A.M.]

ahh...no problemo

TAM:)