RE: There was a plane!

RE: There was a plane! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:17:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Real, you lost that round. Back to the show. Either that or ignore him. I could be watching an old Outer Limits off of IMDB right now. T^T oh that I do not totally ignore him? well I am bored tonite frankly besides gotta give them enough rope to hang themselves which he has done in triplicate

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne I am in the habit of ignoring retards. Ignoring yourself is quite a trick. You must have mastered meditation too. Very true! Besides which if he claims he has a habit is of ignoring other retards besides himself, how come he hasn't ignored me over the past 30 or so pages, if he believes me to be a retard? I would say that in itself, that contradiction, and the claim thereof, is rather "retarded". [:D] after pages of whining that I was ignoring you LOL for fuck sake you play both sides of everything hypocrite "Whining" indeed, I don't give a fucking toss if R0 ignores me. R0 did not consistently ignore me but when he did I only pointed out that he was ignoring me occasionally when he kept saying I was running away, and other variants of his usual lying bullshit.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:21:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne I use NISTS definition not some retard conspiracy theorist bullshit. Again you repeat the fucking lie that Sunders off the cuff remark about free-fall at a press conference represented NIST's definition.

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:21:45 PM)
yep I just keep posting the same question they keep dodging to remind them what losers they are. Oh come on! You mean your phlunky debunker site cant answer this for you? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne See that is where you shit house physicists get all fucked up. The paramount matter is not how long it took for the building to come down. It is the fact (and you both agreed) that it reached a condition freefall. PERIOD That said Sundar said; freefall is when there is no structural support demolition creates a condition of no structual support. you already admitted it freefell, you pal admitted it freefell you have no alternative explation for how that can heppen but demolition. Therefore without an alternative method for creating a global freefall condition I am forced to conclude demolition. see debunker debate results here [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/qdraw.gif[/image] Isnt that a fucking bitch? You didnt listen! -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKaQzQAlNn4 you can be a demolition expert too! All you need it s debunker site here and your finger on the button here and your head in the right frame of mind here. This is not going to change forever because it is the correct answer, bitch cry whine fart eat shit dont matter you and your ilk will have this same question shoved in your face or up your ass which ever you prefer till hall freezes over or until you can give an adequate answer which we all know you cant because demolition IS the only way this can be accomplished. I always wanted to be a debunker but I fucked up and passed my physics exams.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:22:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Real, you lost that round. Back to the show. Either that or ignore him. I could be watching an old Outer Limits off of IMDB right now. T^T oh that I do not totally ignore him? well I am bored tonite frankly besides gotta give them enough rope to hang themselves which he has done in triplicate Pretend all you like, even when your friend says I have won a round! [sm=alien.gif]

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:23:01 PM)
No you did not answer anything at 617 LOL Here let me help you.... Here is a great debunker to help you! It has all the answers to your problem! Bring it on!

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:26:24 PM)
I really think you have brain damage, I have answered that fucking quote several times tonight. such as Post 630 on the previous page: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3815063 - I think the mods need to have a word about him wilfully ignoring repeated answers and continually posing the same question again and again. Its extreme trollism. [sm=abducted.gif] [sm=abducted.gif]

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:34:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne No you did not answer anything at 617 LOL Here let me help you.... Here is a great debunker to help you! It has all the answers to your problem! Bring it on! I answered these questions repeatedly and in a lot of depth at Post 617 http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3814984 and 630 http://www.collarchat.com/m_3801381/mpage_32/key_/tm.htm#3815063 and numerous times before that too such as at post 594 http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3814624 and he did it to several other people too like Mnottertail. He has been copy and pasting throughout the thread but it has got worse, he even admitted doing it prolifically. This behaviour is utterly unacceptable. I think its time to call him out as a troll, which is a word I rarely use.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:37:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Coming up from Universal Studios ( catchy name eh ? ) Star Trek 169 : Return to the big bang that nobody heard T^T A few lines from the song "star trekking across the universe" represents R0: "only going forward cause we can't find reverse" [:D]

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:38:44 PM)
no you did not you dodged them none of this trash is an alt4ernative to demolition quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras More abusive shit Well done, great answer, just abusive shit and links to songs. All you are doing is discrediting yourself all the more. LOL I never said it was an alternative to demolition. OL I never said it was an alternative to demolition. You need to follow the thread of the argument. I had said "If it was a global failure, it would go into free-fall throughout the collapse." to which you replied "false that patently fucking bullshit.". Now you are agreeing with me but strawmanning yet again!

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:44:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras I really think you have brain damage, I have answered that fucking quote several times tonight. such as Post 630 on the previous page: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3815063 - I think the mods need to have a word about him wilfully ignoring repeated answers and continually posing the same question again and again. Its extreme trollism. [sm=abducted.gif] [sm=abducted.gif] no what the mods should do is tell you to either support your claim by answering the question or gove you a 2 week time out to think about it. yep I just keep posting the same question they keep dodging to remind them what losers they are. Oh come on! You mean your phlunky debunker site cant answer this for you? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne See that is where you shit house physicists get all fucked up. The paramount matter is not how long it took for the building to come down. It is the fact (and you both agreed) that it reached a condition freefall. PERIOD That said Sundar said; freefall is when there is no structural support demolition creates a condition of no structual support. you already admitted it freefell, you pal admitted it freefell you have no alternative explation for how that can heppen but demolition. Therefore SINCE YOU NOR YOUR ILK CANNOT SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM of an alternative method for creating a global freefall condition OTHER THAN DEMOLITION I am forced to conclude demolition. see debunker debate results here [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/qdraw.gif[/image] Isnt that a fucking bitch? You didnt listen! -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKaQzQAlNn4 you can be a demolition expert too! All you need it s debunker site here and your finger on the button here and your head in the right frame of mind here. This is not going to change forever because it is the correct answer, bitch cry whine fart eat shit dont matter you and your ilk will have this same question shoved in your face or up your ass which ever you prefer till hall freezes over or until you can give an adequate answer which we all know you cant because demolition IS the only way this can be accomplished. I always wanted to be a debunker but I fucked up and passed my physics exams.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:45:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne no you did not you dodged them none of this trash is an alt4ernative to demolition quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras More abusive shit Well done, great answer, just abusive shit and links to songs. All you are doing is discrediting yourself all the more. LOL I never said it was an alternative to demolition. OL I never said it was an alternative to demolition. You need to follow the thread of the argument. I had said "If it was a global failure, it would go into free-fall throughout the collapse." to which you replied "false that patently fucking bullshit.". Now you are agreeing with me but strawmanning yet again! You are misquoting me yet again and strawmanning. I kept pointing out that Tower 7 is different to demolition for the reasons below. This is what I wrote partly in response to that question: quote: Again I have to remind R0 that we acknowledged Tower 7 only reached free-fall for 1/8th of the decent. The most important point is that it did not do it throughout the collapse so it could not be a demolition job. For a self-proclaimed physics expert to dismiss the time of the descent shows your lack of knowledge, which notably your buddy David "shits" Chandler tried to alter by reading the collapse from the West of the building, not the East side where the collapse initiated. quote: Once again, demolition is not the only context in which free-fall can occur, it can occur where a segment of a building is unsupported, and for only 1/8th of the period of descent when it had no structural support WTC7 did free-fall but not for the rest, which means it was not characteristic of a demolition job.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:53:03 PM)
R0 is copying and pasting yet again quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras I really think you have brain damage, I have answered that fucking quote several times tonight. such as Post 630 on the previous page: http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3815063 - I think the mods need to have a word about him wilfully ignoring repeated answers and continually posing the same question again and again. Its extreme trollism. [sm=abducted.gif] [sm=abducted.gif] no what the mods should do is tell you to either support your claim by answering the question or gove you a 2 week time out to think about it. yep I just keep posting the same question they keep dodging to remind them what losers they are. Like others I have answered your questions repeatedly, which you blithely ignored and repeatedly asked them again. You have consistently ignored questions posed to you whilst firing question after question at others, even when they are answered in depth. It ios unaccpetable behaviour. Here you are simply repeating entire posts including abusive content totally unrelated to the questions. Even if I hadn't answered a question it is the height of stupidity to suggest people should get bans for not answering questions.

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:53:53 PM)
Kiddo you have nothing of value with all that shit. a building cannot globally fail and freefall at any time without demolition, not even for a second! DUH you and ron claimed there are other ways NO there are not. now shit of get off th efucking pot you have no alternative explation for how that can heppen but demolition. Therefore SINCE YOU NOR YOUR ILK CANNOT SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM of an alternative method for creating a global freefall condition OTHER THAN DEMOLITION I am forced to conclude demolition.

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 10:58:29 PM)
you need to explain how a building can globally fail and freefall by any means other than demolition to support your claims. a building cannot globally fail and freefall at any time in its descent without demolition PERIOD. NIST EXPLAINED THAT! They are correct and I agree with them.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 11:00:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Kiddo you have nothing of value with all that shit. a building cannot globally fail and freefall at any time without demolition, not even for a second! DUH you and ron claimed there are other ways Bullshit, if a building globally fails it results in free-fall throughout the collapse as there are no supporting elements. This is what Sunder who you are so fond of quoting said. quote: NO there are not. now shit of get off th efucking pot you have no alternative explation for how that can heppen but demolition. Therefore SINCE YOU NOR YOUR ILK CANNOT SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM of an alternative method for creating a global freefall condition OTHER THAN DEMOLITION I am forced to conclude demolition. Again Tower 7 only reached free-fall for 1/8th of the decent. The rest of the time (87% of it) was not in free-fall so it could not be a demolition job. Demolition is not the only context in which free-fall can occur, Free-fall is simply a body falling without support. A building in a dangerous state could collapse in free-fall for a brief amount of time if there was a sudden catastrophic event with the support structure. This is exactly what happened with WTC7 and for 1/8th of the time it did free-fall but not for the rest, which means it a demolition job cannot be a cause.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 11:03:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne you need to explain how a building can globally fail and freefall by any means other than demolition to support your claims. a building cannot globally fail and freefall at any time in its descent without demolition PERIOD. NIST EXPLAINED THAT! They are correct and I agree with them. No NIST didn't explain that. That is a fucking lie which you have been shown up about repeatedly. Sunder did not mention demolition - he actually said the opposite in the piece you quote as I explained time and time again. The building did not globally fail but fell in stages so it was not a demolition job.

Real0ne -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 11:12:03 PM)
yes they did you fucking liar man I hate to say this but you are far to fucking stupid to comprehend what is going on here. back on ignore

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 11:15:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne yes they did you fuking liar No they fucking didn't, all you did was quote Sunder in a press conference making an off the cuff comment and then pretended it was NIST's definition. This is what you claimed he stated: "WOULD BE A FALLING OBJECT THAT HAS NO ah... STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT" I posted a more comprehensive quote of what he said. There is no mention of demolition anywhere, and no mention of it being NISTs definition. He stated: quote: … a free fall time would be an object that has no … structural components below it...And that is not at all unusual because there was [emphasis in original] structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had … a sequence of structural failures that had to take place and everything was not instantaneous.

Anaxagoras -> RE: There was a plane! (8/18/2011 11:19:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne man I hate to say this but you are far to fucking stupid to comprehend what is going on here. back on ignore You already said that frequently so I don't get why you hate to say it this time. lol I never knew I was on R0's ignore list but if I am yet again then that is proof positive I must be doing something right! Good news for the start of the day - inadvertently I ended up staying up all night to fight with him! Oh the folly! [sm=banana.gif]

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875