kimmy Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Bush/Cheney = George/Dick I called BC "Dick" for years, until he asked me to stop. It still tickles me to imagine that we're actually conversing with VP Cheney. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) What I find most perplexing about this thread is why this guy keeps referring to Dick as "George". -k What I find most perplexing, Kimmy, is how you folks studiously avoid discussing the science. It is Kafkaesque.What is also highly perplexing is your sudden appearance and your laser like focus on the science. Edited April 3, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 poking it with a stick That should be the subtitle of MLW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 avoid discussing the science. Also, why avoid the problem of trying to fund and execute a multi-million dollar project employing thousands of Americans, whose goal is to kill thousands of Americans... all in SECRET. No point in discussing that problem. Especially because common sense tells us that it can't be done. Much easier to point to a bug-eyed "expert" who calls NIST liars, and then quote incomprehensible but incorrect "science". Poke. Poke. Poke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Also, why avoid the problem of trying to fund and execute a multi-million dollar project employing thousands of Americans, whose goal is to kill thousands of Americans... all in SECRET. No point in discussing that problem. Especially because common sense tells us that it can't be done. Much easier to point to a bug-eyed "expert" who calls NIST liars, and then quote incomprehensible but incorrect "science". Poke. Poke. Poke. Jonathan Cole - 9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate - AE911Truth.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 What I find most perplexing, Kimmy, is how you folks studiously avoid discussing the science. It is Kafkaesque. What is also highly perplexing is your sudden appearance and your laser like focus on the science. Why do you only accept the "science" produced by crackpots like Dr Jones and Dr Fetzer and the goofs at AE911, and reject actual science from actual scientists? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 The first great thread on this topic reached 200 pages, as I recall. I would say it's less a question of discussing it, and more along the lines of poking it with a stick to see what happens next. -k Did all 200 pages of the other thread consist of the same brilliant science, the focused attention to detail, being shown by you and your fellow scientists in this thread, Kimmy? That must have been fun, not to mention edifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Why do you only accept the "science" produced by crackpots like Dr Jones and Dr Fetzer and the goofs at AE911, and reject actual science from actual scientists? -k More of the laser like focus. Go ahead and present some evidence, Kimmy. I'm all ears. Did you watch the video of Jon Cole, PE, "The Great Thermate Debate". He, unlike NIST, actually performed scientific experiments. Which is also what Steven Jones did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Did all 200 pages of the other thread consist of the same brilliant science, the focused attention to detail, being shown by you and your fellow scientists in this thread, Kimmy? That must have been fun, not to mention edifying. Oh Im sure it had its share of the crackpot stuff you seem to promote. Thats due to the nature of the truther approach, as each attempt at pseudo science gets debunked, they reach to the internet for yet another etc., etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 The first great thread on this topic reached 200 pages, as I recall. I would say it's less a question of discussing it, and more along the lines of poking it with a stick to see what happens next. -k Forum Rules and Guidelines Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Oh Im sure it had its share of the crackpot stuff you seem to promote. Thats due to the nature of the truther approach, as each attempt at pseudo science gets debunked, they reach to the internet for yet another etc., etc. Yes, to the 2300 architects, engineers and scientists who actually perform experiments to test the various hypotheses. Why would you have chosen such a hopelessly outdated website to advance your ideas, OGFT? Why aren't you using the laser like focus being exhibited by the others in your camp to address the science? The "truther" approach is truth. Notice how I post things with that in mind. You, certainly some tries., but this your latest post is dismal as regards science. Would you care to do a review of Kimmy's, Michael's and Argus's approach to science? Edited April 3, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Yes, to the 2300 architects, engineers and scientists who actually perform experiments to test the various hypotheses. Why would you have chosen such a hopelessly outdated website to advance your ideas, OGFT? Why aren't you using the laser like focus being exhibited by the others in your camp to address the science? The "truther" approach is truth. Notice how I post things with that in mind. You, certainly some tries., but this your latest post is dismal as regards science. Would you care to do a review of Kimmy's, Michael's and Argus's approach to science? So any actual science that debunks the hysteria must be outdated...how typical. Anyway, maybe you should move on, most of the rest of the world has. Although I am sure there are still dark corners of the internet were junk can still be found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 More of the laser like focus. Laser-like focus? Are you suggesting that a directed energy weapon may have been involved? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 This is how Bill Maher dealt with 9/11 truthers and controlled demolition crackpots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zJdEI3rFvCY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 So any actual science that debunks the hysteria must be outdated...how typical. Anyway, maybe you should move on, most of the rest of the world has. Although I am sure there are still dark corners of the internet were junk can still be found. You're not addressing the science, OGFT, you're creating diversions. Forum guidelines suggest that's not desirable. Your source is outdated because the contentions made have been proven, by scientific experiments, to be unjustified. Not just one unjustified contention but many. You likely haven't watched "TheGreat Thermate Debate". It also showed how other contentions found on your source's site are unjustified. Instead of addressing the science you go off with the above nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Laser-like focus? Are you suggesting that a directed energy weapon may have been involved? -k Pretty lame smoke and mirrors, Kimmy. Is this really the best you can do as regards the science? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 This is how Bill Maher dealt with 9/11 truthers and controlled demolition crackpots: More focused science. I'm impressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 More focused science. I'm impressed. It's not all about science...especially half-ass Jones and Truther science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 It's not all about science... Forum Rules and Guidelines Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Forum Rules and Guidelines Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. Then I suggest heeding your own words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Forum Rules and Guidelines Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. You mean posting things like "George/Georgia" ? Got it ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) You mean posting things like "George/Georgia" ? Got it !One can hardly be expected to know whether you are a male or female. Kimmy has said she called you one or the other for years. If you are so concerned tell us your gender. I think georgia is a pretty name. Edited April 3, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted April 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Then I suggest heeding your own words. I brought something new to the discussion and it precipitated a flurry of posts from folks, (some who hadn't shown their face and others who slip in with irrelevant posts), who never addressed it in any fashion that the forum rules suggest, even mandate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) One can hardly be expected to know whether you are a male or female. Kimmy has said she called one or the other for years. If you are so concerned tell us your gender. I think georgia is a pretty name. I would suggest that you learn how to use this American forum engine just like everybody else has. The quote feature efficiently removes the compelling need to play name games. Member profiles indicate gender when volunteered. Edited April 3, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 I brought something new to the discussion and it precipitated a flurry of posts from folks, (some who hadn't shown their face and others who slip in with irrelevant posts), who never addressed it in any fashion that the forum rules suggest, even mandate. As has already been pointed out, there is nothing new here. It has been flogged to hell and back long ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.