Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, theo102 said: Boring, meaning it's obvious that you have no point to make. What "unfeasible nonsense" do you think I'm advocating, specifically? Actually although I disagree with him on much, the point Comedy Time makes here is a good one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Thhe problem with Occam's Razor. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/08/occams-razor/495332/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: More gaslighting attempts and people trying to tell me what I think and what my argument is Pointing out your assumption isn't the same as me gaslighting you. I haven't tried to tell you what I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Just now, Reet Hard said: Thhe problem with Occam's Razor. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/08/occams-razor/495332/ Straw man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 7 minutes ago, theo102 said: I've made no such assertion. Yes you did don't lie it's all there in writing remember. I'll copy and paste where you did if you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, Reet Hard said: Actually although I disagree with him on much, the point Comedy Time makes here is a good one. What point do you think that Comedy Time made? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: Yes you did don't lie it's all there in writing remember. I'll copy and paste where you did if you want. Do it. Edit:: there was a typo in my earlier post: " I haven't tried to tell you what I think." should have been " I haven't tried to tell you what you think." Edited October 3, 2020 by theo102 Typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, theo102 said: Straw man. No very relevant indeed and here is why... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: No very relevant indeed and here is why... Again you haven't made an argument. You've just reposted something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 6 minutes ago, theo102 said: Pointing out your assumption isn't the same as me gaslighting you. I haven't tried to tell you what I think. I haven't assumed anything. Nice blatant gas lighting attempt - not very good at it are you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, theo102 said: Again you haven't made an argument. You've just reposted something. It proves you lied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: I haven't assumed anything. Your assumption was that I was making a claim about truth when I made a claim about a theory, which is why you said that I was misusing Occam's Razor, since it says nothing about truth, as your article correctly pointed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: It proves you lied. Your name speaks for itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reet Hard Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Yes you did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo102 Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Reet Hard said: Yes you did Like I said, your name speaks for itself. The point is that unless you've got an alternative theory about the flightpaths going over radar dead zones then you've got no business talking about Occam's Razor. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/11/03/pentagon-crash-highlights-a-radar-gap/83167fda-f291-4a5e-8960-d501c217960d/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedy Time Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 Sheesh - get a frickin' room. Mods will be along soon I reckon, all this off topic guff. @theo102 I await your overall version of 911. @Reet Hard I await a response to my clouseau post. PLUS - Your claim it was the wrong engine verified and now a response to this post that you seemed to have missed from that link I gave you... https://www.metabunk.org/threads/explaining-the-9-11-murray-st-engine-from-flight-175-n612ua-that-hit-wtc2.9022/ Source: https://plus.google.com/+FredRobel/posts/HmQ8WfDkQVj Fred Robel Aircraft & Aviation Maintenance Apr 29, 2017 The TOBI duct, which provides cooling air to the High Pressure Turbine disk, pokes out amidst a sea of clear plastic wrap, as it encircles the engine center shaft area. We keep the plastic wrap over the outer part of the engine, to keep from dropping things down into the combustion can, through the NGV assemblies, which ring the outside of the area. Pratt JT9D-7R4D aircraft engine buildup. Content from external source 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideawake Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 56 minutes ago, Comedy Time said: Sheesh - get a frickin' room. Good one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacksonsGhost Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 4 hours ago, Comedy Time said: Explain the holes dude. Reality cares. These holes that you keep bleating on about are utterly moot. All buildings came down in a manner that is simply not consistent with the official line or "reality". So, what kind of word salad are you serving up today? I await. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedy Time Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said: These holes that you keep bleating on about are utterly moot. Explain the holes dude. It's a fundamental issue!! They were made by planes. That works. They were made by no planes. Doesn't work. 13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said: All buildings came down in a manner that is simply not consistent with the official line or "reality". Thank you for sharing your opinion. That has nothing to do with "no-planes". 13 minutes ago, JacksonsGhost said: So, what kind of word salad are you serving up today? I await. If the use of words confuses you, shall I simplify my request? I would like you to explain how columns on the WTC1/2 perimeters were blown inwards to simulate the shape of a plane. Edited October 3, 2020 by Comedy Time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishy Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 On 10/2/2020 at 1:24 PM, mishy said: Here's a better analysis of the first strike. No plane shaped hole until few seconds after impact. https://videopress.com/v/tyb4tbsm It has nothing to do with the capabilities of the video recorder, and anyone saying so is just being dishonest. After pages and pages of waffle, here's all you need to know about the (lack of) planes on 911. No plane shaped hole at impact. But feel free to carry on going round in circles. Asking how many people were involved etc is irrelevant, and not being able to answer these question is also irrelevant. Just because "no planers" can't say how many people were in on it, that for some reason means the planes were real? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacksonsGhost Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Comedy Time said: I would like you to explain how columns on the WTC1/2 perimeters were blown inwards to simulate the shape of a plane. I believe planes struck both buildings. The aircraft are canards used to deflect any debate on what really happened. It's still working very well to this very day as you so eloquently illustrate. Edited October 3, 2020 by JacksonsGhost 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedy Time Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 hour ago, JacksonsGhost said: I believe planes struck both buildings. The aircraft are canards used to deflect any debate on what really happened. It's still working very well to this very day as you so eloquently illustrate. Dude....I agree with you totally. I'm not doing the deflecting...maybe you should address this issue at the no-plane team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedy Time Posted October 3, 2020 Share Posted October 3, 2020 1 hour ago, mishy said: After pages and pages of waffle, here's all you need to know about the (lack of) planes on 911. No plane shaped hole at impact. But feel free to carry on going round in circles. Asking how many people were involved etc is irrelevant, and not being able to answer these question is also irrelevant. Just because "no planers" can't say how many people were in on it, that for some reason means the planes were real? lol Spam. Blurred video already answered. I don't care whether you agree or not. How was the exterior blown inwards. Shhhhhhhhhh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.8081a54a3b74a5d1823dfac966666137.jpg)
.jpg.594f0ef23288ec5ab04539b2f8a8dbd4.jpg)
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.