My First Ever Banning

[JimBenArm]

Drop over to the Loose Change Forum, identify yourself and I'll give you all the response you crave.

Here on JREF I'm the equivalent of the "visiting team". All the 'rank 'n file' see is the enemy and nothing else.

You'll get a fair hearing at LC as long as you don't respond like your in JREF.

MM

Here, let me translate that for you Corsair:
"Go over to LC, where I can hurl obscenities, act like a total baboon, and not have to answer for it. You, on the other hand, will be immediately banned as soon as you identify yourself as someone who uses logic and critical thinking skills, and refuses to kowtow to the company line. In any case, I have no evidence to back up anything that I said happened, but will still make outlandish accusations anyway."
That pretty much is why he wants you over there. No accountability.

So, you ever going to man up and actually even attempt to prove any of the things you say? Or just continue to run and hide?

 

[Corsair 115]

Drop over to the Loose Change Forum, identify yourself and I'll give you all the response you crave.

Here on JREF I'm the equivalent of the "visiting team". All the 'rank 'n file' see is the enemy and nothing else.

You'll get a fair hearing at LC as long as you don't respond like your in JREF.

I'm here already, there's only so much time in a day, you've already spent time here discussing the issue, and lastly, whatever your issue with other posters here, I've not been impolite towards you.

Put these together and it seems to me there's no reason for you to not answer here. So, I'll respectfully ask you again to respond to my earlier posts. If you need refreshing on which ones specifically, I will provide the relevant post numbers.

 

[Corsair 115]

Here, let me translate that for you Corsair:
"Go over to LC, where I can hurl obscenities, act like a total baboon, and not have to answer for it. You, on the other hand, will be immediately banned as soon as you identify yourself as someone who uses logic and critical thinking skills, and refuses to kowtow to the company line. In any case, I have no evidence to back up anything that I said happened, but will still make outlandish accusations anyway."
That pretty much is why he wants you over there. No accountability.

That's entirely possible, judging from the accounts I have read around here.

But I have no interest in venturing elsewhere, since A) there are enough forums around here for me to partake in; B) this place alone is already soaking up too much of my time; C) I've seen Loose Change (2nd edition I believe) and found it's premise to be ridiculous, so going to their turf wouldn't seem appropriate.

And, as I mentioned, since MM has already made his case here, there's no rational reason to go elsewhere. If he didn't really want to discuss it here, then he shouldn't have posted here so much. Such is my analysis at any rate.

 

[R.Mackey]

I might point out that Miragememories has been consistently roasted about the NIST report. I've been hoping that if we smack him with the facts hard enough, he'll become interested in learning something. Doesn't seem to have worked. There's this thread (particularly after about page nine) and these two golden oldies...

Perhaps you can help him? He doesn't seem interested in reading what I have to say. Entirely his choice, of course.

 

[Minadin]

Drop over to the Loose Change Forum, identify yourself and I'll give you all the response you crave.

Here on JREF I'm the equivalent of the "visiting team". All the 'rank 'n file' see is the enemy and nothing else.

You'll get a fair hearing at LC as long as you don't respond like your in JREF.

MM

Hey there, MM. I went over to LC a few months ago and tried to argue my point in the most polite way that I could imagine. I"m not sure where i went wrong, but I was eventually "Gone'd". Perhaps you could let me know why:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2346

 

[Slayhamlet]

Hey there, MM. I went over to LC a few months ago and tried to argue my point in the most polite way that I could imagine. I"m not sure where i went wrong, but I was eventually "Gone'd". Perhaps you could let me know why:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2346

Why, because you were being "disingenuous" and had a "hidden agenda", of course! What does that mean in MM speech? It means you were banned for thinking differently than they do.

 

[R.Mackey]

Why, because you were being "disingenuous" and had a "hidden agenda", of course! What does that mean in MM speech? It means you were banned for thinking differently than they do.

You could be right.

Of course, I am still waiting for an answer to that question. And I do so hate putting words in the mouths of other posters.

Alas.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah awesome dive Mark! At that plummeting angle I'm surprised the wings didn't rip off...ya right!

Your subtlety is overwhelming!

Actually, I'm sure that manoeuver wasn't particularily safe.

Do you use a macro for those 'canned responses' or do you wake up occasionally?

Do you ever wonder why people point out errors and fallacies in your posts or do you just answer with rhetoric every time ?

Drop over to the Loose Change Forum, identify yourself and I'll give you all the response you crave.

Here on JREF I'm the equivalent of the "visiting team". All the 'rank 'n file' see is the enemy and nothing else.

Honestly, the place you're in shouldn't alter your ability to dish out evidence.

 

[Miragememories]

Here, let me translate that for you Corsair:
"Go over to LC, where I can hurl obscenities, act like a total baboon, and not have to answer for it. You, on the other hand, will be immediately banned as soon as you identify yourself as someone who uses logic and critical thinking skills, and refuses to kowtow to the company line. In any case, I have no evidence to back up anything that I said happened, but will still make outlandish accusations anyway."
That pretty much is why he wants you over there. No accountability.

So, you ever going to man up and actually even attempt to prove any of the things you say? Or just continue to run and hide?

"Go over to LC, where I can hurl obscenities, act like a total baboon,"

That is a straight out lie.

I don't behave that way. Ask e^n or Architect.

I suggested another forum to avoid idiot comments like yours JimBenArm.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

That's entirely possible, judging from the accounts I have read around here.

But I have no interest in venturing elsewhere, since A) there are enough forums around here for me to partake in; B) this place alone is already soaking up too much of my time; C) I've seen Loose Change (2nd edition I believe) and found it's premise to be ridiculous, so going to their turf wouldn't seem appropriate.

And, as I mentioned, since MM has already made his case here, there's no rational reason to go elsewhere. If he didn't really want to discuss it here, then he shouldn't have posted here so much. Such is my analysis at any rate.

Well then it pretty much sounds like you've made up your mind.

I'm glad I read your last post before I wasted my time giving you a considered response.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

I might point out that Miragememories has been consistently roasted about the NIST report. I've been hoping that if we smack him with the facts hard enough, he'll become interested in learning something. Doesn't seem to have worked. There's this thread (particularly after about page nine) and these two golden oldies...

Perhaps you can help him? He doesn't seem interested in reading what I have to say. Entirely his choice, of course.

I see little point. Your belief in the NIST report is total and you'll just continue to quote everything they say as fact.

You know as well as I do and as Dr. Greening has experienced, that reports are not only created they are 'crafted'. If a foregone conclusion is in place, it's not an insurmountable problem for an agency like NIST to produce believable results that support said conclusion.

If the NIST model had overwhelming succeeded, ie. brought abough collapse initiation with less severe and baseline simulations, I would have been more inclined to accept it's credibility.

Because it only succeeded in the most severe scenario, it only shows how much all numbers barely made it, lowering the probability that their conclusions were true.

Anyway, arguing with you about NIST is fruitless because you insist I accept all the NIST explanations, observations, criteria, laboratory tests, FEA results etc. as facts within the range of acceptability. The NIST report's 10,000 pages are designed to cover every angle with an explanation for everything, too often an explanation only justified because NIST judged it to be the best choice, all the time knowing their results had to satisfy a predetermined conclusion of collapse due to impact and fire damage.

It tainted the whole process.

MM

 

[Architect]

[germanaccent]

When I started this thread I had no idea I was creating a monster!

[/germanaccent]

Incidentally, MM, any planned comeback on the amendments on the Eurocode to take account of progressive collapse risks?

 

[Miragememories]

If you don't mind, I'd like to hear you give an example of a "hidden agenda" or "disingenuous behavior" that would warrant such treatment. I'll be highly surprised if you can come up with one that seems reasonable for Architect, and absolutely shocked if it's not mere speculation, but actually supported by evidence.

RM I don't speak for LC.

You seem to have reasonable intelligence.

A person with a "hidden agenda" or "disingenuous behavior" is anyone who enters a discussion but has absolutely no intention of participating in a true discussion. They are convinced they have the best understanding and have closed the door (in their mind) to any further doubt. Their sole purpose in participating in the discussion is to convert others to their side.

I am not on record as saying that Architect was that type of person.

I do think he is a NISTian, though not as extreme as yourself.

I do hope that satisfies your graving for an answer from me?

MM

 

[Miragememories]

[germanaccent]

When I started this thread I had no idea I was creating a monster!

[/germanaccent]

Incidentally, MM, any planned comeback on the amendments on the Eurocode to take account of progressive collapse risks?

Please elaborate.

I hate those kind of questions.

Tell me Architect what is your impression of the viability of the Avid DNxHD 220X codec?

MM

 

[Miragememories]

Honestly, the place you're in shouldn't alter your ability to dish out evidence.

Imagine a folk singer trying to perform in at a bar filled with redneck truck drivers from Texas and you'll get my impression of how easy it is to "dish it out here".

MM

 

[Miragememories]

Why, because you were being "disingenuous" and had a "hidden agenda", of course! What does that mean in MM speech? It means you were banned for thinking differently than they do.

BS

Thinking differently is what the JREF Conspiracy forum objects to.

In LC we only ask that you be prepared to have an honest discussion.

MM

 

[beachnut]

"Go over to LC, where I can hurl obscenities, act like a total baboon,"

That is a straight out lie.

I don't behave that way. Ask e^n or Architect.

I suggested another forum to avoid idiot comments like yours JimBenArm.

MM

So no facts, just insults today? Shot down your speed problem, and you are back with no facts. Need more help finding correct answers?

Need to know how many mph 500 KIAS is? Spam man is back, what insults do we have today? Failed again, so insults are back? When did you first fall for the misinformation of 9/11 from the LC videos?

About LCF. There are a bunch of really dumb people posting there. Dylan leads the pack. You are one of the best posters to prove there are no facts used at LCF by the loyalist truthers. When I want to see real poor logic and misinformation I go look at some of the regular posters at LCF.

 

[beachnut]

I see little point. Your belief in the NIST report is total and you'll just continue to quote everything they say as fact.

You know as well as I do and as Dr. Greening has experienced, that reports are not only created they are 'crafted'. If a foregone conclusion is in place, it's not an insurmountable problem for an agency like NIST to produce believable results that support said conclusion.

If the NIST model had overwhelming succeeded, ie. brought abough collapse initiation with less severe and baseline simulations, I would have been more inclined to accept it's credibility.

Because it only succeeded in the most severe scenario, it only shows how much all numbers barely made it, lowering the probability that their conclusions were true.

Anyway, arguing with you about NIST is fruitless because you insist I accept all the NIST explanations, observations, criteria, laboratory tests, FEA results etc. as facts within the range of acceptability. The NIST report's 10,000 pages are designed to cover every angle with an explanation for everything, too often an explanation only justified because NIST judged it to be the best choice, all the time knowing their results had to satisfy a predetermined conclusion of collapse due to impact and fire damage.

It tainted the whole process.

MM

What is your goal, no one needs the NIST report to rip LC videos, they are total junk.

No one needs NIST to prove there was no CD, even though you think Dr Greening supports the idiots out there in truth, he can prove there were zero explosives in the WTC on 9/11. If you like the CD theory you are backing a lost idea in the world of reality. But back in fantasyland of LC, it is alive and still the big lie of LC.

You can not even discuss or get the airspeed of flight 175 right. Why? There is no need to debunk and discuss at LCF. Why would anyone try. You can not say what you think, you are banned for just being. There are zero facts to support any ideas of the 9/11 truth movement at LCF.

Even when you discuss you ignore explanation and do not ask questions. You just talk, it is like discussing stuff with Fetzer or DRG. The leaders of the 9/11 truth movement only want dollars from dummies. Not a singe fact to support conclusions they do not even make, and people buy the junk and support it. NUTS. Pure nuts.

Now do not mistake the NUTS, I have paid the bucks and ended up screwed by others. Wish I had taken the time to no pay the bucks. You are buying the lies. Hopefully you are not speeding too much time or money backing the lies of 9/11 "truth".

Go ahead argue about NIST and miss the fact no one needs NIST to explain 9/11. The truth movement fails to ask for real facts and evidence when they spout their junk, why worry about NIST when you have zero facts. You are missing the ammunition to conduct a discussion on 9/11. Why does NIST bother you so much?

Before you jump on thinking Dr Greeening supports you lies, you should read his paper again. Even his new work with others. Do not confuse Dr Greening's attitude toward some for using the "what is wrong with NIST" ploy. May be he does not like people slinging around reports as weapons against liars. He has just co authored a paper stating there were no explosives used in the WTC and why. The same conclusion with simple observation made my millions of engineers around the world on 9/11. http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/00%20WTC%20Collapse%20-%20What%20Did%20%26%20Did%20Not%20Cause%20It%20-%205-2007.pdf

Read it and learn what most engineers in the world knew over 5 years ago, there were no explosives used in the WTC towers.

 

[beachnut]

Please elaborate.

I hate those kind of questions.

Tell me Architect what is your impression of the viability of the Avid DNxHD 220X codec?

MM

Avid DNxHD is a revolutionary mastering-quality HD codec engineered for multi-generation compositing with reduced storage and bandwidth requirements. For example:

• Avid DNxHD 145 8-bit media delivers HD quality while requiring approximately 20% less storage capacity than 8-bit uncompressed standard definition media.
• The reduced bandwidth of Avid DNxHD encoding enable single editing systems to work in HD with a simple 4- or 8-way drive stripe set or even a single drive.
• Avid DNxHD encoding enables the first truly collaborative real-time HD environment with Avid Unity MediaNetwork systems.
• Avid DNxHD encoding supports Avid's Emmy® award winning Multicamera functionality with up to three real-time streams of Avid DNxHD 145.
• New Avid DNxHD 36 resolution (for progressive formats) provides high-quality HD offline pictures for larger projects that are even more sensitive to storage consumption.

I hate it when the author of question does not give his view point with his question. Is it viable. 300 bucks for express, 1000 bucks for the big box, are there free versions?

So is your post an attempt to be banned by spam?

 

[beachnut]

Please elaborate.

I hate those kind of questions.

Tell me Architect what is your impression of the viability of the Avid DNxHD 220X codec?

MM

What do you think?