Hopefully you also don't dislike the OTHER debunkers. You know, those of us who use sarcasm and humour in the place of expertise and brains, which we lack.
what he said.
Yea, I'll second that. Besides, expertise and brains are totally overrated...
The real question is, if real planes hit the towers, then why did they show fake videos?
Brain is your friend, us it.
And no, "debonkers" isn't a typo. He uses it on purpose.stundie said:Peer-review is a debonkers way of doublethinking his way out of evidence
LMAO...Oh dear. Only in your head my friend. Look. This is reported by, let's say just the India Globe. You have to go and prove that it is false. It is not my duty to prove that something reported in a mainstream media source from a country pretty much next to Afghanistan on Afghanistan is true. That ball is in your court. Go.
Lyte Trip said:That's why we helped him get to the bottom of the truth and he is retracting his retraction.
Holy crap. It's too bad he's excluded from the award.
teh stundie@SLCF said:You say they have the same qualifications? Does Gravy hold a BS in Chemistry? Or is it something like English or Geography or something none scientific?
linky

Yeah, it is too bad when you have quotes like this from SLC:Holy crap. It's too bad he's excluded from the award.
I've read more on this subject than I care to mention and this is the thing that started off my belief in the conspiracy and yet, all you debonkers is speculate and provide no EVIDENCE!
Except when it comes from a twoofer!So no links, no evidence is nothing more than you speculating and I'm afraid in a twoofer world...that won't do!
There is nothing wrong with arguing from incredulity, through sarcasm etc, if such tools are not used to avoid addressing the point.
MJD1982, our self-appointed arbiter of the proper rules of debate, shows that there is a place for logical errors even in the most rigorous of arguments.
There's one thing to be said for the likes of MJD1982 and Malcolm Kirkwood and (gasp) Christophera..... at least they tend to confine their nuttiness to just one or two threads.
I guess the sign of a winning argument is that nobody wants to argue with it after awhile...because they know they'll lose.
I think I've achieved that with this thread. There's nothing here that anyone can disagree with because I'm absolutely correct in the facts I've presented...
Being right on this issue is bittersweet though...because it means this country is up s***creek without the proverbial paddle and the people sending us over s***falls are steering the boat by remote control.
Not good...
Now that we know 9-11 was a staged attack, we need to take this country back from the great evil that has hijacked it. This requires educating a critical mass of people....and everyone who now knows the truth can be a part of that process…like a domino effect. The more we shine the light of day on the cockroaches, the less likely that they will be able to fool the people and fulfill their agenda...Those of you who KNOW in your heart that you cannot find fault with my argument, have to start accepting the hard truth, and the hard reality of 9-11. The time to know the truth is NOW...Truth is the only thing that can set us free, and we all need you on the side of the enlightened to do your part to save this country.
The kaanucklehead in question "cydoniaquest".
The full thread appears here:
http://p087.ezboard.com/fstillersforumfrm18.showMessage?topicID=1513.topic
Now the video analysis above shows that building 7 fell at or very close to the rate of freefall in a vacuum once the corner of the building started falling.
Video Demo Link
This HAS to mean that not only were all the vertical support structures suddenly removed….BUT the debris was cleared from the path of the fall.. In fact, the building showed no slowing due to air resistance. This means that the building material was also falling into an area that had been evacuated of air. It had to have been falling into a very low pressure area.
There is only one way to create these conditions. You’ve got to EXPLOSIVELY remove all vertical support structures….and Explosively create a debris free path in order to achieve the effect of freefall. Only one method can accomplish this, and that is EXPLOSIVES…The explosion will instantly remove a properly prepared support column….while creating a low pressure area after the explosion has occurred…In fact, NO other phenomenon, could create the effect witnessed of building 7. No fire could remove vertical support structures . This alone, without even yet introducing the mountain of supporting evidence, is complete proof for controlled demolition or implosion
Welcome to the forum, Nim. You may wanna edit your quote in post #355 to remove the [rule8] breaches. Hate to see you get a warning so early in your tenure.
I think this line on its own is fantastically stundielicious:I'm not really sure if this one is "stundie" material,
Being right on this issue is bittersweet though...because it means this country is up s***creek without the proverbial paddle and the people sending us over s***falls are steering the boat by remote control.
