Brand New CT sub-group: No-Sounders

[LastChild]

Gumboot's point is that since the clipping of the firefighter's voice establishes the maximum peak level the recorder's audio chain could record, an explosion on the same video which has a higher peak level than that cannot have passed through the same camera audio chain. The inference is then that the explosion sound was added after the fact.

Oh really? LOL

What should it have sounded like?

 

[The Big Dog]

Oh really? LOL

What should it have sounded like?

Sounded like? "Sounded like"? You do realize he was talking about recording levels, don't you?

Dear lord, Lost Child, you really don't have the first clue what people are talking about in this thread do you?

/I know, I know: PHAIL

 

[LastChild]

Sounded like? "Sounded like"? You do realize he was talking about recording levels, don't you?

Dear lord, Lost Child, you really don't have the first clue what people are talking about in this thread do you?

/I know, I know: PHAIL

Yeah I know. You mean the levels should be different depending on how it was recorded?

LOL

 

[1337m4n]

No wonder you fail when you can't even read. Is 13 pages a little overwhelming for you? I'll tell you what go back and read what I told the Redworm when it asked the same nonsense. I’m not going to read for you or repeat myself anymore.

I never asked you to read for me or repeat yourself. I asked you to make some sense instead of dodging every question that's thrown at you. Apparently you refuse to do even that.

But, sure, I'll try to make sense of this thread without your help:

1) You start off the thread saying how we supposedly contradict ourselves when we say there were no sounds of explosives.
2) You then derail your own thread by going into a tangent about Gravy's new video, bickering about how it proves nothing.
3) You assert that you have no opinion about 9/11. You then continue to angrily attack Gravy's video, proving yourself to be a liar.
4) You use the word "fail" over and over again.
5) You babble some nonsense about microphones. Your argument is destroyed, but you escape humiliation by dodging questions. You again assert that you have no opinion about 9/11.
6) You use the word "fail" some more.
7) You post a video, the details of which you yourself do not know, and challenge us to find more videos of the same event (even though we have no way of knowing what event that is). You assert that if we fail to meet your challenge, then we lose the argument. Nobody has any clue what argument you're referring to, but you seem confident that we are "running out of time" (whatever that's supposed to mean).
8) I post some videos of what MIGHT be the same event, but I concede I have no clue because you failed to provide any details of the original video. You slither away from humiliation by babbling more nonsense and using the word "fail" some more.
9) The rest of the debate is impossible for me to decipher from that point on.

That's what I've been able to interpret so far.

See here's the problem: You're not explaining jack squat. All you're doing is asking us to meet impossible challenges and screaming "FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL" like a 5-year-old having a temper tantrum every time we explain why your point is irrelevant.

If you would just spell out what you're trying to say in a clear, concise paragraph or two like I asked you, we wouldn't have this problem. In the meantime, you have earned the honor of being the first person ever to be on my ignore list.

(BTW we're still waiting for confirmation of magical microphones capable of picking up quieter sounds while failing to pick up much louder sounds)

YOU ARE FAILING

YOU ARE A BROKEN RECORD. You're worse than that bloody "HeadOn" commercial. Off to ignore you go.

 

[LastChild]

I never asked you to read for me or repeat yourself. I asked you to make some sense instead of dodging every question that's thrown at you. Apparently you refuse to do even that.

But, sure, I'll try to make sense of this thread without your help:

1) You start off the thread saying how we supposedly contradict ourselves when we say there were no sounds of explosives.
2) You then derail your own thread by going into a tangent about Gravy's new video, bickering about how it proves nothing.
3) You assert that you have no opinion about 9/11. You then continue to angrily attack Gravy's video, proving yourself to be a liar.
4) You use the word "fail" over and over again.
5) You babble some nonsense about microphones. Your argument is destroyed, but you escape humiliation by dodging questions. You again assert that you have no opinion about 9/11.
6) You use the word "fail" some more.
7) You post a video, the details of which you yourself do not know, and challenge us to find more videos of the same event (even though we have no way of knowing what event that is). You assert that if we fail to meet your challenge, then we lose the argument. Nobody has any clue what argument you're referring to, but you seem confident that we are "running out of time" (whatever that's supposed to mean).
8) I post some videos of what MIGHT be the same event, but I concede I have no clue because you failed to provide any details of the original video. You slither away from humiliation by babbling more nonsense and using the word "fail" some more.
9) The rest of the debate is impossible for me to decipher from that point on.

That's what I've been able to interpret so far.

See here's the problem: You're not explaining jack squat. All you're doing is asking us to meet impossible challenges and screaming "FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL" like a 5-year-old having a temper tantrum every time we explain why your point is irrelevant.

If you would just spell out what you're trying to say in a clear, concise paragraph or two like I asked you, we wouldn't have this problem. In the meantime, you have earned the honor of being the first person ever to be on my ignore list.

(BTW we're still waiting for confirmation of magical microphones capable of picking up quieter sounds while failing to pick up much louder sounds)



YOU ARE A BROKEN RECORD. You're worse than that bloody "HeadOn" commercial. Off to ignore you go.

boo hoo hoo WHAAAAAAAaaaaa

Cry me a river

But you still FAIL

 

[Corsair 115]

boo hoo hoo WHAAAAAAAaaaaa

Cry me a river

But you still FAIL

Wow, what an incredibly scientific, rational, well thought out, logical, and insightful rebuttal. It's a wonder why you don't win more converts over to your side with such profoundly convincing arguments

 

[Jonnyclueless]

OH man ignore is so nice. It's not like I need to real LC's posts to know what he is saying. Let me guess:

"You FAIL"

LOL!

 

[CHF]

See here's the problem: You're not explaining jack squat. All you're doing is asking us to meet impossible challenges and screaming "FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL" like a 5-year-old having a temper tantrum every time we explain why your point is irrelevant.

If you would just spell out what you're trying to say in a clear, concise paragraph or two like I asked you, we wouldn't have this problem.

I don't think LastChild has any idea what he's trying to argue.

Obviously we're dealing with a 16 year old kid. FAIL FAIL FAIL!!! No adult argues that way.

 

[Mancman]

There is no way any of the charges in any of the Dallas angles would have been heard over the collapse of a 110 story skyscraper.

The
charges
go
off
before
the
building
collapses.

THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES


Do you understand?

 

[A W Smith]

Gravy's video has really pushed Lostchild over the edge.

hey LC I didn't know you were German?

 

[1337m4n]

Obviously we're dealing with a 16 year old kid. FAIL FAIL FAIL!!! No adult argues that way.

Christ, I'm only 19 myself. I get the impression this guy isn't even in his teens yet.

 

[1337m4n]

The
charges
go
off
before
the
building
collapses.

THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES
THE CHARGES GO OFF BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES


Do you understand?

He doesn't understand. You have to say it as though you're talking to a child.

LastChild: things go boom, THEN building comes down. NOT building comes down, then things go boom.

Things go boom FIRST. Building comes down SECOND.

 

[LastChild]

The
charges
go
off
before
the
building
collapses.

GRAVY

COMPARED

CD

TO

THE WTC COLLAPSE ALREADY IN PROGRESS

SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?



YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!

 

[twinstead]

GRAVY

COMPARED

CD

TO

THE WTC COLLAPSE ALREADY IN PROGRESS

SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?
SO THEN WHAT’S THE POINT OF GRAVY’S PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE?



YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!
YOU FAIL!

Perhaps because there were cameras, and AUDIO, trained on the WTC from the time of impact, and there were NO sounds of detonations going off prior to collapse?

Should Gravy had included the 5 or 10 minutes prior to the collapses? Would the lack of detonations helped or hurt your cause?

 

[LastChild]

Gravy's video has really pushed Lostchild over the edge.

hey LC I didn't know you were German?

What would be funnier is if this was you...

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AWSmith

As in funny pathetic

 

[LastChild]

Perhaps because there were cameras, and AUDIO, trained on the WTC from the time of impact, and there were NO sounds of detonations going off prior to collapse?

And AUDIO? From there with a video camera? LOL

Should Gravy had included the 5 or 10 minutes prior to the collapses? Would the lack of detonations helped or hurt your cause?

Gravy compares to the collapse itself not pre-collapse. In fact the audio he claims is fake are also sounds during the collapse not before. Give it up.

YOU FAIL!

 

[WildCat]

Should Gravy had included the 5 or 10 minutes prior to the collapses? Would the lack of detonations helped or hurt your cause?

I asked LC that earlier and was accused of moving the goalposts!

Maybe LC just needs a nappy-poo or something.

 

[beachnut]

And AUDIO? From there with a video camera? LOL



Gravy compares to the collapse itself not pre-collapse. In fact the audio he claims is fake are also sounds during the collapse not before. Give it up.

YOU FAIL!

You may be the smartest sound engineer in the world, but your posts are pure junk.

 

[1337m4n]

Perhaps because there were cameras, and AUDIO, trained on the WTC from the time of impact, and there were NO sounds of detonations going off prior to collapse?

Should Gravy had included the 5 or 10 minutes prior to the collapses? Would the lack of detonations helped or hurt your cause?

Ahh, so THAT was LastChild's point. I think I get it now.

(Amazing, it takes a debunker to make a truther's point for him. Or at least translate it into something the layman can understand)

Lastchild, this might help:



Nothing's wrong with the microphone, as evidenced by the background noise. No explosive sounds are heard.

Moar:



Again, background noises prove the microphone is FINE.

Now, here's your challenge: explain how it's possible for a microphone to pick up quieter noises while failing to pick up louder ones.

I'll answer that challenge for you right now: You can't. It's impossible.

Game over, LC. It's time for you to admit you've lost this one.



(And I did all this without being able to see his posts)

 

[WildCat]

And AUDIO? From there with a video camera? LOL!

So now you're claiming no cameras trained on the WTC had microphones?