• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Lloyd England: Eye of the Storm

Turbofan said:
Sure, attack the messenger and totally forget the fact the Lloyd's story
no longer holds water (as if it ever did...).

Some of you are real 'amazing' researchers.

I'm still curious to know if any of your "netgineers" can explain how the
light pole can suspend itself in mid air over the hood of the cab.
Click to expand...

Oh, burn, Turbo. Say, just how old is Lloyde now anyway?

By the way, we netgineers can only say: Craig's see-saw analogy renders the answer to your question moot. On planet X I guess they don't have fulcrums, levers and childrens' toys, huh? Giggle!

Tell you what, If I can suspend part of a light pole above the ground, can I have Craig's sofa?

While you are swaggering around this thread, Pfft fan, why don't you give us the calculations on those CIT flight paths that your moron friends showed Lloyde.

Thanks!
 
Turbofan said:
Sure, attack the messenger and totally forget the fact the Lloyd's story
no longer holds water (as if it ever did...).

Some of you are real 'amazing' researchers.

I'm still curious to know if any of your "netgineers" can explain how the
light pole can suspend itself in mid air over the hood of the cab.
Click to expand...

I was truly moved by the interview, thank you.... [SIZE="-2"]for further making up my mind that CIT's argument is full of it... Many of the interviewer comments were nice leading tactics... congrats, and your claim about the suspended light pole... wtf?[/SIZE].......

(Can you spot the hidden message in this post?)
 
DavidJames said:
Has CIT contacted anyone who can do something to bring justice (police/insurance fraud/DA/Lawyer/etc. If so who, how and what was the result. Please provide specific details.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
As long as CIT refuses to actually do something with their "evidence" other then produce video's, I have no choice but to consider CIT frauds and con artists.

For those of you supporting them, I have to ask you, why does it not bother you that they aren't trying to achieve justice?
 
Turbofan said:
Tell you what, watch the damn video and admit you've been defeated.

There are no resonable tears in the seats to suspend a pole of that size
in mid air.
Click to expand...

Uh oh! Pfft fan came in here throwing around big words, and now watch those goals posts move!!!

First, it could not be done, it was floating, as if by magic!

Now, it wasn't floating, it can be done, but Pfft Fan subjectively claims that the tears in the seats were not reasonable!!

I thought it was floating!?! Is it not floating if there are reasonable tears in a seat?

Say, that begs a question, just what the hell is a reasonable tear in seat, Turbo? Whatever Craig tells you to think, huh Champ?
 
Last edited:
Turbofan said:
Tell you what, watch the damn video and admit you've been defeated.

There are no reasonable tears in the seats to suspend a pole of that size
in mid air.

This is clearly shown in the video as they revisit the car and show the
interior including the dash and back seat area.

Lloyd is a lie. Wake up and start to realize you're all being taken for a ride.
Click to expand...


I repeat my offer:
You and/or CIT post the flight path calculations showing that their proposed path (with all the banking, climbing, turning, diving, what-have-you) is possible, and I'll plug through the calculations on the force required to keep the pole in the position it was in.


It is more than fair, and it is an attempt to clear up confusion.

Instead of arguing from gut instinct (such as "There are no reasonable tears in the seats to suspend a pole of that size in mid air." unless you have actual numbers and expertise to prove this?) why don't you get the CIT guys to analyze their flyover path and show that it is possible and in return I shall analyze Loyd's lightpole.

Come on, what does CIT have to lose?

CIT gets to prove their theory viable, and in return they have a chance at solid evidence that could prove Loyd is lying beyond a reasonable doubt.

Deal?
 
Let me sum up this 90 minute video for those too dumb and lazy to watch it:

Lloyd England says, "I was not on the bridge. Whatever those pictures show,
it's not where I was that day. I know I was there. I was never near the bridge."

So my, "Critical Thinkers", do the official pictures lie?
 
[X] said:
I repeat my offer:
You and/or CIT post the flight path calculations showing that their proposed path (with all the banking, climbing, turning, diving, what-have-you) is possible, and I'll plug through the calculations on the force required to keep the pole in the position it was in.

Come on, what does CIT have to lose?

CIT gets to prove their theory viable, and in return they have a chance at solid evidence that could prove Loyd is lying beyond a reasonable doubt.

Deal?
Click to expand...

Hell, I'll go one better! You and/or CIT post the flight path calculations showing that their proposed path (with all the banking, climbing, turning, diving, what-have-you) is possible, and I'll cram a huge freaking light pole straight through {x}'s car's wind shield!
 
Turbofan said:
Let me sum up this 90 minute video for those too dumb and lazy to watch it:

Lloyd England says, "I was not on the bridge. Whatever those pictures show,
it's not where I was that day. I know I was there. I was never near the bridge."

So my, "Critical Thinkers", do the official pictures lie?
Click to expand...

It took 90 minutes to say that?
 
16.5 said:
Hell, I'll go one better! You and/or CIT post the flight path calculations showing that their proposed path (with all the banking, climbing, turning, diving, what-have-you) is possible, and I'll cram a huge freaking light pole straight through {x}'s car's wind shield!
Click to expand...


I promise mayhem and pain to anyone who damages the '68 Continental.

I am kind of anal about my cars, and don't really have a sense of humor about them. I know you mean well, but it still gets my dander up.
 
Turbofan said:
Let me sum up this 90 minute video for those too dumb and lazy to watch it:

Lloyd England says, "I was not on the bridge. Whatever those pictures show,
it's not where I was that day. I know I was there. I was never near the bridge."

So my, "Critical Thinkers", do the official pictures lie?
Click to expand...

Thanks Turbo, but I'm afraid you got some unfinished questions about your complete inability to understand basic physics regarding the "floating light pole."

Oh hell, my Pfft Fan, I'll repond to your question: false dichotomy.

Man, two words to prove that you are full of moving goal posts and logically fallacies today.
 
I saw about half of the video. It was about all I could stomach. This is definitly the worst CIT has spewed out yet.

This is yet another example of how bad interviews and testimony is compared to physical evidence.

I'm sorry to say that Lloyd seems to be easily confused which is not uncommon for someone his age. His confusion over his position on the highway is one example.

Lloyd has his advanced age to account for his supceptabilty to confusion, but what is Craig and Aldo's excuse? on several occasion they missinterpret Lloyd. On one case they repeat Lloyd's statement that the pole went "through" the dashboard when Lloyd misspoke.

There is so much innuendo and eye winking that it is hillarious. They make a big deal out of Lloyd's wife working for the FBI yet they never mention what she does for the FBI. Notice they make very mention of LeGasse and Brooks being Pentagon employees.
The other issue they play on to twist the facts is Lloyd's penchance for conspiracy theories. It was absolutly hillarious the way they eat up the conversation on the way to the Taxi cab. It was like blind leading the brain dead.

I also though it was funny how in the beginning of the video Lloyd talks about how "people" were saying things about him that he felt was not true, and the very people he was talking about were in the room talking to him.

CIT lays another stinking steamer.
 
you guys kill me! LMFAO!

Lloyd sees himself and the cab in the photos, he admits it's him and his cab,
but tries to explain he was never there!

LOL!

You guys are the best. How stupid is this debate.

Are you all eating Cheerios supplied by the Pentagon? If so, it's time to
switch.
 
Turbofan said:
Once again, are the official pictures staged, or is Lloyd telling the truth in
this latest video.

Pick one :big:
Click to expand...


You puerile and conspicuously non-relevant responses are noted.


One last time:
Have CIT show their beloved flight-path is possible (involves math), and I will analyze the pole in Lloyd's car.


Right now all you have is innuendo and arguments from ignorance.
I'm offering you information about Lloyd's statement about the light pole, which you can use to determine whether he is lying or not.

You brought up the light pole, claiming it's proof of Lloyd lying.
Lying, as opposed to slightly mis-remembering the day after many years.

You use this as "proof" of your NoC flight-path.

Like I said: Show the flightpath is viable, and I do the work (your work!) and I show whether or not Lloyd's light pole is possible.

It's win-win for you! You get proof of your flight-path with which to shut up those who denounce it as ludicrous, and you get potential proof of Lloyd's account being fabricated.
 
Last edited:
[X] said:
You puerile and conspicuously non-relevant responses are noted.


One last time:
Have CIT show their beloved flight-path is possible (involves math), and I will analyze the pole in Lloyd's car.


Right now all you have is innuendo and arguments from ignorance.
I'm offering you information about Lloyd's statement about the light pole, which you can use to determine whether he is lying or not.

You brought up the light pole, claiming it's proof of Lloyd lying.
Lying, as opposed to slightly mis-remembering the day after many years.

You use this as "proof" of your NoC flight-path.

Like I said: Show the flightpath is viable, and I do the work (your work!) and I show whether or not Lloyd's light pole is possible.

It's win-win for you! You get proof of your flight-path with which to shut up those who denounce it as ludicrous, and you get potential proof of Lloyd's account being fabricated.
Click to expand...

you guys kill me! LMFAO!

Lloyd sees himself and the cab in the photos, he admits it's him and his cab,
but tries to explain he was never there!

LOL!

You guys are the best. How stupid is this debate.

Are you all eating Cheerios supplied by the Pentagon? If so, it's time to
switch.
 
Turbofan said:
you guys kill me! LMFAO!

Lloyd sees himself and the cab in the photos, he admits it's him and his cab,
but tries to explain he was never there!

LOL!

You guys are the best. How stupid is this debate.

Are you all eating Cheerios supplied by the Pentagon? If so, it's time to
switch.
Click to expand...

Uh, you don't know what a false dichotomy is, do you?

/Anyhow, your dodge and humiliation on the floating light pole is duly noted.
 
Okay, could you stop with the poorly-veiled references to us being somehow coerced or controlled?

Thank you.



Do you accept my offer or not?

It's kind of a yes/no thing. So far, in a truly admirable display of topic-jumping, you've managed to avoid either answer.

Makes me wonder if you have some reason for not wanting to use physics and math to support your claims.

Do you accept my offer? Yes or no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom