Breaking news! Truther Ignored by Senator!

[DC]

....
So not only have you been duped, but you've been duped into thinking you've been duped. That takes... uniqueness.

...

absolutely

 

[tempesta29]

I always like when Truthers think somehow they've upset someone. All you're doing is making the same statements over and over again! If there's any feeling I get it's a feeling of sheer boredom!

Upset has degrees. Clearly he cared enough to bark orders at me. I've never made these statements before. It was my first post, as you can see.

And frankly, if you can debunk the claims then they will go away, but you can't because, well, that's physics.

 

[DGM]

Upset has degrees. Clearly he cared enough to bark orders at me. I've never made these statements before. It was my first post, as you can see.

And frankly, if you can debunk the claims then they will go away, but you can't because, well, that's physics.

OK. Tell us about the physics. What's wrong with the "official explanation". Use math, we can take it.

 

[A W Smith]

Upset has degrees. Clearly he cared enough to bark orders at me. I've never made these statements before. It was my first post, as you can see.

And frankly, if you can debunk the claims then they will go away, but you can't because, well, that's physics.

everything old is new again?

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=83f87efc6f926f13

You're welcome

 

[332nd]

OK. Tell us about the physics. What's wrong with the "official explanation". Use math, we can take it.

^This.

 

[tempesta29]

OK. Tell us about the physics. What's wrong with the "official explanation". Use math, we can take it.

everything old is new again?

You're welcome

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

 

[DC]

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

Present something that is not debunked yet.

 

[332nd]

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

Odd... when asked to show what's wrong with the official story's physics and show the math, you dodged it...

 

[Thunder]

Tempesta29- do you think that Silverstein "pulled" WTC 7?

do you find it odd and coincidentally suspect that Silverstein purchased terrorism insurance for the WTC?

do you think that the clouds of dust pouring from the WTC collapses were similar to "pyroclastic flows"?

 

[Drudgewire]

All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

Or that you didn't take the earlier advice to use the search feature and see if your particular questions have been answered on here over and over again... and take 10 minutes to see that is the case and that we don't simply go through the same motions every time a "new" (*snicker*) member just jumps in to declare he KNOWS we're nothing more than sheep who blindly swallow everything THE GUBMINT tells us to.

Hmmmm, who wants to place odds on which it is?

 

[DC]

or the 18 seconds "freefall" collapses maybe

 

[Thunder]

Tempesta29: do you believe that a B-52 crashed into the Empire State Building?

do you believe that the Pentagon had surface-to-air missiles on 9-11?

do you believe that Mohammed Atta is still alive?

do you believe that 4,000 Jews didn't show up to work at the WTC on 9-11?

 

[A W Smith]

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

We have not only heard this "information" before, we debunked it. had you bothered to follow the link I posted for the benefit of your education.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&...&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=1&cad=b

You would have realized this. Apparently you are content to wallow in your own ignorance.

 

[The Big Dog]

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

You know, there are many threads discussing Chandler's theories.

You might want to read them before making assumptions.

 

[fess]

I find it amusing that because you've heard this information before that it somehow invalidates it or puts you in some position of authority to dismiss it outright. All it really means is that you ignored it then and you continue to do so now, instead focusing the preponderance of your attention on ad hominem attacks.

I haven’t been a member of JREF for very long, but I’ve been here long enough to have seen many of your type show up and leave with a bloody tail.
You come on this thread thinking that you have something that we need to consider, but lay nothing on the table to consider. If you have something, lets hear it, or be quiet and learn something.

 

[Thunder]

I haven’t been a member of JREF for very long, but I’ve been here long enough to have seen many of your type show up and leave with a bloody tail.
You come on this thread thinking that you have something that we need to consider, but lay nothing on the table to consider. If you have something, lets hear it, or be quiet and learn something.

indeed.

 

[Kid Eager]

hmmmm.... is somebody missing a sock? 5th post and already the ad-hom statement emerges.

 

[Checkmite]

I always like when Truthers think somehow they've upset someone. All you're doing is making the same statements over and over again! If there's any feeling I get it's a feeling of sheer boredom!

Honestly; it's like listening to someone with dementia tell you a boring anecdote for the 50th time as if it's the first time.

 

[PS13]

tempesta29 -

Seriously... don't waste anyones time here. What evidence do you have that people should consider. How about for your next post in this thread you actually explain what you want to talk about. Don't dodge......like you have already.

 

[twinstead]

Honestly; it's like listening to someone with dementia tell you a boring anecdote for the 50th time as if it's the first time.

Honestly; it's like listening to someone with dementia tell you a boring anecdote for the 50th time as if it's the first time.