mysteronyx
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2011
- Messages
- 381
I'd be surprised if mehmetin could explain how we know he isn't one of the dead hijackers.
Please don't make him divide by zero. He can barely divide at all.
I'd be surprised if mehmetin could explain how we know he isn't one of the dead hijackers.
By "outonomous fly" I mean the aircraft controls it's direction itself without any human intervention. That is like a tomahawk missile that finds its target without external intervention.
Please don't make him divide by zero. He can barely divide at all.
You have no idea what you are talking about. But you amuse me, so please continue.When you need small amount of explosives, you can access empty buildings, can make all kind of holes, study the install places of all explosives, put cables everywhere, there is no need to use radio controlled explosives.
Radio controlled explosives requires longtime preparation, able to place thousands of explosives, possibility of misplacement, it's technologically more expensive. We must consider the radio controlled CDI as the "luxury" of the demolition.
Your english is a little bit complex for me, also true for otehr posts here up.
For what I understand: In the case of four teams, each on board of each plane, the only possible work is a random fly of each plane independently from other. That did not happen! So, this is not consistent with the official claim of four teams.
If this guy thinks coordinated attacks aren't possible without a tomahawk guidance system, I think he needs to look into Normandy.
He did claim to be an electrical engineer but he did so in Turkish.
Still waiting for you to discuss your 2,000+ planted explosive charges and detonation sequence bollox. Pose...........pause...........ignore........change topic.........no clue. lol.
Originally Posted by mehmetin
None of your explanations was reasonable. And the question is still open. If you think there is one rasonable, feel free to bring it here, I will study your argument.
In your opinion none of the explanations were reasonable. You see you have to explain WHY they are not reasonable. But you can't because you know they are perfectly reasonable. Just another thing in your LOOOONG list of lies.
I'd be surprised if mehmetin could explain how we know he isn't one of the dead hijackers.

Everytime, without a single exception, I explained why your explanations are not reasonable. You just need to look the topic.
Originally Posted by mehmetin
Everytime, without a single exception, I explained why your explanations are not reasonable. You just need to look the topic.
Correction. You ATTEMPTED to explain why they weren't reasonable. You failed miserably however.
Official story supporters can only DENY, for them everything I tell is meaningless.
Any way, you can continue to tell such baseless and meaningless opinions, you are just telling unsupported opinions. That changes nothing to the facts and I am still waiting your explaination "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Do not use the words like coincidence, level off, successive take offs; NONE of these claims are reasonable in that case.
- Coincidence is impossible because it's repeated in all 4 cases, regardless take off delays, duration of previous hijacks durations.
- Level off times are not consistent with deviation times, some deviations are before level off, some others are too much later.
- Initial take offs are not planned to be successive, the last flight was delayed too much to make it take off only 4 minutes before the first impact.
In other words, you failed as MISERABLY as Bush Administration to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Official story supporters can only DENY, for them everything I tell is meaningless.
Any way, you can continue to tell such baseless and meaningless opinions, you are just telling unsupported opinions. That changes nothing to the facts and I am still waiting your explaination "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Do not use the words like coincidence, level off, successive take offs; NONE of these claims are reasonable in that case.
- Coincidence is impossible because it's repeated in all 4 cases, regardless take off delays, duration of previous hijacks durations.
- Level off times are not consistent with deviation times, some deviations are before level off, some others are too much later.
- Initial take offs are not planned to be successive, the last flight was delayed too much to make it take off only 4 minutes before the first impact.
In other words, you failed as MISERABLY as Bush Administration to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Official story supporters can only DENY, for them everything I tell is meaningless.
Any way, you can continue to tell such baseless and meaningless opinions, you are just telling unsupported opinions. That changes nothing to the facts and I am still waiting your explaination "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Do not use the words like coincidence, level off, successive take offs; NONE of these claims are reasonable in that case.
- Coincidence is impossible because it's repeated in all 4 cases, regardless take off delays, duration of previous hijacks durations.
- Level off times are not consistent with deviation times, some deviations are before level off, some others are too much later.
- Initial take offs are not planned to be successive, the last flight was delayed too much to make it take off only 4 minutes before the first impact.
In other words, you failed as MISERABLY as Bush Administration to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Official story supporters can only DENY, for them everything I tell is meaningless.
Any way, you can continue to tell such baseless and meaningless opinions, you are just telling unsupported opinions. That changes nothing to the facts and I am still waiting your explaination "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".
Do not use the words like coincidence, level off, successive take offs; NONE of these claims are reasonable in that case.
- Coincidence is impossible because it's repeated in all 4 cases, regardless take off delays, duration of previous hijacks durations.
- Level off times are not consistent with deviation times, some deviations are before level off, some others are too much later.
- Initial take offs are not planned to be successive, the last flight was delayed too much to make it take off only 4 minutes before the first impact.
In other words, you failed as MISERABLY as Bush Administration to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?".