February Stundie Finals

[Travis]

First off we need to congratulate the winner from January which is that time zones are just words:

"physically, the intercept still took 20 minutes, your time zone **** doesn't mean anything, than you AGAIN playing with words..."

Thanks for participating everyone and congrats to our disbeliever in time zone theory.

So this months finalists:

1) It must be very burdensome to have to bring a foundry onto a job site whenever you need to cut some steel to length and local codes forbid thermite use.

No.
We know it was thermite because only thermite can melt steel in the first place....

...Thermite melts steel.

****
2) While I'm not a weaponry expert I'm pretty sure the NWO will have dog proof tanks and helicopters.

I have noticed that recently there has been a rise in the number of dog attacks. I am starting to wonder if they are going to ban people from owning dogs of a certain size and strength and this is a problem, reaction, solution so we don't have anything that can defend us when the NWO kicks in They are doing the same in america with guns are they going to do this to us in the UK with dogs????

****
3) Why should a little thing like getting the passenger capacity of a plane wrong or forgetting about flight crews get in the way of good old fashioned paranoia?

Yah since I reported this on another thread and didn't wanna start one myself, I got the scoop.

The plane had 49 but the planes carrying capacity was 40.

****
4) Some might say that a plane not impacting the Pentagon would be important evidence. Those people are obviously shills.

At this point I really don't give a flying [censored] if the plane impacted the Pentagon or not.

The plane in question could not have had contact with those poles if it was north of the CITGO.

That little fact proves not only a lie, but a conspiracy by our government. End of story.

****
5) Here I was thinking no-planers were discredited by being no-planers.

Paranoid suspicion about every real thing discredits no planers.

****
6) The NWO agents who authorized the "assassination by Cat in the Hat balloon" and "assassination by Yankee pitcher" were fired.

.....Yankee's Star pitcher Cory Lidle crashes his small plane into the upper floors of a New York City highrise on 10/11/06, which some say is 9/11/01 written upside down. He happens to crash into the same apartment as the woman who was almost killed by a giant Cat in the Hat Macy's day parade baloon run amok 7 years prior.
Just one of those "hmmmm".

****
7) Some might think it's common sense to assume a "great loss of life" when two buildings, which normally have 50,000 people in them, collapse. Others think only murderous conspirators would assume that.

Also, how did Silverstein know there was "terrible loss of life" at the time the decision was made "to pull IT"? Obviously, he knew there was an incredible loss of life AFTER THE FACT when doing the particular interview, but not at 5pm on 9/11. NOBODY knew how many people had died by that point, they could only make a guess...

****
8) Actually what they sprayed on was the blood of the Xenomorph from Alien. Also I eagerly look forward to the introduction of nano-thermite. It will revolutionize the way we destroy nano-buildings.

Spray-on nano-thermite makes no sense? Why not? If you were going to deceptively destroy the WTC you would have to disconnect the cores in a manner that didn't look like a nuclear weapon. You would need something that wouldn't require two hundred guys carrying in massive amounts of explosives. Something that could be masked quite easily as a 'fireproofing upgrade'.

****
9) Isn't it awesome when "credibility" simply means "confirms my beliefs?"

Daniel Ganser, author of NATO's Secret Armies, has interviews linked to here, where he spends some time discussing 911.
Although I don't know where Ganser gets this figure from, it seems wholly credible, and if that's the case, it just goes to show you how much work needs to be done to reverse the 'brain washing'...

****
10) Does someone need to cling to a "logical" theory?

BUT, everything is a conspiracy theory. It just depends if you believe the governments' (who are notorious for lying) theory... or the logical theories that we all cling too.

****
11) Strangely the link provided states the status of the accusation is: False

here's a link to start with, http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp The polymer chain in the oil is wrong for us and it blocks the osmosis process in our eyes and that causes pressure to build up mimicking glaucoma over a long period and kills nerves ending in blindness.

****
12) If only there were review boards, experiments and journals where science could be verified.

That's where you're wrong. Science is riddled with skewed statistics and fraud. I wish it were riddled with verification.
Scientists are not interested in the truth, they are interested in tenure and government grants. They will tell anyone anything they want to hear as long as they want to fund study after study to hear it over and over again.

****
13) I'm betting that if a "rolled up ball" --whatever that is-- has enough velocity it can go right through brick.

If you throw a rolled up ball at a brick, I dont care how much velocity it has, it bounces off. So what gives with the official story of 9/11??

****
14) We're only five four unachievable steps away from doom! Is the missing step two "stealing underpants?"

Elite Goals===1. North American Union
3. Police State and veri-chipping citizens bodies 4. one bank-one world government, which gives more economic control for the elites and world royals 5.Sheeple- people who believe everyhting they are told, and those who never question authority. We are sold medicine to fix every problem we have mentally and physically. Nature and the spirit gone. We worry about our Venti-mochas and sports teams than we do our childrens' future see yourself?

****
15) A Marie Claire article on how conspiracy theory thinking destroys relationships simply must really be about how the conspiracies are true because the conspiracies simply must be true. Got it?

In my eyes if she had really tried to fit in with this man, if she had really gone to these meetings then she too would be a believer.
This makes me think she maybe is a believer but this is the only way she can fit the facts in the magazine without them being censored...

****
16) My guess is NIST will get as far as the word "sponges" and decide this suggestion is a prank.

NIST should do it, i.e. test their (conspiracy) theory using sponges and pizza boxes.

****
17) I guess everything Jack The Ripper did wasn't a crime.

there is no crime without a conviction. people do get away with murder - that's not a crime. it is a crime when someone gets convicted.

****
18) But will the aliens attack in retribution for cutting off their source of Benny Hill?

Will they be planning a nuclear detonation to coincide with the digital (TV) switchover? Could this be a trick to make other life forms in the universe believe that we have finally extinguished ourselves. A nuclear flash followed by the elimination of the analog transmisstions that escapes our atmosphere and is filling space currently with Earth's beacon.

****
19) I'm sure a comprehensive answer to this would include the words "unreasonable" and "impossible" in addition to an explanation on how "useless" it would be.

Next question: why were the buildings not reconstructed as a part of crime investigation, for instance somewhere in Michigan, North Carolina or so? Even with the concrete pulverizing, the structure could've been rebuilt, including the planes (more or less, i guess).

****
20) When all someone has is an opinion, it probably would help to be an authority.

What's unbelievable is that you can't even understand that attacking people for not being an authority is an appeal to authority to support your opinion.

There you go people. Twenty reasons to laugh, cry, laugh some more and then vote. Have fun.

 

[Klimax]

Damn it.Travis,you are making it very difficult...
ETA:Just verified that another my nom made it...

 

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

#1, #12 and #20 would have to be the early favorites for a clean win, IMHO.

 

[Travis]

I'm personally liking #11 myself.

Of course I love it when someone links to something that destroys their contention without realizing it!

 

[Horatius]

I'm personally liking #11 myself.

Of course I love it when someone links to something that destroys their contention without realizing it!

The self-debunk is getting a bit cliched. But #12 seems to deny even the possibility of any debunking, since scientists aren't interested in the truth. It seems very telling that some CTists have become so annoyed at scientists not embracing their pet delusions, they've starting denying the value of science entirely.

 

[Travis]

The self-debunk is getting a bit cliched. But #12 seems to deny even the possibility of any debunking, since scientists aren't interested in the truth. It seems very telling that some CTists have become so annoyed at scientists not embracing their pet delusions, they've starting denying the value of science entirely.

Yes, because by "verification" they mean "agree with me."

 

[ihaunter]

I'm personally liking #11 myself.

Of course I love it when someone links to something that destroys their contention without realizing it!

I see you got the "False" showing in red text, but it should be bolded red text to really show how snopes displays it.

I'm going with 11, 12, 15.

 

[Travis]

I see you got the "False" showing in red text, but it should be bolded red text to really show how snopes displays it.

I'm going with 11, 12, 15.

Yeah, I realize I should have bolded it now, but still it's funny.

 

[Klimax]

Yeah, I realize I should have bolded it now, but still it's funny.

This reminds,you should update,your signature...

 

[Travis]

This reminds,you should update,your signature...

I had spaced out on that.

Done now!

 

[Elizabeth I]

No. 6 - because the attack of "The Cat in the Hat" is irresistible (and I wish Horatius would do a comic strip of NWO Kitty as The Cat in the Hat)

No. 9 - because I nominated it (and for its pristine cluelessness)

No. 19 - for its sheer breathtaking monumental uselessness

ETA: I like multi-voting!

 

[TJM]

#7 has to be the most ignornant post I've ever read.

#17, I really hope the author didn't try to test her theory because we haven't heard from her since.

#20 came really close to tying #7.

 

[Tandem Thinking]

In the shortest month of the year, I find myself making the hardest decision between the most stundilicious phrases ever.

I have to go with:
#10 my personal favorite. I mean, the guy comes out and admits it.

#11 a close second

#19 because I debated someone who thought this should happen because he'd seen buildings reconstructed before, so I asked him how tall the building he'd seen reconstructed was, and he told me 4 stories. Well, that's only 106 stories difference, piece of cake.

#7 for a perfect demonstration of closed-mindedness to all things blatantly obvious.
planes fly into buildings, buildings collapse, it's wrong of me to guess many people died.

Excellent nominees this year.

 

[Horatius]

No. 6 - because the attack of "The Cat in the Hat" is irresistible (and I wish Horatius would do a comic strip of NWO Kitty as The Cat in the Hat)

I'm right in the middle of the MWO story, but I'm also trying to decide If I should go with "The cat in the hat in the Cat in the Hat", or "A cat in A hat" vs. "The Cat in The Cat" hilarious mix-up joke....

 

[Horatius]

#7 has to be the most ignornant post I've ever read.

I agree. I remember being with a friend of mine that night, and talking about how many people we thought had probably died. My estimates were way more than 3000, just in the WTC alone.


They got a heck of a lot more people out of those buildings than I believed possible in the time they had. In dealing with all these CT nutbags, we shouldn't lose sight of the great work some people did on that day.

 

[Elizabeth I]

[qimg]http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/horatius/strip/2009/03/02/the-cat-in-the-hat.png[/qimg]


I'm right in the middle of the MWO story, but I'm also trying to decide If I should go with "The cat in the hat in the Cat in the Hat", or "A cat in A hat" vs. "The Cat in The Cat" hilarious mix-up joke....

 

[TJM]

#7 has to be the most ignornant post I've ever read.

Of all the words to misspell, why did it have to be that one?

 

[Edges]

Had to go with #11 because, while it is pretty common for conspiracy nuts to disprove themselves with their own links, it's usually a result of poor reading skills and a lack of comprehension as to what they actually read. That has to be the first time(that I've seen at least) that a CTer linked to a site which basically starts out with the statement: This theory is false.

 

[Travis]

Of all the words to misspell, why did it have to be that one?

Don't sweat it. It's not like it's gonna appear in the March Stundie Finals.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The self-debunk is getting a bit cliched. But #12 seems to deny even the possibility of any debunking, since scientists aren't interested in the truth. It seems very telling that some CTists have become so annoyed at scientists not embracing their pet delusions, they've starting denying the value of science entirely.

I find this one of the most seriously worrying aspects of conspiracy theories. There's the danger that they may begin to share the most pernicious qualities of religious woo like intelligent design and creationism, which have a regressive effect on the acceptance of scientific thought. As a scientist myself I'm all too aware that scientists are human beings with widely disparate motivations, some of whom conform to the picture painted in the quote. To tar the whole of science with the same brush, though, is basically to abandon the advantages of being human.

I voted for #20 this month. The blissful incomprehension of the rules of formal logic, phrased as a pseudo-authoritative declaration of irrefutable fact, is everything I look for in the perfect Stundie.

Dave