May Stundie Nominations

[332nd]

Dang.

It probably would've won too.

For the year.

ETA: Seriously, a black hole was created somewhere in the universe by the sheer density of that much stupid.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Preservation of angular momentum for the win.

ETA: Dammit. Nevermind. Saw this on FSTDT today, forgot to check the time of the post. 5 years too old.
link

Dang.

It probably would've won too.

Can't we give it a Special Honorable Mention or something? I mean, after all: Gravity is what keeps things up, not what pulls them down?!

This deserves some kind of recognition!

 

[Travis]

Older posts have been allowed before if they were never nominated before and they are suitably funny. Provided that some new poster named NSA4truthaboutFBIlies doesn't flood the board in the next couple of days, I think that might get in.

 

[Horatius]

Just to dilute the Ultima1 wave, here's a nom from Q-pid on the LC boards:

It ain't gonna happen. You know those "myths" about the 200mpg carburettor? They aren't myths. Any car can be converted with a "catalyser", except that it won't perform because Big Oil have been adding extra chemicals that deliberately clog up these systems. That's why you can now safely extinguish a cigarette in a bowl of "petroleum".

 

[IMST]

Older posts have been allowed before if they were never nominated before and they are suitably funny. Provided that some new poster named NSA4truthaboutFBIlies doesn't flood the board in the next couple of days, I think that might get in.

Yay! I was not aware of that potential exemption. Here's to relative sanity for a couple days...

 

[Cuddles]

Preservation of angular momentum for the win.

ETA: Dammit. Nevermind. Saw this on FSTDT today, forgot to check the time of the post. 5 years too old.
link

This thread would blow his mind.

 

[Typicallucas]

Here is my stundie nomination.

First:

NIST has no material proof, that the fires were ever hotter than 600 Grad C, and we are talking about steel, which was heated up to 1100 Grad C. No wonder, that you have the urgency, to make the fires hotter.

Then a complete reversal:

You are in a state of denial. The evidences of tremendously hot temperatures are overwhelming. For example:

"The debris pile at Ground Zero was always tremendously hot. Thermal measurements taken by helicopter each day showed underground temperatures ranging from 400ºF to more than 2,800ºF. The surface was so hot that standing too long in one spot softened (and even melted) the soles of our safety shoes. Steel toes would often heat up and become intolerable. This heat was also a concern for the search-and-rescue dogs used at the site. Many were not outfitted with protective booties (Photo 13). More than one suffered serious injuries and at least three died while working at Ground Zero. The underground fire burned for exactly 100 days and was finally declared “extinguished” on Dec. 19, 2001".

this was reported by a small group of SH&E professionals from Bechtel Group Inc., led by Stewart Burkhammer, a professional member of ASSE’s National Capital Chapter.
more about the report.
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/asse_groundzero1.htm

Then he seems to think stating the obvious should cast doubt upon the official explanation of the events of 9/11

for me, it is logic to assume, that the tremendous hot temperatures (in the pile) were connected with the reason for the collapse.

... and the reason for the horseshoes.

 

[dudalb]

Preservation of angular momentum for the win.

ETA: Dammit. Nevermind. Saw this on FSTDT today, forgot to check the time of the post. 5 years too old.
link

I give the guy Inmysparetime quotes credit: I think he is honest in saying ..basically that Science is Evil....what a lot of religious fundies believe but don't want to say outright.
Calling himself after the founder of Dominion Theology pretty much shows where this guy is coming from.

 

[Travis]

Just to dilute the Ultima1 wave, here's a nom from Q-pid on the LC boards:

Someone who doesn't watch Mythbusters, apparently.

 

[jaydeehess]

Just to dilute the Ultima1 wave, here's a nom from Q-pid on the LC boards:

I don't know about it being "safe".

Dubbing out a lit cig in gasoline will probably not result in your burning the hair off your arm (especially if the gasoline and room are relatively cool)but there is a significant possibility that it will (which would go up as the temp of the fuel and air increase).

That the poster does not understand therodynamics or chemistry is,,, well,,, obvious.

 

[ktesibios]

Here are some experiments in trying to ignite gasoline with a burning cigarette at the Intuitor Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics page:

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

(scroll down a bit or click the "cigarettes" link in the sidebar).

They tried very hard to ignite shallow pans of gasoline and gasoline-soaked paper towels with cigarettes, with no success.

Remember the old "electrolyze water, collect the hydrogen and oxygen in test tubes and then try each with a glowing spint and a flaming splint" experiment back in 8th grade science? IIRC the glowing splint didn't do anything for the hydrogen-but the flaming splint ignited it with a loud "SQUEAK!" that made all the girls in class shriek.

 

[332nd]

Here are some experiments in trying to ignite gasoline with a burning cigarette at the Intuitor Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics page:

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

(scroll down a bit or click the "cigarettes" link in the sidebar).

They tried very hard to ignite shallow pans of gasoline and gasoline-soaked paper towels with cigarettes, with no success.

Remember the old "electrolyze water, collect the hydrogen and oxygen in test tubes and then try each with a glowing spint and a flaming splint" experiment back in 8th grade science? IIRC the glowing splint didn't do anything for the hydrogen-but the flaming splint ignited it with a loud "SQUEAK!" that made all the girls in class shriek.

I remember that! Sherri peed a little.

 

[Hokulele]

I have absolutely no idea what this means, but it does offer an interesting mental image.

Physics isn't really an actor.

But comparing the United States government to physics is kind of like comparing a cockroach to a grizzly bear. It just isn't of any importance.

 

[Mel Odious]

From a thread at the David Icke Forums entitled Movies that showed 9/11 before 9/11:

Die Hard released 1987

BUSINESSMAN. I know. I know. It sounds crazy. Trust me. I’ve been doing it for nine years. Yes, sir! Better than a shower and a hot cup of coffee.
JOHN MCCLANE. Okay.
(The airplane stops. Passengers rise, start to take down overhead luggage. McClane does this, but as he opens the door above, the Businessman blanches seeing McClane’s Beretta pistol peeking out from his jacket. Recognizing the look, McClane smiles reassuringly.)
JOHN MCCLANE. It’s okay. I’m a cop. Trust me. I’ve been doing this for eleven years.

Comparing the sum of experience each has in their respective fields the Businessman has nine years and McClane eleven years - 911

Post #90 of that thread.

Is "kidsarocker" serious?

Yes he is.

 

[1337m4n]

Movies that showed 9/11 before 9/11:

To be fair, it's entirely plausible that movies before 9/11/2001 would use the date 9/11 in a symbolic fashion, because a great many historically significant things have occurred on the date 9/11.

Truthers, of course, do not realize this, believing instead that 9/11/2001 is the only 9/11 in history.

 

[Cavorite]

Delurking for a good one:

Can't post links, but it's in the BAUT conspiracies forum in the "Regarding Tunguska" thread, page four:

To reach the ones who are most ready to receive, contemplate and struggle with evidence of other (more evolved) human beings, an approach would be made that would still, until no longer demonstrably necessary, incorporate certain elements of plausible deniability, so not as to violate the free will of those who may be "pushed over the edge" by evidence and realizations that, even though they may have thought to the contrary, they were nonetheless not capable of safely dealing with.

In keeping with this approach, there would be certain "escape routes" for both physical and informational evidence that would keep absolute "proof" just out of the reach of those who weren't ready for it. There is no condescension intended whatsoever by that remark.
...
Now, returning to the idea that there are those who are indeed ready for something, though maybe not all that they presume, the evidence is presented or inserted into our world, with certain elements of plausible deniability built in. Specifically, a man is given the opportunity to film one of the UFOs circling a tree in front of a farm house. But to the some people it's "obvious" that the UFO is just a model on a string being manipulated in a pendulum like motion.

So if it looks like obvious crap, that's because you're not ready for the truth.

Bulletproof.

Gotta respect the "no condescension" bit.

 

[Horatius]

Gotta respect the "no condescension" bit.

This reminds me of a comment a truther friend of mine made in an e-mail. He linked me to a site about "apathetic sheeple", but oh, no, he wasn't trying to insult me for not being a truther, heaven forbid!

 

[Travis]

It's amazing how some will go to great lengths to rationalize why they are the only ones who see obvious crap as something so much more meaningful.

 

[Baylor]

Maybe not stundie-worthy since there's so much competition this month. But this deserves at least an honorable mention. I see a lot of potential in KreeL. Heiwa has been mentoring him very well.

My uncle put a fire out with a can of dirt. I watched him do it when i was a kid.

Watching the explosive demolition of the twin towers proved that if anything else, the fires were put out, by and large, by the huge amounts of dust.

 

[Stacko]

Because the 9/11 Truth movement has been so effective.

The dollar is much stronger than in 1564, at least.

Note to self when picking an arbitrary date in the past make the sure the country I'm talking about at the very least existed then.