Was Dick Oliver confused about what he heard on 9/11

[Myriad]

[qimg]http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af205/jfibonacci/album2/zan-x.jpg?t=1273842870[/qimg]
Figuratively speaking, of course. Hint: I am not a fan of BigPharma

So figuratively, you're advising HawksFan to take an untested herbal and vitamin concoction, deceptively brand-named to fool the gullible into thinking it's related to the similarly named prescription benzodiazepine Xanax?

Figuratively speaking, this seems completely fitting.

From the manufacturer's catalog ad copy (red text added):

Zan-X is one of the most sophisticated products designed to promote relaxation and feelings of well-being. That's what we designed it to do. Note that we're not allowed to say that it actually does it, because we have no idea, since we never tested it. When used before bedtime, Zan-X may help boost free IGF-1, a hormone necessary to maintain youthful cellular function throughout the body. Or it may not. We have no idea, because we never tested it. Zan-X is formulated to help fight stress, enhance relaxation and recovery, and promote soothing sleep. That's what it's formulated to do. Note that we're not allowed to say that it actually does any of those things, because we have no idea since we never tested it.

But at least Zan-X isn't made and sold by a corporation out to make money, right?

The general question of "how do we know what we know" might be better off taken to the Philosafee forum. (Which is much better than the Philosophy forum here at JREF, because it has a similar sounding name but isn't controlled by BigRandi.)

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The video segment you have posted is also to be found in the 10 min. compilation of all 43 known videos of the second explosion, most, but not all, of which show some variation on "the shadow thingy."

I referenced that video compilation in post# 783, above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc2tfVuaSrg

Using the 10 min video as the discussion source, you may find your video segment beginning at or about the 1:46 mark corresponding to the following image:

[qimg]http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af205/jfibonacci/secondhit10minallversionexcerpts/146-10minvoicesloudnoplanesound.png?t=1273847072[/qimg]

That particular clip is noteworthy for the clarity of the human voices, conveying dismay, angst, dread and, perhaps, fear. It is, indeed, a freightening thing to watch.

The sound quality of the voices, however, stands in sharp contrast to the lack of any sound at all coming from "shadow thingy" and, a barely audible explosion coming at about the 17sec time frame in the clip you posted.

A widebody Boeing 767 at 800ft @ 550mph should be ear-splittingly loud and environmentally disturbing. However, in the particular video underdiscussion, the plane appears to me to just glide along and to be slower than is depicted in some of the other videos in the All 43 compilation; and certainly not a 550mph juggernaut. But hey, that is just me, posters are free to interpret the data as they see it. It also seems to me the shadow thingy in the video you posted is not heard at all. Zero, zilch, nada. Once again, that is my interpretation. That is what I hear.

Thanks for your post.

Flog flog flog

http://showhype.com/video/the_godfather_horse_head_scene/

 

[sts60]

Grasp this: Before any new skyscraper is built on GZ, they had better make sure that site is fully remediated as the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching.

Different types of directed-energy weapons have different effects.

Since you claim to know the effects, you must know the cause. What kind of directed-energy weapon was it? And where was it?

 

[Macgyver1968]

Different types of directed-energy weapons have different effects.

Since you claim to know the effects, you must know the cause. What kind of directed-energy weapon was it? And where was it?

Dream on...not even Dr. Judy will answer that one. Likes to call it a "distraction".

 

[beachnut]

Posting a photo shot of Flight 175. Debunked himself. But with his delusions of steel turning to dust, jet engines are Plymouth wheel covers, aircraft fuselages are horse trailers, and more moronic nonsense it is clear he debunks himself on each post of insane ideas and delusional logic.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

"non-self-quenching."

Another word he does not know the meaning of.........


Flog flog flog

 

[GlennB]

Different types of directed-energy weapons have different effects.

Since you claim to know the effects, you must know the cause. What kind of directed-energy weapon was it? And where was it?

ooh ooh, me me!

bzzzt! Question disallowed as a "gotcha/20 question question"

 

[DGM]

Grasp this: Before any new skyscraper is built on GZ, they had better make sure that site is fully remediated as the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching.

This seems to indicate that you do indeed know something about this DEW weapon that no one (even yourself) has ever been able to even guess what it could be.

I don't want to derail my own thread so, If I start a new thread will you finally explain to us what type of thing this DEW actually is?

 

[tsig]

Post #783, IMHO, is a clear example of his mental disorder..what ever it may be (autism, paranoia..etc). I've seen this in others. Presenting something as evidence, and only focusing in on one particular aspect which they believe supports their case, while ignoring anything else in the evidence that contradicts their beliefs...it is ignored and is seen as irrelevant.

Jam believes that DEW's were used to create the holes in the towers, and pyrotechnics were used to make the explosions...no planes...nothing striking the tower. Yet, he posts a video that has numerous examples of something very plane-like striking the towers. His only focus is the sound of the engines, that he believes should be heard, but isn't...which in his mind is evidence for his belief. He completely ignores the fact that videos show something actually hitting the building, which completely contradicts his DEW+pyrotechnics theory. This is ignored, and seen as irrelevant.

Many of us are here for the Lulz...but they have faded...it's time to put this pony to pasture.

edit:



And yet another example. The clip is clearly shot from a significant distance from the towers, yet Jam claims it's only 800ft away. He expects to hear the sound of loud engines, even though the people are inside and behind a plate glass window...as no "street sounds" are audible in the clip. He even refers to the "shadow-thingy", which contradicts the DEW/pyrotechnics theory.

His evidence is what people didn't see and didn't hear.

 

[sts60]

This seems to indicate that you do indeed know something about this DEW weapon that no one (even yourself) has ever been able to even guess what it could be.

I don't want to derail my own thread so, If I start a new thread will you finally explain to us what type of thing this DEW actually is?

Good luck with that. As you can see, I already tried, but since poor, deluded Ms. Wood can't define her claim, neither can any of her followers.

 

[X]

As is my custom, in making assumptions I like to double check the accuracy of them before proceeding too far.

bolding mine

Except for the ones you pull out of your own ass.

Like here, for example:

GZ was flat and no steel was shipped to China.

Grasp this: Before any new skyscraper is built on GZ, they had better make sure that site is fully remediated as the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching.

By the way, I sure hope the remnant steel used in the USS New York wasn't used for any part of the hull that is below the waterline...

[qimg]http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af205/jfibonacci/album2/uss-new-york-sea-trials.jpg?t=1273844030[/qimg]

Lots of assumptions.

Care to support your assertions that
1) no steel was shipped to China
2) the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching

I won't bother asking you to support your assertion of groundzero being flat. You've long since proven incapable of that.

I customarily do not make declarations about who is right and who is wrong.

********.
In your secodn post after the one above, you tell BillyRayValentine that his interpretation of his own post is incorrect.

Double checking for accuracy of understanding. Is post #651 fully accurate as to what you saw on 9/11?


For reference:


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5923435&postcount=651

"Yes, I was here. I've lived in the West Village for 20 years. I saw the first hole from Greenwich St., apparently moments after it happened, and ran across the Westside Highway (I had been on my way out for a run) to Pier 40. Not long after getting there and walking out a bit, my eye caught the plane coming in over the harbor. You had to happen to be looking at the right time- it was fairly easy to miss against the horizon.

I didn't see the actual impact or or have a direct view of the affected area of the building. I was almost a mile away, so I heard very little - sirens were screaming steadily at that point, so whatever sound might have reached me from a mile away would have been drowned out.

I did see parts of the resulting fireball and loads of smoke. And since I saw the plane and its path beforehand, and I'm a sane person, I was quite certain that the fireball and smoke I saw were the results of the plane crashing into the building."

Would you agree with me that any person who is a witness to an event really does more than one thing in being a witness. A person serves as a vehicle for transmitting information and a person also serves as an interpreter of the events thusly reported. Agreed?

I accept your statement as quoted above at face value, without exception.

Chances are, however, you interpret your statement differently than I do. Matters of interpretation are not at all associated with declarations of truth or falsity. Obviously, people interpret things differently.

I have not ever called you a liar. I have, however, "parsed" your statement for purposes of explaining how I interpret your statement and not for purposes of changing either your statement or your interpretation of your statement.

I hope this serves bring about a greater sense of ease and a lesser degree of apparent angst.

all the best

Once again, thank you very much for adding your personal experience. I could not be more sincere in saying your experience adds greatly to the quality of this thread that DGM started.

Tell you what, Jammonius:

Stop dodging and weaving and being a jackass.

Start backing upi your claims with substance.

You can begin by explaining what exactly the effects of DEW are.
Provide detail on what the telltales are, and what we would expect to find in the videos, eyewitness statements, sound recordings, and other measurement systems, if DEW were used.

 

[DGM]

Good luck with that. As you can see, I already tried, but since poor, deluded Ms. Wood can't define her claim, neither can any of her followers.

Yeah, I know but asking makes me feel better (not that I feel bad)

This is my favorite from that thread:

I don't know the exact upper range of their lethality, but I fear they can destroy the earth. I assert they pulverized 2 110 storey buildings in <10seconds. The query then is, what can they destroy if the beam remains on for 20 seconds, for 1 minute?

Classic.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Good luck with that. As you can see, I already tried, but since poor, deluded Ms. Wood can't define her claim, neither can any of her followers.

But Jammo must know or how could he possibly say.......

as the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching.

I'm really keen to find out what kind of energy could cause a "Non-self-quenching" fire.......actually I'd really like to know what a "Non-self-quenching" fire. was

Could jammo just be a trial of a nonsense writing blogging program? Similar to that used IIRC by New Scientist Magazine to show that Dr Jones Journal was nothing but a pay to publish vanity press?
This would explain a lot of Truther posts.

 

[BigAl]

But Jammo must know or how could he possibly say.......



I'm really keen to find out what kind of energy could cause a "Non-self-quenching" fire.......actually I'd really like to know what a "Non-self-quenching" fire. was

Could jammo just be a trial of a nonsense writing blogging program? Similar to that used IIRC by New Scientist Magazine to show that Dr Jones Journal was nothing but a pay to publish vanity press?
This would explain a lot of Truther posts.

I've said this about another loon, one we mercifully haven't heard from lately.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I've said this about another loon, one we mercifully haven't heard from lately.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

You might be right. Would he pass the Turing test? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

I'm guessing not, as nobody could believe a human could make the conclusions he does.

 

[BigAl]

You might be right. Would he pass the Turing test? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

I'm guessing not, as nobody could believe a human could make the conclusions he does.

IMO, the only test Jam could pass is for typing speed and spelling accuracy.

 

[sylvan8798]

That particular clip is noteworthy for the clarity of the human voices, conveying dismay, angst, dread and, perhaps, fear.

They also talk about a plane, jammonius.

 

[X]

They also talk about a plane, jammonius.

Are you sure?
Maybe it's "pPaza".

Like that cultivated underrated Duke...

 

[GlennB]

... the effects of DEW are non-self-quenching...

Oh dear. This can only mean that it will slowly consume its way outwards, gobbling up the entire planet. With a bit of luck it might just lurk in one place for a bit, as long as nothing consumable passes by too close.

Live while you can folks!

 

[tsig]

But Jammo must know or how could he possibly say.......



I'm really keen to find out what kind of energy could cause a "Non-self-quenching" fire.......actually I'd really like to know what a "Non-self-quenching" fire. was

Could jammo just be a trial of a nonsense writing blogging program? Similar to that used IIRC by New Scientist Magazine to show that Dr Jones Journal was nothing but a pay to publish vanity press?
This would explain a lot of Truther posts.

That must be the fire that dieth not or Hellfire!!!

ETA: on further thought isn't any fire "non self quenching" as long as they have fuel and oxygen?