Monday, August 02, 2010

CIT for the Prosecution

Arcterus, one of the more intelligent Truthers, writes about the problems CIT would experience if they were running the case for the prosecution.

Let's start with their own witnesses being cross-examined with each other. CIT's own witnesses state that the plane impacted the building. Their case for claiming the physical evidence was faked revolves around the testimony that the flight path as on the north side of CITGO. They would HAVE to find some way to convince the jury that part of the testimony was right and another part was wrong without directly saying so. Now even if they made this possible, invalidating a witness discredits their ENTIRE testimony. Even if you're only arguing against part of it, it only makes the entire testimony look bad. It's so unlikely it might as well be said to be impossible that an entire jury would accept a testimony to be PARTIALLY accurate. They would almost definitely disregard it. Even if, by some miracle, each and every one of them thought in this way, that would go out the window upon cross-examination. Take, for example, Sergeant Lagasse. CIT says that Sergeant Lagasse giving irrefutably wrong locations of the taxi cab and light poles actually supports their theory. Well, that's all fine and dandy, but back in the realm of reality, all it means is that he's WRONG. And if he's wrong, it means the entire testimony could be wrong. That and, of course, they wouldn't be allowed to say why they think it supports their conclusion. They can not speculate.


I particularly like this part:

In short, this means "Every contact leaves a trace." Are the implications of this clear? Physical evidence is always correct, because it can not be wrong. IF the physical evidence was faked, then there'd be some sign, some EVIDENCE that it was faked. Does everyone understand? You can only trump physical evidence with PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

Were the light poles blown away by explosives? Then there should be some explosive residue. Was that segment of the Pentagon blown up? Then like all bombs, there must have been some shrapnel. Were the plane parts planted? Then it should be clear to forensic examiners that the locations of the plane parts are all wrong, that they flew in the wrong trajectory, that they weren't traveling at the right velocity, anything to suggest that they didn't originate from a high-speed plane crash. Did the examiners miss all of this? If so, it doesn't matter. It means CIT has no case here. If the evidence was missed by those examining the scene, there's nothing that can be done about that. It still means there's no documented, verifiable physical evidence with which to suggest that the whole scene was set up.


Indeed. Of course, if we try to suppose that Professor Jones is in the witness chair, and Arcterus the prosecutor, I'd love to hear this part:

Arcterus: Did you obtain confirmation that the red-gray chips were thermite?

Jones: Well, we sent them to a guy in France, who confirmed the existence of the chips, although not in the quantity we found them, and he discovered they had been deactivated...

Arcterus: Do you have any evidence that they had been deactivated?

Jones: Errr, well, that is to say....

Labels: , ,

92 Comments:

At 02 August, 2010 09:47, Anonymous Pat: Squirming Witness said...

Arcterus: Did you ever source or obtain confirmation for this quote, Mr. Curley?

"The iron microspheres reported in the RJ Lee report could easily have been caused by the steelworkers using acetylene torches on the steel during the rescue operation."

Pat Curley: well no, ummm, but Crazy Chainsaw has been on Ripley's before...you know, I mean...uhhh, that makes the spheres he speculates about identical to the ones in the dust...you know I mean uhh.. from torches and weed whackers and such.
Their morphology and composition HAS to be the same, even though I've never checked...uh...but don't forget what I also said in 2008: "I always say we don't do the best debunking..."

Boy is that ever true...you know I mean...

 
At 02 August, 2010 09:55, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Trolling again--you batty back door buccaneer?

Go honk a cock--you freak of nature.

 
At 02 August, 2010 10:00, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The RJ Lee Report doesn't support your idiotic theory, either--you screaming fairy bum bandit.

Again fucker, explain how 3,900 lbs of "nanothermite" created 10,000 tons of alumino-silicate and iron rich spheres?

I can guarantee you that fire cannot produce that amount of alumino-silicate and iron rich spheres.

The only source that can provide that amount of alumino-silicate and iron rich spheres is the tower's lightweight concrete, which was pulverized when the towers collapsed.

Now, either prove that Jones' theory is correct, or STFU.

And don't forget to violate the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of mass--you batty back door buccaneer.

And what reply can we expect from the temperamental twink, you ask?

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

 
At 02 August, 2010 10:01, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Pat: Squirming Witness said... "

And that has what to do with the post, you backdoor buccaneer?

 
At 02 August, 2010 10:25, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Pat made an interesting point when he wrote, "...Jones: Well, we sent them to a guy in France, who confirmed the existence of the chips, although not in the quantity we found them, and he discovered they had been deactivated..."

So, tell us, Brian--you screaming-mimi sissy queen--if Jones' experiments cannot be reproduced, what does this "anomaly" tell us about the validity of Jones' alleged "peer reviewed" (by troofers, which isn't a peer review, by the way) "scientific paper"?

ROTFLMAO!

And what reply can we expect from the insatiable sexual invert, you ask?

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

Again, go honk a cock--you salacious sphincter proder.

 
At 02 August, 2010 10:47, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Brian--you prattling powder puff--it's easy to confirm that Jones' "dust samples" contain Si, K, Ca and Ti. How does the presence of the aforementioned elements support Jones' "nanothermite" reaction theory?

The exothermic chemical reaction for "nanothermite" follows:

Fe2O3 + 2Al => 2Fe + Al2O3

So, tell us, Brian--you fanny finagling faux femme--where did the Si, K, Ca and Ti in Jones' "dust samples" come from?

And what reply can we expect from the light-headed lavender lad, you ask?

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

Again, go honk a cock--you limp wrist lisper.

 
At 02 August, 2010 12:05, Blogger avicenne said...

" If you agree that trial is going to be a necessary factor in the grand scheme of things..."

They really think that some day there's going to be a trial?! Based on what? A load of old scientific voodoo?

We call President George Walker Bush. Gasps in the courtroom.

He unwittingly encapsulates the whole truth movement, - "That whole mess is such a wishy-washy roller coaster ride filled with holes and mistakes..."

 
At 02 August, 2010 12:44, Anonymous Arhoolie Vanunu said...

Even the loopy Debunker Cult has to admit that posting quotes from Paddy's debates has utterly ruined the pasty idiot's credibility.No wonder this jerkoff embraces the nutjob Nico Haupt and the caveman from West Va.Paddy,run that spire thing by us again,we sure can use a laugh here at the dungeon!

 
At 02 August, 2010 12:45, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The marauding morphodite prattles, "...Their morphology and composition HAS to be the same...[blah][blah][blah]."

Big words from a junior college dropout who doesn't know the meaning of morphology or composition.

Now, what's that sound I hear emanating from the troofer camp?

You guessed it...

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

 
At 02 August, 2010 12:52, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The ArseHooligan, fugitive from justice, dissembles, "...Even the loopy Debunker Cult has to admit that posting quotes from Paddy's debates has utterly ruined the pasty idiot's credibility."

Golly ArseHooligan, I don't think we have to admit anything. And didn't Pat write the following passage?

"...Jones: Well, we sent them to a guy in France, who confirmed the existence of the chips, although not in the quantity we found them, and he discovered they had been deactivated..." -- Pat.

So, tell us, ArseHooligan--you pathological liar--if Jones' experiments cannot be reproduced, what does this "anomaly" tell us about the validity of Jones' alleged "peer reviewed" (by troofers, which isn't a peer review, by the way) "scientific paper"?

Come on, ArseHooligan, do you possess the intellectual honesty to answer that question (fat chance)?

Predicted response from the ArseHooligan, you ask?

You guessed it...

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

Now, go play in the freeway, ArseHooligan.

 
At 02 August, 2010 14:12, Anonymous GB's Absent Sources said...

"...if Jones' experiments cannot be reproduced..."

Imagine being lectured on scientific repeatability by an idiot who says he knows the origin of the iron in the dust WITHOUT EVER HAVING SEEN IT...

If it's just one fail after another, is it any less epic? I think not. GuitarFAIL loses again.

 
At 02 August, 2010 15:14, Anonymous Pat's Idiotic Credulity said...

"Face it, troofers are no match for me, and they never will be." CatarrhBile

All we want is your sources, and you keep failing, slick. What 'match' are you talking about? Is this a competition? If so, you haven't even gotten to the starting gate.

But don't worry: in the game of unsourced, speculative nonsense, you and Pat are WAY ahead!

"The iron microspheres reported in the RJ Lee report could easily have been caused by the steelworkers using acetylene torches on the steel during the rescue operation" -Pat Cowardly

Unfortunately, "I read this at JREF" doesn't count as a source, Pat. You fail.

 
At 02 August, 2010 15:27, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The gay as a goose git prattles, "...Imagine being lectured on scientific repeatability by an idiot who says he knows the origin of the iron in the dust WITHOUT EVER HAVING SEEN IT..."

Are you trying to say that I've never read Jones' "scientific paper"?

You'll try anything, won't you, compulsive liar for 9/11 troof?

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

And speaking of epic failure, tell us more about the accuracy of EDX when detecting oxygen and nitrogen--you brain-dead pee pee-pulling pederast.

 
At 02 August, 2010 15:37, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The leering lisper belches, "...All we want is your sources, and you keep failing, slick."

I've given you my sources, but you're too lazy, dishonest, deceitful and despicable to read them.

And never mind that I'm a scientist, which means I'm QUALIFIED to pass judgment on matters of engineering and general scientific interest.

Now, tell us, what qualifications does a junior college dropout (that's you, gay boi) possess to pass judgment on matters of engineering and general scientific interest?

The short answer: None.

Too bad that you're so conceited that you can't see reality for the woods.

Now, go play in the freeway, charlatan.

 
At 02 August, 2010 15:48, Blogger Triterope said...

Arcterus: Do you have any evidence that they had been deactivated?

Jones: Errr, well, that is to say....


I think you got Jones' response wrong. I suspect it would be:

Jones: No. But you see, this is why we need a new investigation into 9-11...

 
At 02 August, 2010 16:18, Anonymous FAILY McFAILY FAIL said...

FAIL! FAILY FAIL FAIL FAIL! FAIL? Faaaaaaaiiiil!!!!!!!

Fail fail fail! FAIL!

Overusing this word doesn't make you "hip" or "edgy" troofers...

TROOF FAIL!

 
At 02 August, 2010 16:33, Anonymous Arhoolie Vanunu said...

According to the Insane Git the iron rich microspheres were A) already there B)"...you know how when you try to grab a cricket and the dang thing just flies,like,really far through the air?" or C)weren't possible at that particular juncture or D) "I'll throw anything up against the wall,motherfuckering queer bait!".Pray tell,just what does this have to do with the completely bonkers Paddy and the Steve Coll acolyte and some of their tortuous,gullible and pathetic offerings?

 
At 02 August, 2010 16:53, Anonymous Arhoolie's a bitch... said...

Arhoolie's Right! Therefore it must have been Super-Duper-Magico-Them*te! What astounding logic!

 
At 02 August, 2010 17:00, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Keep repeating the following over-and-over again until you get it through your thick skull, ArseHooligan:

Lightweight concrete employs fly ash (the source iron-rich spheres) and pumice (the source of alumino-silicate spheres) as aggregate.

Again...

Lightweight concrete employs fly ash (the source iron-rich spheres) and pumice (the source of alumino-silicate spheres) as aggregate.

And one more time for good measure...

Lightweight concrete employs fly ash (the source iron-rich spheres) and pumice (the source of alumino-silicate spheres) as aggregate.

Got it, stupid?

 
At 02 August, 2010 17:14, Blogger GuitarBill said...

And "nanothermite" is unsuitable for "controlled demolition", as the following paper written by an energetic nanomaterials researcher makes perfectly clear (be careful troofers, there are lots of big words in the article; thus, your head's may explode).

Simpson wrote, "...Energetic materials are made in two ways. The first is by physically mixing solid oxidizers and fuels, a process that, in its basics, has remained virtually unchanged for centuries. Such a process results in a composite energetic material such as black powder. The second process involves creating a monomolecular energetic material, such as TNT, in which each molecule contains an oxidizing component and a fuel component. For the composites, the total energy can be much greater than that of monomolecular materials. However, the rate at which this energy is released is relatively slow when compared to the release rate of monomolecular materials."

Source: llnl.gov: Explosive aerogels.

Keep reading the sentence highlighted in bold font until you get it through your head, troofer swine.

Thus, the best use of "nanothermite" is where minuscule, precise application of extreme heat (an exothermic reaction) is valuable--melting thin thermocouple wires, separation reactions, and the like.

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

 
At 02 August, 2010 17:15, Anonymous Arhoolie's Spear said...

Yeah,and "physics" explains how a huge arrow from the quiver of Captain Pancakes was able to pierce the heart of the American Express Buiding! Did you read the Oz books as a kid,Merry Sunshine? Back to the fakebook,Cowboy Small!

 
At 02 August, 2010 17:29, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Ever heard of something called kinetic energy, genius?

How about potential energy, eh genius?

Nah, those huge skyscrapers couldn't possibly have enough energy when unleashed by the collapse to hurl a mere column 600 feet or so. Right, genius?

ROTFLMAO!

 
At 02 August, 2010 17:50, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Let's see, each floor stored 10.3 billion Joules of energy.

And a ton of TNT is 4.2 billion Joules.

Hmmmm...

110 floors * 10.3 billion Joules = ~ 1.14 trillion Joules

Hmmmm...

1.14 trillion Joules / 4.2 billion Joules/ton (TNT) = ~ 271 tons of TNT.

(Can you say, "the energy equivalent of a small nuclear weapon?". I knew you could. LOL!)

Nah, there's no way those huge skyscrapers stored enough energy to hurl a mere column 600 ft or so.

ROTFLMAO!

 
At 02 August, 2010 18:51, Anonymous Arhoolie the inept thinker said...

Of course not, "Git!" The only thing ever invented ever that could ever make anything steel like a column move 600 feet ever, is sooper dooper nano thermite!!!!! It does everything! sprinkle it on your toast!mix it in koolaid to make red bull! Hurrr duurrrrr!!!!

 
At 02 August, 2010 19:20, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Oh no! My calculation's are off by one ten trillionth of a Joule.

How could I be so stupid!

Epic fail!

INSIDE JOB! INSIDE JOB!

 
At 02 August, 2010 20:29, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Arcterus may be more intelligent than most, but he's still full of shit. Lay witnesses can say pretty much whatever they want about what they perceived, and juries can choose whether and how much to believe them. That's how the jury system works. It's quite common for a witness to be credible on certain parts but dubious on others, and the dubious parts are precisely what you expect your opponent to emphasize on cross.

Something else that Troofers never seem to pick up on: winning a civil case only requires that you convince a jury that your evidence is better than your opponent's evidence. There's no "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement, you just have to tell the better story. They seem convinced that their evidence is watertight, but strangely enough they never get around to meeting this pretty easy standard in court.

 
At 03 August, 2010 04:28, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"(Can you say, "the energy equivalent of a small nuclear weapon?". I knew you could. LOL!)"

Hey, I want an H/T!

 
At 03 August, 2010 08:35, Anonymous Bennett's Best Narratives said...

JamesB (frantically, building to a whine at the end):

"See, History is about building narratives...Conspiracy theory is about anomaly hunting, where ‘well this happened and this happened! this happened! and this happened! this just was weird! and this is really weird too, and then this happened! what a coincidence! But none of it—- it doesn’t MEAN anything! It-- [crosstalk and James giggling]. "

Umm...those are called facts, Jimbo. You can't discount them just because they don't fit well your 'narrative', try as you might. Facts build the narrative, not the other way around.

Oh, and we never got to hear your proposed source for all the melted iron in the dust, Jimmy. Was it torches and weed whackers? fly ash? Or are you going with the published scientific reports instead? Enlighten us, James Bennett.

"It doesn't MEAN anything!"

 
At 03 August, 2010 08:47, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Only one problem, closet queen.

The RJ Lee report doesn't substantiate your propaganda.

So when will explain how 3,900 lbs of "nanothermite" created 10,000 tons of alumino-silicate and iron rich spheres?

(Don't hold your breath, because he can't substantiate his argument. I've asked him to substantiate his argument at least 100 times, but he simply ignores me and continues to dissemble).

Since when does STONEWALLING count as "debate"--you grindle packing camp bitch?

 
At 03 August, 2010 09:06, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Umm...those are called facts, Jimbo"

No they're not, they're paranoid conspiritard natterigns about, well, nothing.

 
At 03 August, 2010 09:07, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Oh, and we never got to hear your proposed source for all the melted iron in the dust, Jimmy."

What's yours, fucktard?

 
At 03 August, 2010 10:34, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at GayTardBull, talking to himself and seeing ghosts. Lying about 9/11 has taken its inevitable toll on him--I guess he thought that since it was so far away from him, none of it matters. It matters.

 
At 03 August, 2010 10:46, Blogger GuitarBill said...

STONEWALLING again, Brian?

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

 
At 03 August, 2010 11:03, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Uh folks, here's the real juicy story...

http://wtcdemolition.com/blog/node/2927

 
At 03 August, 2010 11:29, Blogger GuitarBill said...

TROOFER CAT FIGHT!

Get the popcorn!

 
At 03 August, 2010 12:35, Blogger Lazarus Long said...

"Anonymous said...
Look at GayTardBull, talking to himself and seeing ghosts. Lying about 9/11 has taken its inevitable toll on him--I guess he thought that since it was so far away from him, none of it matters. It matters."

so mwhat's your explanation, fucktard?

 
At 03 August, 2010 14:50, Anonymous Bennett's Research said...

More unsourced lunacy from James Bennett's "debate":

(Speaking for NORAD on whether the multiple drills and simulations affected NORAD's response):

"It never affected the response... it was just weird!"

James: what's your source for this?
How often does 'weird' stuff like this happen, and how do you know it had no affect on the response?

 
At 03 August, 2010 15:00, Anonymous James B. Mendacious said...

James Bennett: "we’ve got confessions of at least 7 of the 9/11 terrorists ... plus Osama Bin Laden, we have all the forensic evidence…"

Putting aside the ridiculous lie about 'all the forensic evidence', please source your claims about the 'confessions' of those 8 individuals. How many independent parties have come out to refute the Pentagon's 'translation' of the OBL's video, Jimmy? Does he ever actually confess anything? Don't forget your sources, champy!

(James on History) "...it's about building a story and trying to explain things..."

Not without sources, it's not.

 
At 03 August, 2010 15:17, Blogger Triterope said...

So the big news on 911Blogger is a Truther imagining how another Truther would prosecute an imaginary court case. Okay, then...

 
At 03 August, 2010 16:40, Anonymous Back to Cell for Vanunu said...

Poor,poor pitiful JoggingJamesB and his loopy pal,Paddy the Mediocrity.Jeepers,guys,lay off those saps,they've already crashed their catamaran on the rocks.next thing you know you'll be picking on them by bringing up the Gulf of Tonkin.Have mercy on these nutcases.

 
At 03 August, 2010 16:59, Anonymous "9/11 was,like,really weird,dude" said...

Boy,has anyone folded their tent and skedaddled to the jogging track faster than the dim bulb JJB the Boob? Maybe you can ban your own comments,hey Jimson?

 
At 03 August, 2010 17:40, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The mendacious bunghole marauder prattles, "...Putting aside the ridiculous lie about 'all the forensic evidence', please source your claims about the 'confessions' of those 8 individuals."

Right here, cooch, at the end of the video.

Source: Google Video: Screw Loose Change--Not Freakin' Again Edition.

 
At 03 August, 2010 17:48, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The screaming fairy prevaricates, "...Putting aside the ridiculous lie about 'all the forensic evidence.'"

I've already proven that there was plenty of forensic evidence.

Do you honestly believe that telling the same lies over-and-over-and-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over-over-and-over again, ad nauseum adds the force of credibility to your propaganda--you mendacious cocksucker?

Do you worship Hitler? You must, because you're a faithful practitioner of the BIG LIE.

 
At 04 August, 2010 04:11, Blogger Triterope said...

Poor,poor pitiful JoggingJamesB and his loopy pal,Paddy the Mediocrity.Jeepers,guys,lay off those saps,they've already crashed their catamaran on the rocks.next thing you know you'll be picking on them by bringing up the Gulf of Tonkin.Have mercy on these nutcases.

Ban.

 
At 04 August, 2010 07:50, Anonymous GodwinBile's Stupidity said...

"Do you worship Hitler? You must, because you're a faithful practitioner of the BIG LIE."
-GodwinsBile

Source? I go by scientific reports, you go on speculation.

"I'm QUALIFIED to pass judgment...' -CatarrhBile

Laughable.

 
At 04 August, 2010 08:30, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GB's obsessive, compulsive, self-abusing denial is quite amusing.

 
At 04 August, 2010 08:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kind of shows that the creation and maintenance of a false internet persona can cause one to lose one's grip on reality.

 
At 04 August, 2010 09:37, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, charlatan.

Tell us more about the accuracy of EDX when detecting oxygen and nitrogen--you brain-dead pee pee-pulling pederast.

And when you're finished supplying us with another 100% fact-free non response, get back to this comment and answer my questions--you pillow biting powder puff.

 
At 04 August, 2010 09:43, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The pee willied pederast prattles, "...I go by scientific reports...[blah][blah][blah]."

You do nothing of the sort.

In fact, you misrepresent your sources, and lie like a rug when caught posting propaganda.

FACT: The RJ Lee Report doesn't substantiate your propaganda. And when I asked you to provide one sentence that substantiates your argument, you resorted to quote mining and bald-faced lies.

Tell us more about the accuracy of EDX when detecting oxygen and nitrogen--you brain-dead pee pee-pulling pederast.

And when you're finished coughing up another spit ball of lies and propaganda, get back to this post and answer my questions--you dissembling degenerate.

 
At 04 August, 2010 10:10, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not interested in the accuracy of EDX. I'm interested in your claim that it doesn't detect oxygen--which was a blatant and stupid (easily-detected) lie.

 
At 04 August, 2010 10:10, Blogger GuitarBill said...

And the cowardly troofers response, you ask?

You guessed it...

*crickets*

*crickets*

*crickets*

Pathetic.

 
At 04 August, 2010 10:14, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The lisping lavender lad lies, "...I'm not interested in the accuracy of EDX. I'm interested in your claim that it doesn't detect oxygen--which was a blatant and stupid (easily-detected) lie."

Prove it, gay boi. Because so far you've offered nothing to substantiate your assertion.

And don't you dare repost that bullshit that tries to equate detection of oxygen with accurate detection of oxygen.

Go for it, Mr. Science illiterate know-nothing and pathetic charlatan.

 
At 04 August, 2010 17:23, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh you're moving the goal posts now. You said EDX did not detect oxygen. And then when I showed Jones's charts showed it did, you said it didn't accurately detect oxygen.

 
At 04 August, 2010 18:26, Blogger GuitarBill said...

No I didn't move the goal post--you idiot.

I wasn't explicit in my original statement, and as per your policy of picking gnat shit out of pepper, you decided to quote a misleading statement about EDX's alleged ability to accurately measure oxygen.

But that's neither here nor there. The lightest element EDX can accurately measure is Na, as per McCrone.

Thus, if you had any idea what you're talking about you would never have tried to claim that EDX can accurately measure oxygen.

Again, you lose the debate because you're an idiot.

Enjoy your plate of crow, Hitler fanatic.

 
At 04 August, 2010 23:49, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GB wrote: "I wasn't explicit in my original statement"

Oh no? http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2010/07/will-these-idiots-make-up-their-alleged.html#c7190825104395336612

"It is well known that oxygen doesn't show up in EDX"

You don't even know what you wrote, let alone anything else, GordoBall.

 
At 05 August, 2010 09:34, Blogger GuitarBill said...

There you go again, troofer. You're making an ass of yourself by picking gnat shit out of pepper.

You can piss and moan all you like; nevertheless, oxygen is not reliably measured by EDX. For example, light elements like oxygen, nitrogen and carbon, emit extremely low energy X-rays. Thus, be careful when quoting any measurement for the aforementioned elements if the values were obtained by EDX.

Got it?

Once again, you jumped the gun and made a huge error. In fact, I warned you some time ago that Jones' experiments are flawed. You didn't heed my advise because you're conceited and arrogant. And now you're paying the price. Moreover, you're not man enough to admit that you're wrong.

Pathetic.

 
At 05 August, 2010 10:19, Anonymous Arhoolie Vanunu said...

Can we refer to the utter destruction of the "Git" as an "uncontrolled demolition" from here on in? Because that wacky nerd is really out of control! Fun to watch implode,though,all 6'3" 235 pounds of him! Special mention for his advanced thinking on homosexuals! Ga hey Brofee!

 
At 05 August, 2010 10:22, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I didn't make any error. I've never based any claims on Jones' work. YOU made the error when you claimed EDX can not measure oxygen, and you're not man enough to admit it.

But then one can't expect much from a guy who spends his life hanging out on a chat board bragging about his anonymous internet persona.

 
At 05 August, 2010 10:45, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The painted willy prevaricator wrote, "...I didn't make any error. I've never based any claims on Jones' work."

I've already proven that you lied, Brain, by providing a hyperlink to the post you wrote that cites Jones' "peer reviewed scientific paper."

What's this, ass-clown?

Source: SLC: The lying assleech Brian Good cites Jones' Bentham Paper as evidence.

In response, you lied and claimed that you didn't write that post. Well, that's bullshit, and you know it, Mr. Sock Puppet. Thus, we have more evidence that you're incapable of telling the truth or admitting an error. And that's precisely why I refer to you as conceited and arrogant.

"...YOU made the error when you claimed EDX can not measure oxygen"

More obfuscation and bullshit. Tell us, what good is a measurement if it's not accurate? Thus, my statement is correct. EDX cannot measure oxygen, because if the measurement is in error the measurement is worthless.

Thanks for proving, once again, that you're liar and an idiot.

Who do think you're kidding with this bilge, aunt fancy?

 
At 05 August, 2010 10:49, Blogger GuitarBill said...

And why is it that The ArseHooligan and Brian Good ALWAYS post within minutes of one another?

Can you say Sock Puppet?

I knew you could, children.

LOL!

You're a transparent fraud and a liar, Brian. Put simply, you're a deranged psychopath.

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:12, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Project much? Your irrational belief that every anonymous poster is Brian Good would seem to reflect some kind of homo thing. Whassamatter Guy, wifey getting pudgy and cranky?

It's not obfuscation to point out that you made a pedantic claim that EDX can not detect oxygen, it was not true, and you lack the integrity to admit it. Now you're trying to shift the issue from "detect" to "measure".

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:19, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Read it until you get it through your thick skull, Mr. Sock Puppet.

Tell us, what good is a measurement if it's not accurate? Thus, my statement is correct. EDX cannot measure oxygen, because if the measurement is in error the measurement is worthless.

You'll never get around that fact, asshole, so give it up.

FACT: You're in error, as is Steven Jones.

Now, would you care to provide evidence that EDX can reliably measure oxygen?

Of course you can't provide the evidence because I'm right and you are consistently wrong.

Well, if nothing else you're consistent--consistently wrong, that is.

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:27, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You claimed EDX can not detect oxygen. It can detect oxygen. You were wrong. That's okay. You won't admit it. That's not okay.

Time to get down to Togo's and get a job, Gordo. See how much provolone you can stuff in your face before they fire you.

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:34, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, psychopath.

Face it, you lost the debate again, and now you're playing semantic games.

So, where's the evidence that EDX can measure oxygen reliably?

Come on, Brian, lie and play more semantic games. But understand that lying and semantic games will never prove that EDX can measure oxygen reliably.

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

Do the troof movement a favor, Brian. Step away from the keyboard before you do more damage to the nutters for 9/11 troof.

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:40, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GummerBawl, I never said EDX could measure oxygen reliably. You said it couldn't detect oxygen at all. You were wrong. And that fact that you're not man enough to admit you made a simple mistake completely wipes out your credibility.

 
At 05 August, 2010 11:50, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...GummerBawl, I never said EDX could measure oxygen reliably."

Then perhaps you can explain why you wrote the following post?

Source: SLC: The lying assleech Brian Good cites Jones' Bentham Paper as evidence.

And don't try to claim that you didn't write that post. We're well aware of why you post as "Anonymous".

You post as Anonymous because it allows you to lie and claim that someone else made the post when your lies, mistakes and stupidity are exposed to the light of day.

Sorry assclown, but Jones' experiments rely on EDX to measure oxygen. Thus, Jones' conclusions, like your arguments, have no integrity.

Poor assleech, you'll never learn that you're no match for your moral and intellectual superiors--and no amount of lying, semantic games, sophistry and obfuscation will save your threadbare argument.

 
At 05 August, 2010 13:54, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I wrote that post (and I don't remember if I did or didn't) I did it to show that your claim that EDX can not detect oxygen was false.

I post as anonymous 'cause I'm too lazy to type in a name. Also it amuses me to hear you all accuse me of being the notorious sex-stalker Brian Good.

In what way does Jones rely on EDX to measure, as opposed to detect, oxygen? Seems to me his EDX charts are entirely of a qualitative, not quantitative nature.

 
At 05 August, 2010 13:56, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GoiterBalls, why does 9/11 Truth make you so emotional? Is Dr. John Gross your uncle or something? He kind of looks like you. Have you ever considered a career in radio?

 
At 05 August, 2010 14:55, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Oh look! Brian Good's in full sock puppet mode--and he thinks we'll fall for another pack of lies.

And you still haven't proven that EDX can reliably measure oxygen--and you never will.

Pathetic.

 
At 05 August, 2010 15:44, Anonymous Anonymous said...

GB, I have never tried to prove that EDX can measure oxygen. You sare dissembling by mischaracterizing the issue in an attempt to cover up your mistaken claim that EDX can not detect oxygen.

 
At 05 August, 2010 16:45, Anonymous Arhoolie Vanunu said...

The "Git" must be a Frenchman:always sure,seldom right!

 
At 05 August, 2010 18:55, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...You sare [SIC] dissembling by mischaracterizing [SIC] the issue in an attempt to cover up your mistaken claim that EDX can not detect oxygen."

Brian, what were you saying about "linguistically challenged"?

And EDX still can't detect oxygen. And when EDX does detect oxygen the measurements are so inaccurate as to be completely worthless.

You know, Brian, WORTHLESS, your middle name.

Any questions?

 
At 05 August, 2010 19:09, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mischaracterize is correct, fruity-dreams. EDX can detect oxygen, as Dr. Jones' traces and the manufacturer's website confirm. You make up your facts. You live in a fantasy world.

 
At 05 August, 2010 19:39, Blogger GuitarBill said...

McCrone's Particle Atlas is a "fantasy world"?

Why does McCrone's Particle Atlas demonstrate that the lightest element EDX can reliably measure is Na?

Will you argue that Na is lighter then oxygen, 'tard?

(Don't give him any ideas, Bill)

 
At 06 August, 2010 00:13, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not interested in your endless and desperate and pathetic attempts to distract from the fact that your claim that EDX can not detect oxygen was wrong.

I bet your kids don't respect you.

 
At 06 August, 2010 00:49, Blogger GuitarBill said...

That's not an answer, degenerate.

Where's your proof that EDX can reliably measure elements like oxygen, nitrogen and carbon?

I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer, because your argument consists of nothing more than pathetic semantic games.

Proof, troofer, proof.

No doubt, you're almost as scientifically inclined as a Bonobo monkey--you deranged pratt.

 
At 06 August, 2010 01:38, Anonymous GIGOBull said...

I have no obligation to prove something I never claimed.

You surround yourself with an army of straw men in a pathetic attempt to distract from the fact that you made a mistake.

That's pathetic. Just admit you were wrong. EDX can detect oxygen. There's no shame in a mistake--but you are humiliating yourself with your refusal to admit to it.

 
At 06 August, 2010 08:25, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Brian, spin, lies and semantic games will never conceal your repeated failure.

It's well established that EDX cannot reliably detect or measure elements with an x-ray below ~1.2 keV.

Oxygen, nitrogen and carbon are characterized by x-rays in the ~0.4 keV range; thus, EDX is useless for this purpose. As I stated a week ago, Auger electron analysis is the only method that can reliably detect and measure oxygen, nitrogen and carbon--and no amount of obfuscation, lies and semantic games will ever change that inescapable fact.

As a result, Jones' experiments are irreversibly flawed. Thus, your conspiracy theory is based upon unreliable data.

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

Now hurry, Brian, throw up another smokescreen of lies, obfuscation and semantic games. After all, that's all you have at this point, because you're incompetent, conceited, deceitful and arrogant--a loser.

 
At 06 August, 2010 10:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tell it to UC Davis Materials Science:

[url]http://chms.engineering.ucdavis.edu/students/undergraduates/labs/files/FEI-XL30-SFEG.pdf [/url]

They seem to think their EDS system "can be used for elemental analyses and is capable of detecting carbon, nitrogen and oxygen".

 
At 06 August, 2010 11:01, Blogger GuitarBill said...

ASPEX Corporation, a leading SEM/EDX manufacturer, wrote, "...And finally, there is sometimes a question as to whether the 'hype' of light element detection exceeds the practical value. For persons concerned with detection of elements such as beryllium, boron, and fluorine, the light element capability is decidedly helpful. However, the prospect of detecting oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon is the appeal for many users. The problem is that these latter elements are so ubiquitous in the environment that they will be found on almost any surface. Carbon, in particular is a contaminant that naturally builds up on surfaces during electron beam imaging. Accurate quantification of these elements is still a challenging proposition, even with a WDS spectrometer. Thus the utility of their detection may be considerably less than is first assumed."

Source: ASPEX Corporation: EDX.

Check and mate

Would you like another source of information that proves you're full-of-shit, Brian?

Just say the word, and I'll bury you.

Conclusion: Another epic failure for the 9/11 troofers.

 
At 06 August, 2010 11:04, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at GutterBall, disproving his own point! He said ADX can not detect oxygen, then he cites the mfr statement that the ubiquity of oxygen puts noise in the system. If the oxygen were invisible, it would not make noise.

GutterBall you're arguing a non-existent point simply because you are not man enough to admit you were wrong when you said EDX can't detect oxygen.

 
At 06 August, 2010 11:09, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Now, you're putting words in the manufacturers mouth. Does that surprise me? Not in the least. After all you're a pathological liar.

Keep reading that last sentence until you get it through your thick skull, jackass.

"...Accurate quantification of these elements is still a challenging proposition, even with a WDS spectrometer. Thus the utility of their detection may be considerably less than is first assumed."

Translation: You can't rely on EDX to accurately detect light elements like oxygen, nitrogen and carbon.

Check and mate

Squirm, Brian, squirm--you little weasel.

 
At 06 August, 2010 11:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Accurately" is not the point--it's just your pathetic effort to weasel out of the fact that you claimed EDX can't detect oxygen at all.

Don't quit your music gig, GutterBall; it's obvious that your day job isn't working out for you.

 
At 06 August, 2010 12:08, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Scumbag the Quote Miner wrote, "...'Accurately' is not the point--it's just your pathetic effort to weasel out of the fact that you claimed EDX can't detect oxygen at all."

Yawn.

You are a liar, Brian.

I never used the word "at all". Thus, you're lying again.

For example, you wrote, "...YOU made the error when you claimed EDX can not measure oxygen"

I never said that at all. And all you have is a quote mined statement to "substantiate" your propaganda.

Here's what I wrote, Mr Quote Miner:

"...Steven Jones employed EDX to determine the composition of the "dust samples". It is well known that oxygen doesn't show up in EDX because oxygen emits very low energy X-rays--that is, ~0.4 keV or less.

"The bottom line: oxygen is not reliably measured by EDX, which explains why none of the "dust samples" show oxygen peaks (but that doesn't mean that oxygen isn't abundant in the sample). Jones, moreover, needs to subject his "dust samples" to Auger electron analysis, which does not use X-ray emission to detect elements like oxygen."


Here's the proof that you're a quote miner. In fact, Brian used a portion of my words, and quoted me OUT OF CONTEXT.

Brian wrote, "...YOU made the error when you claimed EDX can not measure oxygen, and you're not man enough to admit it."

Check

Brian wrote, "It is well known that oxygen doesn't show up in EDX"...You don't even know what you wrote, let alone anything else, GordoBall."

Source: SLC: Proof that you're a quote mining son-of-a-bith, Brian.

Check and mate.

What were saying, Mr. Pathological liar?

ROTFLMAO!

Squirm Brian, squirm--you lying little weasel.

 
At 06 August, 2010 12:20, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Let's see, Brian. Today, I caught you red-handed [1] impersonating Troy From West Virginia; and [2] quote mining my writing and misrepresenting my argument.

Can you say, "Crash and burn"?

Poor baby, cry me a river.

Now, take your double-digit IQ and go back to 911flogger where you belong, scumbag.

Shot Down In Flames.

Squirm Brian, squirm--you lying little weasel.

 
At 06 August, 2010 12:43, Anonymous GIGOBull said...

Wow, GB, your deterioration right out here in public is pretty dramatic. You admit that you said "It is well known that oxygen doesn't show up in EDX" and then you claim that my statement "You claimed it can't detect oxygen at all" is a lie because you didn't use the words "at all".

You believe with no evidence at all that I am some pervert you seem to have a sexual interest in, and you seem to believe that someone posting under the name troyfromwastevagina is trying to impersonate troyfromwestvirginia.

You are really a sketch, GB, and the funny thing is you have no idea how much damage you do to your own cause. I bet you still haven't figured out why you lost your job or why your wife left you.

 
At 06 August, 2010 12:58, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Another 100% fact-free non-response, scumbag? Tell us about it, Mr. Quote Miner.

Is that all you have? Scurrilous speculation and bald-faced lies concerning my career and family life? If you know so much about me, Brian (and you know nothing, by the way), tell me my real name. Because if can't tell me my real name, that's proof that your comments find their origin in your ass, not reality.

Pathetic.

I noticed that you refuse to address the air-tight evidence I present against you, which proves that you have NOTHING to say in your defense.

Why no defense, Brian?

Because you know I'm telling the truth.

You took my words OUT OF CONTEXT, and then proceeded to use the quote mined material, not just once, but on dozens of occasions.

Face it, Brian, you're finished. Once again, your "credibility" can be measured in negative engineering units.

Bottom line: You're a sick little psychopathic boy in a mans body--not to mention a coward and a prolific scumbag.

In fact, you'd need to look up to view the underside of a snakes belly.

Squirm Brian, squirm--you lying little weasel.

 
At 06 August, 2010 13:56, Blogger Triterope said...

you have no idea how much damage you do to your own cause

Nobody changes their opinions on real-world issues because of how someone acts on a blog. What are you, 12?

 
At 06 August, 2010 14:13, Blogger GuitarBill said...

No, he's 58 going on 12.

%^)

 
At 07 August, 2010 11:41, Anonymous NYLies and Lies and Lies said...

So TR, nobody changes their opinions? Then what is this blog about? Just reinforcing the ignorance of those who already agree with it?

 
At 07 August, 2010 12:26, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The percy-pants peter puffer prattles, "...So TR, nobody changes their opinions? Then what is this blog about? Just reinforcing the ignorance of those who already agree with it?"

That statement carries a lot of weight when written by a quote mining pathological liar.

Go honk a cock--you sphincter probing shit stain.

 
At 07 August, 2010 17:01, Blogger Triterope said...

So TR, nobody changes their opinions? Then what is this blog about? Just reinforcing the ignorance of those who already agree with it?

Try reading the entire sentence next time. Idiot.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home