Evidunce from the 9-11 Consensus Nutbars
Came across this at 9-11 Troof dot org.
The 9/11 Consensus Panel now offers four evidence-based Points about the alleged phone calls from the 9/11 flights.Cue Twilight Zone music. As usual, the goofballs go over the edge in an effort to make everything mysterious. Beamer was "strangely tranquil"? He declined to speak to his wife? 1111111!
The famous "let's roll" drama of the passenger revolt on UA 93 was relayed by passenger Todd Beamer's 13-minute unrecorded seat-back call to GTE telephone supervisor Lisa Jefferson, who reported Beamer as strangely tranquil, declining to speak to his wife. Eerily, Beamer's line remained open for 15 minutes after the crash.
Of course, if a 9-11 Troofer had been on the plane that day, he would have been babbling like a madman. "We're all gonna die--But not on this jet!" Because we all know that real men lose their heads in emergencies.
As for Beamer declining to speak to his wife, the reason for that is well-known, and no, it's not what the 9-11 Nutsensus Panel states:
It was not just that he didn't want to upset her. She'd had a difficult pregnancy and he didn't want her to have a miscarriage. And later the creeps ask:
Beamer continued talking to Jefferson, rather than having her transfer him to Lisa Beamer, because his wife was pregnant and he did not want to upset her.
He did not ask to talk with her because he did not want to upset her, although learning of his death would presumably upset her.
This explanation is inconsistent with the FBI report that he had first tried to reach his residence at 9:43:48 AM.But if you go back to one of the first reports about Beamer's call, which these retards know about because they link to it, the answer becomes quite obvious:
"I introduced myself as Mrs. Jefferson. I said, 'I understand that you're on United Flight 93 and it's being hijacked.' And I asked him to explain."See? He at first tried calling his house and when he couldn't get through, he tried calling an operator. It was only after he heard about the planes crashing in New York that he decided not to talk to his wife. On September 10, 2001, it would have been one thing to hear that your spouse was on a plane that had been hijacked. It would be worrying, certainly, but you'd also know that historically, most people on hijacked planes survived the ordeal. On September 11, after seeing the Twin Towers burning, it would have been quite another thing.
He knew there were at least three hijackers, two with knives who had commandeered the plane's controls and one with a suspected bomb strapped around his waist who kept watch on the passengers.
The pilot and copilot lay motionless on the floor in front of a curtain that had been drawn by the bomb-carrying hijacker. Beamer told Jefferson he could not tell whether the pilot, Capt. Jason Dahl, 43, of Denver, or first officer, LeRoy Homer, 36, of Marlton, N.J., were alive.
She told Beamer about the two planes crashing in New York.
What a bunch of evil dirtbags the Troofers are.
posted by Pat @ 10:20 AM
150 comments
150 Comments:
Speaking of evil dirtbags, I imagine failed janitor and sex predator extraordinaire Brian Good will be here soon enough to post more spam about magic thermite elves.
It must be tough for Brian when there haven't been any new posts for a while. After all, this is the only place he hasn't been banned, so I imagine he refreshes this blog obsessively every 5 minutes, waiting for another opportunity to babble about magic thermite elves. I mean, it's not like he has a job or friends or family or normal hobbies to occupy his time.
Oh, and Brian? When you post your humiliated response to me, please go with something other than "it thinks it's funny", which is really boring.
I always enjoyed it when you called us "girls". You could do that again.
Just a friendly suggestion.
It thinks it's funny, it likes getting its hair done frequently, and it likes when it thinks it's being called a girl.
And it lies and lies and lies and lies, and says nobody cares about truth or justice or the widows' quest for answers.
What a bunch of evil dirtbags the Troofers are. -Shat Squirelly
You're using dramatic language and appeals to emotion to mask the fact that the linked page has a ton of facts that you avoided like a coward. Again. Why did his phone log 19 calls after the plane crashed? Is that just an 'anomaly'? How often does that happen, Pat? Show your sources.
Typical SLC idiocy. scratch a stundiebunker, and reveal a credulous moron who provides more reason to question the fairy tale, not less. Keep it up, Shrivelface.
It thinks it's funny, it likes getting its hair done frequently, and it likes when it thinks it's being called a girl.
And it lies and lies and lies and lies, and says nobody cares about truth or justice or the widows' quest for answers.
Yup, this is the kind of squealing I expected. Thanks Brian!
Also, Brian, you're the one who claims there are no widows. Also, I'm interested in truth and justice, which is why I don't let pathetic liars like you make ridiculous claims about 9/11.
Speaking of your pathetic lies, remember that time you ran away squealing and crying when Willie Rodriguez challenged you to a debate? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
I debated Willie right here. I proved that his hero story was a lie, and I showed that he stole his story from a hero who died on 9/11, Pablo Ortiz.
Willie ran away screaming and crying and he hasn't been back.
the linked page has a ton of facts
What a credulous idiot. Appeal-to-hyperlink is the most pathetic of pseudoskepticism.
You prefer appeal-to-nothing-at-all, I suppose.
You prefer appeal-to-nothing-at-all, I suppose.
Correct. Debunkers apply rational judgment to credible facts, which is why we get things right. Appeal-to-anything fallacies are for Truthers.
Peedunkers' idea of "rational judgment" is to start with their ideologically-based assumptions, appeal-to-nothing and conclude "That sounds logical!"
I debated Willie right here. I proved that his hero story was a lie, and I showed that he stole his story from a hero who died on 9/11, Pablo Ortiz.
Willie ran away screaming and crying and he hasn't been back.
See what I mean about you being a pathetic liar?
Peedunkers' idea of "rational judgment" is to start with their ideologically-based assumptions, appeal-to-nothing and conclude "That sounds logical!"
Yes, because a mentally ill unemployed janitor who sniffs glue and believes in modified attack baboons is a good judge of "logic".
Brian, you have no job and live with your parents. You have a hideous homeless mullet. These facts aren't necessarily relevant to this discussion, but they humiliate you, so I like pointing them out.
Also,
it likes getting its hair done frequently
Brian, I get my hair cut about once every six weeks. You live in a fantasy world.
So Brian, so far you have compared the collapse of the WTC to a "birds nest on a post", "meatball on a fork", "rake on rake" and "tomato on a ladder". All of these analogies have led to endless ridicule of your inability to think rationally, and have left you squealing and crying and calling people "girls".
Let's see if we can come up with other analogies for you to use....
"fish on a mailbox"
"cat on a refrigerator"
"bubblegum on an air conditioner"
Can you come up with more?
Your aversion to analogies suggests you did poorly on the S.A.T. tests.
Your belief that your lies are clever suggests the same thing.
Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
Fiddler on a Roof
Your Brain on a Drug
Soap on a Rope
Strangers on a Train
Snakes on a Plane
On-A-Gadda-Da-Vida (Sorry couldn't resist)
snug.bug said: "Your aversion to analogies suggests you did poorly on the S.A.T. tests."
The problem is your analogies are exceptionally stupid.
People who don't understand analogies always claim that the problem is the particular analogy, rather than the intellectual limitations that make them unable to understand them.
So they're back to arguing about proven phone technology. They don't even make it hard.
"You're using dramatic language and appeals to emotion to mask the fact that the linked page has a ton of facts that you avoided like a coward."
"Facts?" You mean like this?"
"- America first learned of the 9/11 hijackings from Solicitor-General Ted Olson, who reported two calls from his wife, well-known CNN commentator Barbara Olson."
First learned? This "fact" ignores the small problem of the Flight 11 striking WTC at 8:46AM, AA77 (which Olsen was a passenger on) would not be hijacked until 8:50 (between 8:50 & 8:54).
"These and other reported calls have now been examined by the 9/11 Consensus Panel of scientists, pilots, professors, attorneys, and journalists."
A panel of troofers. Not one of them is a telecommunications expert.
"Again. Why did his phone log 19 calls after the plane crashed? Is that just an 'anomaly'? How often does that happen, Pat? Show your sources."
19 calls that didn't connect. I suspect post mortem butt dialing.
Funny how people like Brian never give up when they should know when to give up when faced with the music that their theories don't stick.
Their theories are like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. The only problem is there's not any peanut butter to hold it together and the jelly just slides right out the bottom.
Where did you get the idea that I have theories, TAW? I leave the theorizing to fools like you.
Starting an Adult/Porn 3D Virtual Reality company, need donations
I am trying to start a small software company that will develop adult/porn 3D interactive virtual reality programs for the new Oculus Rift VR headset.
Right now the Oculus Rift is in development stage, but I need to raise 300 dollars which is the cost of the developers kit, which includes the VR headset.
I'll be very thankful for your donations and will keep you up to date on the progress of our development. Hopefully we will have rendered porn into 3D and have it ready by the 2014 release date.
Email me at virtualrealityfuture@yahoo.com and I'll keep you up to date.
Here's my Bitcoin wallet address, please donate as much or as little as you like. Every bit helps.
12PBCKw3iNxS2aP6jX8X8JP7SQbuCgDs5X
I really love the whole "nineteen calls" and other twoofer "arguments." It reminds me of the fact that they take the smallest little details, and then construe them to indicate some kind of conspiracy. For example, in this case, nineteen calls were attempted and did not go through after the planes hit the building, which proves... something?
Let's apply Occam's Razor here. Which is more likely:
1) There was a random error that caused a number of false phone calls.
2) There was a group of government officials staging the attacks who were simultaneously intelligent enough to put together a massively complex, near-perfect, military style attack on the United States, yet dumb enough to sit there trying to make phone calls from Olson's phone after they personally watched the plane she was on crash into the building.
I guess I'll leave it up to you guys to decide. Personally, I'm off to my NWO COINTELPRO job. Today's a really important day -- we're trying to break ladders with tomatoes, and all because of the personal suggestion of Brian here...
Some people use Occam's Razor as a blunt instrument.
Tomatoes can't break ladders--that was the point. The ladder represents the path of greatest resistance for a tomato under the influence of gravity headed for the ground.
I notice that the guy who denied the existence of the path of greatest resistance hasn't been back since the ladder analogy completely defeated his nonsense. And Willie Rodriguea, who ran away screaming and crying, hasn't been back since I showed that his hero story was a lie.
Sorry, Brian, we at NWO labs have tested this theory, and have found it rather lacking. We have noticed that some strange force appears to prevent the situation from occurring as you describe it. We believe this strange, incomprehensible force is referred to in some circles as "gravity."
A shocking revelation!
If you have any other questions about the testing procedure, you could always talk to my handler at New World Order headquarters. I'm in the "Clunkity-Clunk" division, which is part of the "Dustification" department. My specialty is dealing with engineering calculations involving such great simulators of construction material as:
- tomatoes and ladders
- meatballs and forks
- rakes
- birds' nests and posts
It's a good job, I suppose. The magic thermite elves and modified attack baboons are a pain to deal with, though.
You have tested what theory? The existence of paths of greater resistance and lesser resistance is not a theory, it's a fact.
Yes, we have factored that into our equations. It appears as if the power of analogies and the path of greatest resistance isn't enough to counteract this... "gravity."
Make no mistake, we are pouring all our efforts into cracking this "gravity" enigma! Our current research indicates that it causes objects to fall *downwards*, instead of shooting off to the side or spinning off into geostationary orbit.
However, we have conceded that there may be errors in this study. We have not factored density into our equations. In order to better understand the effects of density, we are considering hiring someone with great experience in dealing with extraordinary density; someone who spends his whole life in the presence of extremely dense objects.
Might you like to volunteer, Brian? The job pays relatively well, and the magic thermite elves aren't THAT difficult to live with. You definitely meet and exceed our minimum density levels, as well.
I know; the nature of this research is truly groundbreaking. If you have any questions, you can refer to the "Death Ray" center. They handle all our personnel-related questions.
Resistance is not an analogy, clown. Resistance is measurable.
Gravity causes objects to fall downward only in the absence of resistance. A plate on a table does not fall through the table.
That is most certainly the case! We at New World Order headquarters have noted this fact, and NWO HQ always strives to be thorough in our research, so we have decided to test this feature.
In order to test this theory, we are planning to place a five hundred pound boulder on a pedestal rated to hold one hundred pounds without breaking. Our experts in tomatoes, ladders, forks, meatballs, rakes, bird nests, and posts ASSURE us that this theory will play out correctly, and the pedestal will not be broken by the weight.
Our goal in this NWO experiment is to determine what is more powerful: this strange new force "gravity", or resistance.
Again, we at NWO HQ would be happy to have you participate, Brian. You truly are an expert in all things involving extreme density.
Your experiment is flawed. Resistance is variable according to the morphology of the resistant body.
Thus there can be no meaningful answer for your stated goal.
Brian, how can you make such an accusation? NWO headquarters only hires the premier experts in the fields of rakes, forks, tomatoes, and ladders. With such experts in fields so relevent to structural engineering, we would never produce such shoddy research!
If you have any further questions, just consult our "Box Boy" center. They handle all questions about slipshod research -- the name is quite fitting, don't you agree? We could always use advice from such a premier expert on density as yourself.
Mr. Gage's cardboard box demonstration was a perfectly valid demonstration of Newton's 3rd Law and the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, and anyone who pretends otherwise is simply demonstrating his or her ignorance.
Your belief that you are clever only discredits you.
But of course! Why would you ever think that I wasn't taking you and box boy seriously? In fact, not only do we at NWO headquarters take your comments seriously; we regard you as the world's leading expert on all things dense, with a specialty in the study of clods. Your comments strike us as remarkably thick.
Poor Brian. He'll never feel loved by Carol cause Carol is being loved by Kevin and Willie and she's loving them back.
Carol will never love you Brian cause you betrayed her trust. Carol will never love you cause you tried to break up her marriage. She will never love you as a friend cause you took advantage of her.
Are you gonna get mad @ me for telling the truth huh Brian? You gonna sit there and cry like a little whiney bitch and hold a Raggedy Ann doll or Barbie doll and scream out Carols name?
I know what's it's like to be loved Brian. My fiance will be my wife soon and you'll be alone and cold with no one to love.
Craig Ranke: "Brian Good immerses himself in various truth groups with volunteer activism. He eventually gets upset, angry, antagonistic, controlling and demanding with the leaders of these groups over whatever he chooses to disagree with, and he ultimately causes disruption, division, distraction, and strife."
I agree with Craig.
Your belief that your lies are clever only discredits you.
Brian,
Carol doesn't love you the way you think she loves you. You're upset that she slammed to door in your face and you feel that by attacking the leaders in the TM is doing you any good, it's not. You can never get Carol to see things your way, she'll never look at you the same way she saw you the first time. You made her out to be some sort of "whore" and she responded to you the best way she could by shutting you out of her life forever.
You want to attack people? Attack yourself cause you're your own worst enemy.
I wonder how many women slammed the door on Brian cause of his sexual advances?
I'm willing to bet that Brian has a criminal record where he's a sex predator.
Are you a sex predator Brian?
Brian lives around some sex offenders:
http://www.city-data.com/so/so-Palo-Alto-California.html
There's a sex offender that lives down the street from Brian @ 753 Alma Street Apt # 119.
Does Brian know that person and does he associate himself with them?
Brian lives in a condominium with a swimming pool in the back. There's a soccer and baseball field @ El Camino Park. There's a mall located on Sand Hill Rd. where he probably goes shopping and looking at women.
I know what the place looks like now where he lives.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian lives exactly 2,666 miles away from me and it'd take me about 40 hours to get there by driving.
Just go to Google Maps, copy and paste this: 101 Alma St, Apt 305 Palo Alto, CA 94301 in the driving directions and find out how far Brian lives from you.
No, Brian, we don't believe our "lies" (you misspelled "reality" there) are clever. It's just the fact that you're so moronic that makes anything we say so much more intelligent.
So, be proud of yourself for that! You serve as an example of the absolute rock-bottom that is reachable in life.
Thanks to Google Maps I know exactly where Brian lives and what his condominium that he lives in looks like due to the satellite.
Brian, you want me to forward your location to Kevin and Willie?
Starting an Adult/Porn 3D Virtual Reality company, need donations
Wrong forum, snug.bug.
"Some people use Occam's Razor as a blunt instrument."
Blunt instruments are most effective on dull-headed people.
"Tomatoes can't break ladders--that was the point."
It depends on the ladder and the tomato now doesn't it? You skipped factoring and rate-of-change in Algebra.
"The ladder represents the path of greatest resistance for a tomato under the influence of gravity headed for the ground."
So you've never actually seen a ladder up close.
Except nobody is talking about ladders or tomatoes. Today's subject is the allegation that phone calls were not made from any of the hijacked aircraft on 9/11/2001.
Jeez, MGF, did you even read the Original Post? You can't even characterize it correctly.
We were talking about ladders and tomatoes only because Ian and Alec brought it up. Try to keep up.
Which floor do you live on Brian in your condominium?
Does your fiancee know what a creep you are? Are you going to tell her?
"Does your fiancee know what a creep you are? Are you going to tell her?"
She knows that you're an insane jackass who thinks women adore you. If that were the case you'd have Carol beside you but you don't.
Now which floor do you live on Brian?
Remember Brian, your sole purpose in life is to serve as an example of what the term "rock bottom" truly means. You aren't very adept at doing much else.
Because of this ineptitude, you really should stop attempting to create analogies. They only serve to make you seem more of a pillock...
Oh goody, Brian's gotta blue mail box in front of his condominium on Alma St.
Hey Brian, do you spy on the women that go swimming in the swimming pool when they wear their bikinis? Pervert!
Brian can take the Palo Alto Shuttle Crosstown. He can catch bus #947 on the corner of Hawthorne Ave. and Alma St.
Brian's getting freaked out that he might have a "stalker". Karma's a real bitch, ain't it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
If you want the picture of Brian's condo hit me up on facebook: Wil Clark Johnstown, PA
I've got a stealth fighter as a pic, can't miss it.
Apt. 305 is located on the 3rd floor ain't it Brian? You must be located on the left side ain't ya.
How do you like me now Brian? I've stooped to your level, what ya gonna do punk?
Brian babbled, "People who don't understand analogies always claim that the problem is the particular analogy, rather than the intellectual limitations that make them unable to understand them"
Once again you just make stuff up some one who can't understand analogies would be able challenge the validity of one. And it's truthers who have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to understand similes, analogies, metaphors etc.
To a person with an IQ over 70 the upper portions of the WTC towers were in no way like tomatoes or meatballs and the parts below the impacts were not like ladders or forks nor was the impact of the upper floors on the lower ones at all akin to a fruit hitting ladder rungs.
To make a long story short you're an idiot - debunkers mock you, truthers don't want anything to do with you. Prove me wrong cite one of the latter who respects you.
That's right Brian be scared and hide. You should move your ass out of the condo and into a real house. I'm in a real house and it's wonderful. Don't have to worry about people living above ya, below ya and to the sides of ya.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Well, I guess Brian isn't going to be commenting on this post anymore. Dare I say this indicates that he "ran away screaming and crying" as he so often accuses Willie of doing?
I guess at this point he's just constantly refreshing the SLC webpage, waiting for the next post to be made so he can jump on the comments on that one...
Len, your second sentence makes no sense at all.
Who compared the top of the WTC to a meatball or a tomato, and who compared the lower part to a ladder or a fork?
Peedunkers mock me because they can't refute me--and mocking makes them feel better and gives the more dim-witted of their associates the illusion that I have been refuted.
Who compared the top of the WTC to a meatball or a tomato, and who compared the lower part to a ladder or a fork?
Me, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure you did that, Brian...
And people don't always mock other people because they can't refute them. Sometimes they just do it because other people can be so damn easy to mock...
I didn't say that people always mock other people because they can't refute them.
I said that peedunkers mock me because they can't refute me.
Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, can you prove you compared the top of the WTC to a meatball or a tomato, and compared the lower part to a ladder or a fork?
But hey, I think I have found evidence for the TROOF movement! I have found irrefutable proof that the government used cruise missile mini-nukes to destroy the twin towers, and guided them to their targets using human patsies! There's a whole video of them testing it at their secret NWO test site!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlSQAZEp3PA
As you can see, the man on the nuke is waving his arms in a way that looks suspiciously like a swastika, freemason logo, and illuminati sign all combined to form one overwhelming symbol of EEEVIL! Truly, this is completely airtight proof of a conspiracy.
IT'S THE TROOF!!
I could while away the hours
Posting vids of burning towers
And never need explain
I'd unravel the conspiracy
They'd bow down to my superiority
If I only had a brain
I could be the greatest troofer
Providing all the proof for
those holographic planes
They'd admire all my theories
And would answer all my queries
If I only had a brain
Oh I can't tell you why
It's impossible for me to ever listen
Or why I like the sex I get in prison
I suppose it's just my neo-narcissism
Though it might seem like a step down
I'm happy as an ass-clown,
annoyance, and a pain
I'll be smug and I'll be merry
As SLC's dingle-berry
Cause I haven't got a brain
Hallelujah! Vaseline is coming out with new labels for its petroleum jelly...
And guess what? They're going to have pictures of my missing gerbils on it.
Meatball on a fork
"The core was built to take five to ten times the weight of the entire structure and was subject only to the weight of the core debris. This debris would have seen been tangled up into a ball that would have impaled itself on the core columns like a meatball on a fork."
I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good have never defended my deranged "meatball on a fork" theory. Lies, lies, lies. I have never posted anything to screwloosechange in defense of my "meatball on a fork" theory. Liar, liar, pants on fire!
Brian can't afford to get out of his condo. Hey Brian, get a real job.
I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, have never posted a word in defense of my "meatball on a fork theory to the screwloosechange blog. Why do youse girls lie?
"Ian, 'meatball on a fork' is so obvious to anyone who understands the 1st law of thermodynamics and Newton's third law that there's no need to publish it anywhere."
I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, would never babble like a deranged, meth addled chihuahua in defense of my "meatball on a fork" theory. Why do youse girls lie and lie and lie?
"UtterFail, meatball-on-a-fork actually quite aptly addresses the divergent weight-to-resistance ratios between the core and the outer floors. But I can't expect a graphical illiterate like you to understand that."
What do I, homosexual sex predator Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, have in common with all politicians?
We can only mandate.
When I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, was a child, what did my parents buy me for Christmas?
Erection sets.
My first homosexual encounter with my dentist occurred when I was 13 years old. What was my nickname for my newly found lover?
The tooth fairy.
What's the difference between me and a refrigerator?
The fridge doesn't fart when you pull the meat out.
What did the Rabbi do with my brother's foreskin after circumcision?
He gave it to me for chewing gum.
What did the Trix Rabbit say to me when I was 11 years old?
"Silly homo! Dicks are for chicks!"
Did you hear about my gay rabbit?
He found a hare up his ass.
Are you aware that I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, am the world's only semiprofessional boxer?
That's right, on the boxing circuit I'm known as Fruit Punch.
What do you get when you cross me, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, with an Eskimo?
A snow-blower.
What is "Gay Pride"?
A group of homosexual lions.
When I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, die, I want to be reincarnated as an electron.
That way I can blow fuses.
Did you hear about my homosexual poison pen letters?
They only cum in male boxes.
Why don't me and my girlfriends in San Francisco wear short black mini skirts?
Because our balls show.
Of course I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, dress well. After all, I don't spend all that time in the closet doing nothing.
Butt seriously, cum on, gay jokes aren't funny.
I was gonna make a gay joke, butt fuck it.
Hey are you a solar system cause I wanna be in Uranus
I'm so gay I wouldn't know a straight line if it hit me in the face.
I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, recently contracted AIDS. What is the first symptom?
A pounding sensation in the ass.
What do you call a phone that I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, can't use?
A homophone.
I'll bet Richard Gage's ass that the first gay Transformer will morph into a Prius.
Why can't I, Brain "meatball on a fork" Good, drive faster than 68 MPH?
Because at 69 MPH I blow a rod.
How did I manage to catch my firs gay squirrel?
I climbed a tree and pretended to be a fruit.
Why won't Carol Brouillet fuck me?
Because I've been in A Few Good Men.
Did you know I got kicked off Stanford's Golf Course?
I was playing with too many strokes.
Why am I so appreciative of my nutsack?
Because I use it as a mudflap.
I'm an asshole. Literally.
Why should AE911 Truth be renamed Marlboro?
Because they're a pack of fags.
Wow, you've truly embarrassed me. If as they say a man can be judged by the quality of his enemies, you're making me look like a real nobody.
Hey Brian, you don't mind if I told Kevin an Willie your address would ya? I'm sure they'd love to come knock on your door and speak with you.
I've already spoken with Kevin in Rancho Cordova. He wanted me to hug him. I said I don't hug bigots.
Willie's sockpuppets have published my address, so he doubtless knows where I live. He doesn't have the guts to talk to me. He knows I have proven that his hero story is a lie and that he stole it from a true hero, Pablo Ortiz.
Nah, Brian, we don't need to make you look like a real nobody. You do that yourself.
And yes, because of course the only reason someone would not want to talk to you is because they're afraid to do it...
You might've said those things but you never said them in front of them. Craig Ranke can testify that you don't talk very much in person and that you'd rather listen than say a word. But give you internet access and a computer you'd talk your empty skull off.
You have a bipolar disorder Brian, it's apparent. How long have you had bipolar?
This comment has been removed by the author.
snug.bug said: "Wow, you've truly embarrassed me. If as they say a man can be judged by the quality of his enemies, you're making me look like a real nobody"
I agree that most of "Petgoat's" posts were infantile, but amongst his gay jokes he quoted when you made comments you'd denied making. Your stupid analogies already put you in a bad light but denying you said them makes look even more ridiculous.
"I've already spoken with Kevin in Rancho Cordova. He wanted me to hug him. I said I don't hug bigots."
I doubt anyone believes that and you should have written "I spoke with Kevin..."
TAW, you don't know what you're talking about. I've only spoken to Craig Ranke once. I listened to him for almost an hour, and I said I'd watch his DVD. And after I watched his DVD I advised him to find another project--I said hanging his hopes and his fortune on the DVD would not turn out well for him. And I was right.
He taunted me, saying that he would ambush me with a video camera and make a fool of me. So I went to three local conferences after that to give him a chance to keep his promise. He never showed.
Len, which analogies are stupid and why? Or are you one of those who thinks all analogies are stupid?
Yeah right Brian, you don't even notice that you're back peddling.
I agree that most of "Petgoat's" posts were infantile
Since I refuse to listen to reason, I'll subject myself to ridicule.
TAW, where was I backpedaling? I wasn't peddling anything, fool.
You said that you met Craig Ranke and spoke with him in person. You lied about that and all you did was watch the DVD he gave ya and you mouthed off to him behind a computer.
You're a pussy Brian. You're shy when in person and when you get behind the computer you totally go off your rocker.
That just proves that you suffer from bipolar and possible multiple personality disorder.
TAW, I bet most of your lies are projections of your own behavior. You are so desperate to feel good about yourself that you must defeat an imaginary punching bag to do it.
It seems that you can't make up your mind as to whether I listened to Ranke for an hour or never met him. Somehow your inability to make up your mind proves (you believe) that I am mentally ill.
I'd recommend that you read a few self-help books. There's this thing called a library where they let you read books for free. If you ask a nice policeman you just might be able to find one.
How bout 1 of these days I come visit you and put your mug on YouTube and then we'll see what your fans think of you. Ok wuss?
snug.bug said:
"Len, which analogies are stupid and why? Or are you one of those who thinks all analogies are stupid?"
Your Sgt. Schultz/Vinnie Barbarino shtick is not fooling anyone, the analogies that Ian and I mocked you for, the same ones you'd denied making and pet.goat quoted you making. We've been talking about them in this thread over the last couple of days.
I assume you're playing dumb but perhaps you really are that stupid. Let us know.
So what's dumb about them? Pick one.
Ian (back in the days when he posted as "New Yorker" used to make fun of the notion of "nomadic fires" in the WTC, asking if they rode camels and lived in tents.
I see Brian spent another lonely holiday weekend posting spam on this blog. While normal people were enjoying a weekend out of town, Brian was squealing about magic thermite elves.
Well, given that Brian has no friends, you wouldn't expect him to get out of town with his crew. And given that Brian has no job and can't even afford a decent haircut, you wouldn't expect that he could afford a weekend out of town.
Yeah just as I thought Brian. You're scared that you'll wind up on YouTube and people will have a glimpse into your life and your mug. Maybe someone near ya can come to your condo, ask you to debate them all the while being filmed.
Lian, I didn't say anything about magic or elves. I didn't spend the weekend posting.
TAW, there's no need for a Youtube debate. We can debate right here. You can show that you don't know what you're talking about, and I'll show that I do.
Yeah, the assclown who doesn't know how to convert short tons to kilograms knows what he's talking about. And don't play dumb, asshole, you just spent an entire 310 post thread avoiding a simple question that any competent college freshman can easily answer.
You make me want to projectile vomit, you shit-eating maggot.
Molested any innocent married women lately, schlong inhaler?
**********
Brian Good's (aka, "snug.bug") Insane Homeless Mullet for sex predators. (Credit to Mike Rosefierce).
9/11 Sex Stalker Brian Good Unmasked!
ButtGale, what makes you think I don't know how to convert short tons to kilograms? By your logic, you don't know how to clean bird poop off my car.
Have you molested your daughters lately, "Guitar Bill"?
TAW, there's no need for a Youtube debate. We can debate right here. You can show that you don't know what you're talking about, and I'll show that I do.
Tough fucking shit Brian. If I happen to visit you and I have a camera we're gonna debate and after the debate I'm gonna upload the vid to YouTube.
You are a fucking pole smoker ya know that? I can't say pussy cause you clearly can't get none.
pfffft
snug.bug said: “So what's dumb about them? Pick one.”
Was that really a serious question? Why did you lamely and dishonestly deny having made them if you didn't come to realize how dumb they were?
Sorry dude but 'tomato on a fork' and 'meatball on a ladder', or was that 'tomato on a ladder' and 'meatball on a fork'. Doesn't really make a difference, neither way round do your 'analogies' represent the masses of the upper (or outer) portions of the towers compared the strength lower ones (or the cores).
“Ian (back in the days when he posted as "New Yorker" used to make fun of the notion of "nomadic fires" in the WTC, asking if they rode camels and lived in tents.”
LOL please tell us where the term “nomadic fires” appears in the relevant literature, oh yeah that's right it doesn't because it's a term you made up.
So you can't back up your claim that the analogies are stupid--because you can't show how they are stupid. Thus you are unable to distinguish yourself from someone who thinks that ALL analogies are stupid because he lacks the intellectual capacity to think abstractly.
Neither the tomato nor the ladder were meant to represent the towers' masses. We were talking about the concept of the path of greatest resistance. As I recall, some fool was denying that any such thing existed.
You can "pfffffft" all you like Gaylord. You wouldn't know what to say or do if you had a camera in front of you would ya Brian.
There's no need to say anything at all--just stand back and let you demonstrate your idiocy.
Lian, I didn't say anything about magic or elves. I didn't spend the weekend posting.
False and false. Everyone knows that you believe in magic thermite elves, as that's your explanation for how the towers were destroyed. Everyone can read when you posted your spam in this thread. You live in a fantasy world.
What everyone knows is that you lie and lie and lie.
So you can't back up your claim that the analogies are stupid--because you can't show how they are stupid.
Not all analogies are stupid, but your analogies sure are. They're the kind of things a paranoid lunatic unemployed janitor might come up with to explain things he's too stupid and ignorant to understand.
Serious scientists wouldn't babbling about meatballs on forks.
Also, you have the worst haircut this side of Donald Trump.
Years ago, I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, woke up, only to hear my homosecual lover in the bathroom making grunting and moaning sounds. I pulled my diseased gay ass out of bed, walked down the hall and opened the bathroom door. I looked at my lover and, God as my witness, he was masturbating with a condom on.
While hyperventilating I said, "What the hell are you doing???"
My lover replied, "Oh, not to worry, I was just packing your lunch."
Ian, you didn't back up the claim that the analogies are stupid--because you can't show how they are stupid.
I suppose you think Boyle was babbling when he described gas in terms of coiled springs and Kekulé was babbling when he imagined a benzene ring as a snake biting its own tail.
You adopt a posture of ridicule because you don't actually know enough about 9/11 or science to have anything to say.
Ian, you didn't back up the claim that the analogies are stupid--because you can't show how they are stupid.
Your analogies are stupid. Let's explain how:
let's consult merriam-webster:
2 a : resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike : similarity
b : comparison based on such resemblance
Let's see, is there any resemblance between a meatball on a fork, and a steel-framed skyscraper? No. Thus, your analogies don't work, which is what is to be expected when you're a lunatic failed janitor who believes in modified attack baboons.
I suppose you think Boyle was babbling when he described gas in terms of coiled springs and Kekulé was babbling when he imagined a benzene ring as a snake biting its own tail.
No, because those analogies make sense. Yours don't. That's why Boyle is a legendary scientist, while you're a failed janitor who lives with his parents and wears women's underwear.
You adopt a posture of ridicule because you don't actually know enough about 9/11 or science to have anything to say.
My, such squealing!
Ian (back in the days when he posted as "New Yorker") used to make fun of the notion of "nomadic fires" in the WTC, asking if they rode camels and lived in tents.
Yes, that was always fun to mock you for that idiocy. You squealed and squealing and called us "girls", but eventually you stopped babbling about "nomadic fires" after I had humiliated you too much.
There's no need to say anything at all--just stand back and let you demonstrate your idiocy.
You owe me a new irony meter pal.
Brian at his best:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/331530#tab=comments&sc=1599316
Brian at his best:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/331530#tab=comments&sc=1599316
Yup, posting the same dumbspam he's been posting for over 4 years here, and demanding new reports, as if anyone cares if a failed janitor who lives with his parents rejects the NIST reports.
I put up his phone number on there. I don't care if Brian knows who I am (not gonna give my whole name out, I'm not an idiot).
So Ian believes his inability to see any resemblance between the broken framing of a skyscraper and a fork makes the analogy stupid, rather than makes him stupid.
So Ian believes his inability to see any resemblance between the broken framing of a skyscraper and a fork makes the analogy stupid, rather than makes him stupid.
And there we have it. Another admission that I, Brian "meatball on a fork" Good, am the deranged meathead who authored the idiotic "rake-on-rake" and "meatball on a fork" analogies.
I'm so stupid I act as though my stupidity is a virtue.
This comment has been removed by the author.
And there we have a typical lie from you. Refuting Ian's silly claim that the analogy is stupid is by no means claiming authorship.
And when you try to claim that my statement proves your authorship you're just goofy.
Perhaps you in your infinite wisdom would care to explain just what exactly is stupid about the meatball-and-fork analogy, since Ian can't do it.
So Ian believes his inability to see any resemblance between the broken framing of a skyscraper and a fork makes the analogy stupid, rather than makes him stupid.
You forgot the meatball, Brian.
Anyway, yes, your analogies are idiotic. Remember, Brian, I'm the accomplished professional, while you're the college drop-out who can't hold down a job mopping floors and lives with his parents. That's why your analogies are stupid. You simply lack the mental capacity for making analogies.
Refuting Ian's silly claim that the analogy is stupid is my no means claiming authorship.
Your meatball on a fork analogy is stupid, Brian. That's why you can't name a single person who thinks it makes sense. Everyone just points and laughs at you for it, and then you start squealing and call everyone "girls".
Perhaps you in your infinite wisdom would care to explain just what exactly is stupid about the meatball-and-fork analogy, since Ian can't do it.
There is no resemblance between a steel-framed skyscraper and a meatball (or a fork). That's why your analogy is stupid. That you came up with it is perhaps unsurprising, given that you're a lunatic unemployed janitor with a hideous homeless mullet haircut.
Ian, you are an anonymous internet poster. There is no reason to believe your claims that you are an accomplished anything, and when you claim knowledge of things you can not possibly know you demonstrate your dishonesty and incompetence.
You keep claiming that the model makes no sense, but you can't show that it makes no sense. What about it does not make sense?
If you can't see the resemblance between the broken structural framework of a skyscraper and a fork, you are demonstrating only your own intellectual limitations.
Ian, you are an anonymous internet poster. There is no reason to believe your claims that you are an accomplished anything, and when you claim knowledge of things you can not possibly know you demonstrate your dishonesty and incompetence.
Yup, this is the kind of humiliated squealing that makes Brian so much fun to taunt.
You keep claiming that the model makes no sense, but you can't show that it makes no sense. What about it does not make sense?
Your "meatball on a fork" nonsense is not a "model", Brian. Given that you're a mentally ill unemployed janitor and not a scientist, I can see why you don't understand this.
It's an analogy, and one that is stupid because there are no similiarities between meatballs or forks and skyscrapers. I keep explaining and you refuse to learn.
If you can't see the resemblance between the broken structural framework of a skyscraper and a fork, you are demonstrating only your own intellectual limitations.
Yup, because when a lunatic unemployed janitor who believes in magic thermite elves, wears women's underwear, sniffs glue, and has a hideous homeless mullet haircut puts forth a ridiculous senseless analogy, it's the fault of the sane and intelligent people for not understanding its brilliance.
Poor Brian. He's failed again.
In what way is the "meatball on a fork" model not a model?
Upon what basis do you deny the similarity between the lower structure of a skyscraper and a vertical fork, tines up?
Upon what basis do you deny the similarity between an amorphous but cohesive blob of proteinaceous and fatty material (a meatball) and an amorphous but cohesive blob of broken building materials?
When did I ever say I believed in magic thermite elves?
When did I wears women's underwear?
When did I sniff glue?
What makes you think I have a hideous haircut?
What exactly is ridiculous and senseless about the analogy? All you can do is restate your opinion, but you provide no basis for it.
I never said the meatball/fork model was brilliant.
Also, where's your buddy Willie Fraudriguez? He ran away screaming and crying after I proved that his hero story was a lie. He hasn't been seen since. I hope Elvis is OK!
Also, do any of you experts know anything about the post at JREF by "Oscar" that purported to contain the text of an email from Mr. Fraudriguez?
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=70963
The text alleged to be from Willie claims that he has a college degree, and for some reason puts Scare Quotes around the word "janitors".
I wonder if anyone has any insight into any of that that.
Post a Comment
<< Home