Thursday, January 21, 2010

No Payday for Payday

List of performers at Treason in America Conference today:


List yesterday:

62 comments:

  1. Pat, why don't you "debunk" what Coleen and Anthony are about? Oh, that's right... you can't.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pat, why don't you "debunk" what Coleen and Anthony are about? Oh, that's right... you can't.

    Heh, I love it how irritated the "truthers" get whenever their "movement" gets embarrassed (which is pretty frequently).

    I'd like to think my 5 seconds of searching Myspace for Payday Monsanto had something to do with this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Truthers do monitor this site. Maybe Payday had not been vetted because he was recommended by somebody. I've noticed that the bad guys tend to stick together and recommend each other. You get a bullshit cabal (Rodriguez, Barrett, Ranke, Balsamo) with Barrett at the middle.

    ReplyDelete
  4. sackcloth and ashes21 January, 2010 10:33

    'Pat, why don't you "debunk" what Coleen and Anthony are about?'

    We've done it repeatedly on numerous threads. You just can't admit that you've been owned.

    On topic, we have our own equivalent of Payday Monsanto in the UK. He's called Lowkey, and he's also a failure.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Patrick from Cincinnati21 January, 2010 13:03

    "I'd like to think my 5 seconds of searching Myspace for Payday Monsanto had something to do with this."

    Kudos!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Does this mean we can't sick the SPLC and ADL on them anymore?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Patrick from Cincinnati21 January, 2010 13:37

    Without Payday's Nazi graphics, I'm not sure there's enough transparency to put pressure on the convention center, so I don't see the point. Of course, we all know that at least half of them are anti-Semitic nutjobs, but like Alex Jones, they've learned to not come out and say it. Payday's sin was his graphic admission.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Uh oh! The biggest politician ever is now flirting with truthnieness. His reasoning?
    'If they can make Avatar, they can make anything,' the former prime minister told a press conference here yesterday after delivering his speech at the General Conference for the Support of Al-Quds to aid the Palestinians.
    I really hope he was joking.
    http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Malaysia/Story/A1Story20100121-193339.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'If they can make Avatar, they can make anything'

    Pffft. If anything, it's harder to make convincing computer models, because audiences are so accustomed to seeing it in movies. CGI that was top-shelf just a few years ago now looks stilted and obvious. Terminator 2: Judgment Day comes to mind. (It's still an awesome movie, though.)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pwnt.

    But hey what happened at luke's court date yesterday? Bet be lost since he didn't crow about a win on wearelame website yet.

    ReplyDelete
  11. sackcloth and ashes22 January, 2010 05:24

    Introducing Low-Key:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcoc9Ny1BD4&feature=PlayList&p=32FA33BD1884BF67&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=1

    ReplyDelete
  12. I really hope he was joking.

    Mahathir came out of the closet as a twoofer a few years ago. All this proves is he is still an America-hating asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Truther girl says
    Haiti Quake, HAARP and the NWO

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_ZEPZPtEI0&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  14. Shyam Sunder said anything with structural elements beneath it would not experience free-fall acceleration, but the NIST report stated that there was free-fall acceleration for over 2 seconds, or 100+ feet, during the collapse of Building 7. They say it was caused by the failure of 1 out of 83 columns, but they never explained how this was possible. Neither have you. Why is that?

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Anonymous said...
    Shyam Sunder said anything with structural elements beneath it would not experience free-fall acceleration, but the NIST report stated that there was free-fall acceleration for over 2 seconds, or 100+ feet, during the collapse of Building 7. They say it was caused by the failure of 1 out of 83 columns, but they never explained how this was possible. Neither have you. Why is that?"

    Because you're a moron and wouldn't understand the explanation.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Try me, Lazarus. Seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It's already been explained.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well you see Anonymous due to fire parts of the internal floors collapsed, you know when you see the penthouse fall inward, (the part truthers never show you). This left much of the top and north wall of building 7 unsupported. This allowed them to fall quite quickly as shown by the video truthers will show you, the 6 second or so collapse of the north wall.

    Now add that to the time it took the internal structure to collapse you have a total collapse time of over 13 seconds. In keeping from a stickily gravity driven event. and clearly demonstrated by videos of the ENTIRE event.

    Now the fact you are so mentally challenge as to NOT understand something rather simple is rather telling, but not surprising given the level of competence of your average truther. These questions of yours will always rattle around in you pea size brain, but will mean nothing to us who are educated and more analytically endowed.

    Basically just run along little boy and don't think about it, it's something you are not equipped for.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Now instead of asking stupid question explain how what Shyam Sunder said demonstrates a controlled demolition?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mr. Kyte, if the north wall of WTC7 was unsupported, why didn't it fold up like a wet paper bag as the NIST computer models predicted? How can you have 600 foot columns with no lateral support and they don't buckle? Want to explain that, Your Excellency?

    ReplyDelete
  21. "you are so mentally challenge..."
    "In keeping from a stickily gravity driven event..." "around in you pea size brain..."

    Funny how geniuses like you butcher the English language, and then call strangers 'mentally challenge'.
    You also clearly misunderstood the question, and failed to answer it in any way: the full duration of the collapse is immaterial. I'm referring to the period of free-fall, confirmed by NIST, which means all potential energy is being converted to motion. Do you understand what this means, and why Sunder would have said it's impossible, or is it time for someone else to help you out?

    ReplyDelete
  22. It's already been explained.

    ReplyDelete
  23. New Yorker, could you show me where it has been explained, or are you just lying to yourself and others?

    ReplyDelete
  24. New Yorker, could you show me where it has been explained, or are you just lying to yourself and others?

    I'm not lying. It's been explained.

    ReplyDelete
  25. See.

    Did I say he wouldn't understand it or did I say he wouldn't understand it?

    Frikkin' moron with laser beams on his head.

    ReplyDelete
  26. New Yorker, you're just spamming now.

    Laz, what exactly did I not understand? Can you point to it?

    If none of you can provide an explanation, why would you think it's been explained?
    Is rational discourse even possible on this forum?

    ReplyDelete
  27. "rational discourse" is a concept that is impossible for troofers to understand you blithering moron.

    http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Laz, what exactly did I not understand? Can you point to it?"\


    Everything, boron.

    Everything.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "Is rational discourse even possible on this forum?"

    Not with you, you retarded marmoset.

    ReplyDelete
  30. And boron, you never answered the question I asked earlier.

    When you were a child playing in the sandbox, did the cat try to cover you up?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Biker: Since you posted the link, can you point to where NIST explains how the failure of 1 column caused all elements to descend at once, with no resistance at all?

    You too, Lazarus. You can both show me just how 'rational' your discourse is.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Retarded marmoset? That's clever. Now how about some real analysis? What's keeping you?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Retarded marmoset? That's clever. Now how about some real analysis? What's keeping you?

    Nobody cares, Petgoat.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Patrick from Cincinnati22 January, 2010 15:12

    911 troof movement = continuing fail

    ReplyDelete
  35. " Anonymous said...
    Retarded marmoset? That's clever. Now how about some real analysis? What's keeping you?"

    You're a retarded marmoset.

    You wouldn't understand.

    ReplyDelete
  36. clever, not original.

    I pretty quickly found the term "retarded marmoset" in a 10/04 post:

    http://www.nhbgear.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=v9mj1hlpd2dstfv47lebmq58f5&action=search2

    ReplyDelete
  37. So after a brief appearance by other "truthers", it appears we're back to the usual pair of Brian and Spacebar Guy, is that right?

    Brian, considering all the sockpuppets you have out there on the internet, it's weird that you haven't created a new one here. Just go with Snug.bug.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Also, Brian, can you start calling us "girls" again? That was always worth a laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Funny how geniuses like you butcher the English language,

    Yes Brian, as a writer I suck, I sometime type you instead of your, But science was my thing and maybe that is why I understand it so much better than you. Although the fact you are by all standards a guy who can't grasp even the simplest of physics may have something to do with it.

    Yes Brian I am smarter than you and so I am not a truther. You will always be that idiot who at 55 can't hold a simple janitorial job. You should feel inferior because everyone except maybe spacebar guy is better that you. It's all part of being a truther, cause and effect.

    So now thy your hardest and explain in your own simpleton way exactly why the statement by Shyam Sunder demonstrates a controlled demolition? No more stupid question and insight about my typing skills. Prove you are not the idiots you present so well.

    Here I will help you out.... A controlled demolition would not necessarily cause the free fall of parts of the building. You do understand that.

    ReplyDelete
  40. "If none of you can provide an explanation, why would you think it's been explained?"

    Brian time to put up or shut up.

    Why is it YOU can not find an explanation or understand the one all others seem to grasp, barring that give a clear logical explanation exactly why the statement by Shyam Sunder even remotely implies a controlled demolition.

    The fact YOU don't know does not make building 7 a controlled demolition.

    You are like a petulant child asking "Daddy Why?" when told he is wrong. And given the thing you have said I suspect a child is not far from your intelligence level.

    "Explain to me Daddy"
    "Why Daddy?"

    STOP BEING THE FOOL.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Brian, here's a comment you made on the Aussie truther site, 9110z:

    "After way too many years on this stuff, I would be extremely grateful if some knowledgeable engineer would pat my silly little head and show me where I'm wrong so I can move on in my life. I have emailed a couple thousand college professors and I've never seen any indication that they can."

    There were many 'knowledgeable engineers' involved in the NIST reports.

    Accept the reality, and move on.

    Also, you sent a "couple of thousand emails", Brian?

    Please, seek professional help.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Mr. Kyte, I didn't say anything about Shyam Sunder in this thread. That was some other anonymous.

    Thanks for using the word "demonstrates" instead of "proves". Extra points for nuance! Of course it's still rather blunt.

    How about "suggests"?

    Did NIST ever do an energetic analysis quantifying the energy necessary to pulverize the concrete and dismember and crush the steel bix columns? I didn't think so.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Mr. Kyte, I didn't say anything about Shyam Sunder in this thread. That was some other anonymous.

    Thanks for using the word "demonstrates" instead of "proves". Extra points for nuance! Of course it's still rather blunt.

    How about "suggests"?

    Did NIST ever do an energetic analysis quantifying the energy necessary to pulverize the concrete and dismember and crush the steel box columns? If they did, I don't think they published it.

    Unfortunately, NIST's behavior in tossing its empirical studies of the truss-sag theory suggest that they tossed a lot of studies counterindicating their theories.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Is this the conference thats going to be in Pennsylvania in March? I think I'm going to try to go to it as its only about an hour and a half from me. I keep seeing these things in Vancouver and Toronto and New Zealand. Its nice to have something local.
    -Emory

    ReplyDelete
  45. "After way too many years on this stuff, I would be extremely grateful if some knowledgeable engineer would pat my silly little head and show me where I'm wrong so I can move on in my life. I have emailed a couple thousand college professors and I've never seen any indication that they can."

    It's because nobody cares about your insane beliefs, Brian. Professors are busy people who don't have time to respond to lunatics. I've explained this to you many times.

    Also, you sent a "couple of thousand emails", Brian?

    Please, seek professional help.


    What paul w. said.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Poo-day for Payday

    ReplyDelete
  47. Poo-pay for Payday

    ReplyDelete
  48. "...the six second collapse of the front wall" HaHaHaHaHaHa...is Shyte at the moldy crack again? Hey Shyte,after saving up for your bus ride to Pennsylvania to have your ass handed to you by "truthers",why don't you take advantage of the Medicaid program and have your head examined.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Mr. Kyte, I didn't say anything about Shyam Sunder in this thread. That was some other anonymous.

    Then pick a fucking name, and you won't have that problem anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "..the six second collapse of the front wall".Sure,Chief,it's so obvious,just look at the video.HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa R.I.P. Whining Dogs of the Lunatic Debunker Cult+Nico Haupt.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "Whining Dogs of the Lunatic Debunker Cult"

    Lather.

    Rinse.

    Repeat.

    Get sucked down into a the black hole of truther insanity.

    ReplyDelete
  52. And then Shyte referred to the "six second collapse of the front wall".HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa! Funny how cheap tents fold in a light wind,ain't it!

    ReplyDelete
  53. R.I.P.,Whining,Running Dogs of the Debunker Cult.May it serve you well.

    ReplyDelete
  54. And then Shyte referred to the "six second collapse of the front wall".I mean,that one is beyond priceless! Boy,when a liberal Democrat from Abandoned Buildings,Michigan folds his tent he folds it with a bang,not a whimper!!

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'm sorry... what?

    ReplyDelete
  56. In case you missed it Bilbo,the liberal Democrat from Tommy Hearns' neck of the woods took another look at #7 falling neatly into a pile and claimed he could break it down like a madcap Nazi scientist.He saw the North face of the building "collapsing" in six seconds.No word on what he saw the West face of the bulding doing, or any other side for that matter! Oh well,we knew that boy was going to crash mightily at some point,so.......The Debunker Cult:"We make it up as we go along and DAMN THE TORPEDOES,FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!"

    ReplyDelete