|
Post by Data Cable on Aug 3, 2008 3:34:49 GMT -4
Again, more proof that you (and obviously others) don't understand the information I post. Understand it? We're laughing at it, uproariously! Translation: She made up a word because she doesn't understand why the existing ones apply. We don't need to imagine it... We saw it.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 3, 2008 4:15:58 GMT -4
Meanwhile, back to hurricanes in the wild behaving quite normally and not under control... is this a tactic used to divert the attention away from the topic subject?
I asked the OP a few questions, any answers from the OP? I still believe hurricanes are uncontrollable, in so far as we can change direction, and will behave a certain way above certain latitudes.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 4:38:08 GMT -4
Meanwhile, back to hurricanes in the wild behaving quite normally and not under control... is this a tactic used to divert the attention away from the topic subject? I asked the OP a few questions, any answers from the OP? I still believe hurricanes are uncontrollable, in so far as we can change direction, and will behave a certain way above certain latitudes. Did you see the London Guardian Link I gave?
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 3, 2008 4:50:41 GMT -4
Meanwhile, back to hurricanes in the wild behaving quite normally and not under control... is this a tactic used to divert the attention away from the topic subject? I asked the OP a few questions, any answers from the OP? I still believe hurricanes are uncontrollable, in so far as we can change direction, and will behave a certain way above certain latitudes. Did you see the London Guardian Link I gave? Yes. Item from 2004. Uses words like "could change" and "scientists are developing" and this one "'Nothing stands in the way of hurricanes,' says Ross Hoffman" then goes on to use "The team has proposed several answers". My words now, nothing concrete. Like I said before, I also like explanations. As far as I can find, hurricanes are uncontrollable and will behave in a certain way above certain latitudes. Explain the control mechanism if you can. No links please.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 5:02:31 GMT -4
Did you see the London Guardian Link I gave? Yes. Item from 2004. Uses words like "could change" and "scientists are developing" and this one "'Nothing stands in the way of hurricanes,' says Ross Hoffman" then goes on to use "The team has proposed several answers". My words now, nothing concrete. Like I said before, I also like explanations. As far as I can find, hurricanes are uncontrollable and will behave in a certain way above certain latitudes. Explain the control mechanism if you can. No links please. This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 3, 2008 5:55:45 GMT -4
[ This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc. So I take it you cannot provide an explanation? Just theories of your own on a different topic. So, to recap. You say control but cannot provide any info? Do not forget the rest of the world has "media" as well.
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Aug 3, 2008 6:28:05 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Aug 3, 2008 7:25:44 GMT -4
Yes. Item from 2004. Uses words like "could change" and "scientists are developing" and this one "'Nothing stands in the way of hurricanes,' says Ross Hoffman" then goes on to use "The team has proposed several answers". My words now, nothing concrete. Like I said before, I also like explanations. As far as I can find, hurricanes are uncontrollable and will behave in a certain way above certain latitudes. Explain the control mechanism if you can. No links please. This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc. Evasion noted. You're confronted with science, and so you go on to claim "The media is controlled!" That seems to be the "Get out of Jail Free" card for conspriacy theorists. Media control doesn't alter the laws of physcics.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Aug 3, 2008 7:26:29 GMT -4
This does indeed appear to be the majority opinion of Dr Wood among "truthers". I love it when paranoid crackpots armed only with unfounded handwaving collide with other paranoid crackpots armed only with contradictory unfounded handwaving. Their only possible rebuttal is mutual "Gubb'mint plant!" finger-pointing.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Aug 3, 2008 7:26:47 GMT -4
Psst--you mean "resident," Grand Lunar! D'oh!
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Aug 3, 2008 7:31:56 GMT -4
And before you play that card on us, let me remind you that there is proof that the WTCs were NOT pulverized (as pointed out by our resisdent spell checker, there is no such word as "dustify"). Also noted was that the "After" picture was taken months after clean up began. Again, more proof that you (and obviously others) don't understand the information I post. I specifically said that Dr Wood coined the term dustify"? Do you not remember me saying that? She coined that term to describe a process that has been observed on video, but has not yet been scientifically defined. That is what scientists do. "Pulverize" would be an inappropriate term at it implies something specific. Also, the last of the three photos were taken ON 9/11, not months after the cleanup began. But that does not matter. There were no debris piles higher than WTC 6. Can you imagine that?? An 8 story building towering over the "collapse" of two 110 story buildings? Very well then, it's Judy Wood's word. It still doesn't matter; "dustify" isn't a real term. She could've used vaporized or pulverized. But no, she has to invent her own term. What does she hope for, an entry into Webster's? Have you ever seen images of what the pile of debris looks like after a building has undergone demolition? They're not very tall. A building is mostly air. The WTCs were no different, with their tube-in-tube design. Tell us how tall YOU think the debris pile should be. Have you any qualifications or training to prove that the debris pile should be taller than an 9 story building?
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Aug 3, 2008 11:40:06 GMT -4
[ This explanation might help a bit more: The mainstream media is controlled and will not report what's really going on in the world. They must word things very carefully so as to not give away information as fact. The media is nothing more than a brainwashing tool, in the literal sense. If the American media did report what they should, then water-powered car technology would receive 24/7 coverage on CNN, FOX, front page in New York Times, etc. So I take it you cannot provide an explanation? Just theories of your own on a different topic. So, to recap. You say control but cannot provide any info? Do not forget the rest of the world has "media" as well. I cannot scientifically explain it. (I'm not a scientist.) The rest of the world does have media, which is why Reuters reported in Japan the new Japanese water-powered car a few months ago. Why didn't CNN pick it up? Were they too busy with their "War on Terror"?? Reuters clip: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 3, 2008 12:33:26 GMT -4
So I take it you cannot provide an explanation? Just theories of your own on a different topic. So, to recap. You say control but cannot provide any info? Do not forget the rest of the world has "media" as well. I cannot scientifically explain it. (I'm not a scientist.) The rest of the world does have media, which is why Reuters reported in Japan the new Japanese water-powered car a few months ago. Why didn't CNN pick it up? Were they too busy with their "War on Terror"?? Reuters clip: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDMEI cannot comment on other news organisations editing. I would ask if you have looked this up or just swallowed it without investigating? So how does it work? Big bubble of water under the drivers seat and water is squashed out the rear when the driver sits down? Or something that will disappear into the ether? I cannot wait for water powered cars. But think I will have to wait a while? I cannot scientifically explain it. (I'm not a scientist.)Neither am I a scientist. But I can usually follow the gist of an explanation even if I have to look up certain processes that vex me at the time. Now if you go into the maths of a nuclear reaction then I will be out of my depth and need a bit of coaching. So, we have a huge storm heading for the coast. The norm appears to be that conditions tend to head them NE? That is from looking at a historic track record. Have I got that right or is it wrong? If it is controlled, by what method. Now I am not expecting a scientific explanation, is it a beam weapon doobery, microwave, huge electric fan?
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Aug 3, 2008 13:44:46 GMT -4
CBB, do you think you can stick to one subject per thread?
You started off by going on about Judy Woods claims.
Now you're complaining about CNN.
If you want to rant about CNN and water powered cars, start a new thread. Besides, it's hardly a conspiracy for one news source to report something that another does not.
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Aug 5, 2008 12:47:46 GMT -4
To go one step back...
What's the motive of destroying the towers?
With all the magic technology that must be there in this scenario, it can't be about oil...
|
|