Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Why are you still posting here parker?
Like I said,I just wanted to make one last final attempt to try and reason with him and it was actually kinda fun showing him that with his OWN numbers,he helped me prove my point that he was wrong 😆 But as i said,like King and darth,he as well is afraid of the truth and doesnt want to learn so its time to move on.I just wanted to take him to school one more time before I left and show how his OWN figures proved he was wrong. 😄 so I wont be posting here anymore,its just the same old people with the same crap logic over and over again.
Just as I predicted,you cant counter the point,you know you have been defeated,so its all just all blah blah blah blah from you.Dude the guy that needs to go to school is you.Again you ignore the facts that countless other Physic teachers around the country have praised him.YOU need to grow up and be able to be mature enough to admit it when your wrong and been defeated. okay like darth and King of Kings,just as I predicted,you come back with the same old crap that they did because like them,your too afraid to get out of your comfort zone and hear the truth about it.as i said earlier,the only poster who disagrees with me,Ashtar and david on this that can act civilized about it and be mature in his debates is Grand so go on letting the government shove down their lies and propaganda on you.Like Darth and King,your a waste of time to try and reason with on this as well.You simply dont want to hear the truth either. so good bye,Im done with you as well.Looks like my ignore list grows larger by the moment.
stay in school......don't do drugs.....don't take candy from strangers......use condoms when you hit puberty.....take your vitamins. If you follow this advice and stop believing every conspiracy theory website you read on the net, you may turn out okay when you grow up.
9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3
Not taken apart at all, the interviewer first attacks the research editor of a magazine (popular mechanics) regarding issues that do not relate to his articles.
How can the research editor talk about evidence that does not exist?
He then tells the Research editor that he should use his influence to get the gov't to release the "unseen evidence". It's popular mechanics magazine, they have no influence at all with the gov't to release such information even if it did exist.
The interviewer keeps hounding the editor who responds with, "I can't properly speculate on evidence that I haven't seen". What more can be said? Perhaps the interviewer could discuss the merits of the evidence that Popular Mechanics has shown to debunk the conspiracey theorists.
What the interviewer does instead is talk about WTC7 and after a detailed explanation responds with. "It may or not be true", show me pictures. After explaining that some of the evidence witnessed by the researchers for background research has not be released publicly by the New York authorities, the interviewer goes ballistic over his right to know. No point is made to counter the magazine's research. None.
Callers call in with heresay and misinformation and, once again, the interviewer gets sarcastic when he is corrected.
When the editor says, "may I ask the caller a question?", the interviewer responds with,"No". Why won't the interviewer let the editor converse with the caller and ask him questions? The editor even accuses the interviewer of manipulating and framing the questions where they can only lead in his directions an make them illigitamate.
When he can't talk his way out of that truth he hangs up on the editor.
Deano, maybe you believe (in your own little world) that this interview went in favor of your conspiracy theorist radio network, but it didn't. Actually it did nothing but bolster the validity of the editor and his evidence because the interviewer was afraid to attack that. Instead he tried to hairy the person instead of contradict the scientific evidence because he knew that he didn't have aleg to stand on.
This is another example of a conspiracey theorist thinking that if he gets passionate enough, and yells loud enough, common sense will be ignored. Of course, he like all the others of his ilk, are wrong.
Originally posted by KharmaDogDo you love Deano or something?
Not taken apart at all, the interviewer first attacks the research editor of a magazine (popular mechanics) regarding issues that do not relate to his articles.How can the research editor talk about evidence that does not exist?
He then tells the Research editor that he should use his influence to get the gov't to release the "unseen evidence". It's popular mechanics magazine, they have no influence at all with the gov't to release such information even if it did exist.
The interviewer keeps hounding the editor who responds with, "I can't properly speculate on evidence that I haven't seen". What more can be said? Perhaps the interviewer could discuss the merits of the evidence that Popular Mechanics has shown to debunk the conspiracey theorists.
What the interviewer does instead is talk about WTC7 and after a detailed explanation responds with. "It may or not be true", show me pictures. After explaining that some of the evidence witnessed by the researchers for background research has not be released publicly by the New York authorities, the interviewer goes ballistic over his right to know. No point is made to counter the magazine's research. None.
Callers call in with heresay and misinformation and, once again, the interviewer gets sarcastic when he is corrected.
When the editor says, "may I ask the caller a question?", the interviewer responds with,"No". Why won't the interviewer let the editor converse with the caller and ask him questions? The editor even accuses the interviewer of manipulating and framing the questions where they can only lead in his directions an make them illigitamate.
When he can't talk his way out of that truth he hangs up on the editor.
Deano, maybe you believe (in your own little world) that this interview went in favor of your conspiracy theorist radio network, but it didn't. Actually it did nothing but bolster the validity of the editor and his evidence because the interviewer was afraid to attack that. Instead he tried to hairy the person instead of contradict the scientific evidence because he knew that he didn't have aleg to stand on.
This is another example of a conspiracey theorist thinking that if he gets passionate enough, and yells loud enough, common sense will be ignored. Of course, he like all the others of his ilk, are wrong.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Well it seems you always have to reply to everything Deano says.
Well, I wouldn't say that I respond to everything Deano says, just the things that either pique an interest or strike a chord. As for the latest repsonse, he personally PM'd his last post, as it is more misinformation, I responded.
Does that satisfy your curiosity? And why the childish/smart ass comment anyway?
Originally posted by KharmaDogDo you like to believe you're better than others? Because that's the feel I'm receiving here.
Well, I wouldn't say that I respond to everything Deano says, just the things that either pique an interest or strike a chord. As for the latest repsonse, he personally PM'd his last post, as it is more misinformation, I responded.Does that satisfy your curiosity? And why the childish/smart ass comment anyway?
Originally posted by lord xyz
Do you like to believe you're better than others? Because that's the feel I'm receiving here.
Well, then you are wrong.
Your line of questioning also has nothing to do with the subject at hand. If you have a problem with me, PM me. Otherwise, stick to the subject or my comments pertaining to the subject.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
Not taken apart at all, the interviewer first attacks the research editor of a magazine (popular mechanics) regarding issues that do not relate to his articles.How can the research editor talk about evidence that does not exist?
He then tells the Research editor that he should use his influence to get the gov't to release the "unseen evidence". It's popular mechanics magazine, they have no influence at all with the gov't to release such information even if it did exist.
The interviewer keeps hounding the editor who responds with, "I can't properly speculate on evidence that I haven't seen". What more can be said? Perhaps the interviewer could discuss the merits of the evidence that Popular Mechanics has shown to debunk the conspiracey theorists.
What the interviewer does instead is talk about WTC7 and after a detailed explanation responds with. "It may or not be true", show me pictures. After explaining that some of the evidence witnessed by the researchers for background research has not be released publicly by the New York authorities, the interviewer goes ballistic over his right to know. No point is made to counter the magazine's research. None.
Callers call in with heresay and misinformation and, once again, the interviewer gets sarcastic when he is corrected.
When the editor says, "may I ask the caller a question?", the interviewer responds with,"No". Why won't the interviewer let the editor converse with the caller and ask him questions? The editor even accuses the interviewer of manipulating and framing the questions where they can only lead in his directions an make them illigitamate.
When he can't talk his way out of that truth he hangs up on the editor.
Deano, maybe you believe (in your own little world) that this interview went in favor of your conspiracy theorist radio network, but it didn't. Actually it did nothing but bolster the validity of the editor and his evidence because the interviewer was afraid to attack that. Instead he tried to hairy the person instead of contradict the scientific evidence because he knew that he didn't have aleg to stand on.
This is another example of a conspiracey theorist thinking that if he gets passionate enough, and yells loud enough, common sense will be ignored. Of course, he like all the others of his ilk, are wrong.
im just merely stating that people who call everyone conspiracy nuts because of asking questions about 9/11, well they can rarely defend themselves at all, as the radio show proved. there are things we need to know about 9/11, and no one is trying to give us many anwsers apart from the ''conspiracy nuts''. and this guy who strongly sticks to his beliefs quite clearly coudnt answer a single question without stuttering.
i dotn claim to have the answers, i just like to put a different version in peoples eyes to remind them that you should always question everything and to make them realise that maybe nothing as it seems. people shoudnt be dumbed down puppets who questions nothing, it makes humantiy look even worse when there are some honest researches who get crapped on for asking these sort of fair questions abotu 9/11.
well you see, the mainstream media produce the news and have proof that bin laden did it because the government said so. where are the reporters getting their information from? official sources! name me a single piece of relevant information broadcast by the mainstream media about what happened on 9/11, how it was done, who did it and what the retaliation should be, that did not come from official sources. Not one. We are told that white house sources say this, FBI sources say that, and pentagon sources say the other. people always prattle on shouting "Where's the proof that 9/11 was an inside job? I can't believe what hasn't been proved, can I?" Oh but people do; and they go on doing so all their lives. Billions are convinced that the official version of 9/11 is true because of the 'proof' revealed by the United States government. they produced no proof of anything, only the repetition of their fairy tale that billions accepted as 'proof'.
people need to be more careful. thats all i am saying
Originally posted by Deano
im just merely stating that people who call everyone conspiracy nuts because of asking questions about 9/11, well they can rarely defend themselves at all, as the radio show proved. there are things we need to know about 9/11, and no one is trying to give us many anwsers apart from the ''conspiracy nuts''. and this guy who strongly sticks to his beliefs quite clearly coudnt answer a single question without stuttering.
This link did not prove this at all. The questions asked had nothing to do with the articles in question. The Interviewer kept asking questions about "unseen evidence" and asked the editor to speculate. The editor could not answer many of the questions asked because they where misleading or poorly constructed questions. When asked if he could ask a question himself, he was outrightly told "NO". Why was that?
Originally posted by Deano
well you see, the mainstream media produce the news and have proof that bin laden did it because the government said so. where are the reporters getting their information from?
They got that from Bin Laden himself. He in fact admittedted to it publicly, isn't that enough?
Originally posted by Deano
people need to be more careful. thats all i am saying
You have posted an interview that proves nothing. QUotes that were proven to be doctored and evidence from a general that has been acknowledged privately and publicly as one who is off their rocker.
I think you need to be more careful in whom you trust for info and their sources as more often than not, they don't seem to pan out for you.
bin laden admitted it? so what? thats no proof. thats just a madman who probably wanted to be credited with the disaster. and not to mention the CLEARLY fake bin laden videos the government put out to the world.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html
the 2001 videotape where 'he' 'confesses'
''To be perfectly honest it is preposterous to suggest this videotape could be authentic, but lets have a look at it anyway. Here's 5 Osamas - which is the odd one out?''
IF he was involved, i doutn he could pull off such a plot without inside help from the united states.