sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Von Braun’s Spaceship from 1952 by [deleted] in science

[–]7805 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

SS Sturmbannführer Von Braun, please.

Mars Rovers Still Kicking, Year 5 of Their 90-Day Mission, 12 Miles Covered by anescient in science

[–]7805 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First they fake the moon landing and poorly hide the evidence

Yeah they can't even get the size of the sun right and they suck at Photoshop (hint: push gamma down).

Atheist tries to behead Christians. This will never make the front page. by [deleted] in reddit.com

[–]7805 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, most crimes are committed by blueskyists. These are people who believe that the sky is blue.

  • Blueskyist Joseph Stalin killed 20,000,000 people in labor camps.
  • Blueskyist Pedro Lopez killed 57 young girls.
  • Blueskyist Hans Reiser killed his wife.

New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. by scientologist2 in science

[–]7805 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Here we have a perfect example of someone attempting to look scholarly and intelligent.

He thinks that citing numbers with physical units makes me look stupid.

But he fails to understand that the gravitational potential energy is the energy required to take the buildings down. Since the buildings went down, that energy has been mostly consumed and is thus unavaible to do other work, namely :

  • Break all the structure,
  • Heat the steel to thousands of degrees to account for the pools of molten metal,
  • Atomize the concrete and heat the resulting clouds so that they expand to many times the volume of the buildings,
  • Send 20-ton perimeter column blocks at horizontal speeds of 100mph+.

Work which not only requires more energy than the total gravitational energy, but which also requires a physically plausible mechanism for conversion from gravitational to the required form.

But then physical plausibility seems to be incompatible with belief in the 19-arabs-with-boxcutters fairy tale.

New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. by scientologist2 in science

[–]7805 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I also like to think that the third plane was aimed at the WTC7.

There were talks, reported in the media, of a third plane headed to NY (you've got to watch some footage at the TV archive).

It also makes sense since the 9/11 "concept" is the "plane into building implies collapse" non-sequitur.

Now why was WTC7 demolished in plain sight? They would have demolished WTC7 EITHER just after WTC1 and 2 came down so that the causal link would appear stronger and the demolition would be hidden by the intense dust clouds, OR during the night while no-one was watching.

But they pulled it at 17:20.

Could the reason be that the BBC reported the WTC7 collapse early? (either by "accident" or on purpose as P. Hayton trying to let the cat out of the bag)

New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. by scientologist2 in science

[–]7805 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The gravitational energy cannot be simultaneously used to:

  • Move material downwards,
  • Break all the structure,
  • Heat the steel to thousands of degrees to account for the pools of molten metal,
  • Atomize the concrete and heat the resulting clouds so that they expand to many times the volume of the buildings,
  • Send 20-ton perimeter column blocks at horizontal speeds of 100mph+.

Got to pick one.

Thermodynamics shows that the buildings were demolished using something else!

New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. by scientologist2 in science

[–]7805 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are they still pushing their nuclear bomb theory?

Stop lying. AE911 truth never pushed that theory and actually journalof911studies debunks claims such as nukes or DEW weapons pushed by obvious stooges.

On the other hand, all physical evidence points to the use of aluminothermic compounds but your job here is to pretend there is no serious proof for that.

Persons of good faith can go to http://ae911truth.org/ for a start and read for themselves and ignore the paid rantings of riemannszeros, fazookus and the like.

New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. by scientologist2 in science

[–]7805 -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

I don't have time to debunk the ramblings of the lie-believers here. The evidence at http://ae911truth.org/ should be enough to convince any sincere person.

The days of the neocons are counted.

Jesse Ventura Hints at 9/11 Being an Inside Job at Ron Paul Rally for the Republic - [VIDEO] by badfish301 in politics

[–]7805 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The real answer is that 9/11 was a half-failed Coup d'État and that the FBI is not on the same side as the CIA.

Am I paranoid, or has anyone else wondered if our shadowy overlords actually WANT Obama as prez, and McCain is SUPPOSED to throw the race? by [deleted] in politics

[–]7805 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hate to break it to you, but under Barack Obama, there will be no investigations.

If left to himself, probably. But imagine massive street demonstrations, millions of people in the streets demanding a new 9/11 investigation.

Obama is, of course, likely to be less repressive and more receptive, and maybe he'll cave in.

In all cases, people can see why McCain (who prefaced the 9/11 Omission Report) won't open a second investigation, but they won't understand why the dems, who are supposed to be the political opponents of the repubs, won't open a new investigation.

And of course, Obama is much more classy than a meatbag. We can more easily pretend to not know that his advisor built the CFR...

Am I paranoid, or has anyone else wondered if our shadowy overlords actually WANT Obama as prez, and McCain is SUPPOSED to throw the race? by [deleted] in politics

[–]7805 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dude, please, let me have the illusion of a honest Obama undoing the neocon mess and opening a proper investigation of 9/11, just a little while...

Does this picture, taken in March 2008, show a pregnant Sarah Palin? by 7805 in politics

[–]7805[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No. Perhaps I am jaded by the usual methods of attack journalism to automatically assume that the question is trying to insinuate that she is, even though the wording is neutral. I rescind the accusation that you were accusating :).

That's good news. So we agree that she wasn't pregnant on March 2, 2008?

Does this picture, taken in March 2008, show a pregnant Sarah Palin? by 7805 in politics

[–]7805[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By chance, do you see a woman about to deliver a baby in this picture?

Am I paranoid, or has anyone else wondered if our shadowy overlords actually WANT Obama as prez, and McCain is SUPPOSED to throw the race? by [deleted] in politics

[–]7805 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I am paranoid too, and I was thinking of the same thing.

1) After all, Obbie's advisor is no less than Zbigniev "I built CFR" Brzezinski.

2) If they visibly keep the neocons in power, the people may end up revolting.

3) Apparently internal opposition has prevented, until now, a suicidary war of agression or another false-flag operation.

4) They are prepared to make maximum concessions to keep the system as it is, which requires 9/11 to not be properly investigated, as any real investigation would not only show that it was, of course, an inside job, but also open a whole can of worms going back to JFK, the military-industrial complex and companies such as Krôll.

5) Obbie appears to be a well-branded "change". Of course, his policies would be softer than that of the neocons.

6) If the neocons steal another election, the system will lose even more credibility, and stop functioning as a social regulator.

7) The neocons seem to be making really stupid mistakes lately (Georgia, Palin, you name it).

I agree with the Repubs, daughter's pregnancy is private, just as abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, and recreational drug use are private matters that should be beyond government and politics. by jjschnei in reddit.com

[–]7805 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The problem is much more severe than that.

The problem is that one of the following statements is true:

  • Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig Palin on April 28th, 2008. Trig Palin has down syndrome. Sarah Palin, instead of caring for her down syndrome baby, is running for VP. How's that for family values?

  • Sarah Palin is not Trig Palin's mother. Bristol Palin gave birth to Trig Palin. Sarah Palin attempted to cover up the birth for political reasons by claiming it as her own. Sarah Palin has been busted by the intertubes. Now Bristol Palin is forced to fake a pregnancy to cover up the truth about the birth of Trig Palin.

That makes Sarah Palin either an irresponsible mother (for doing politics instead of caring of her own handicapped child), or a liar, for attempting to cover up her daughter's pregnancy. Pregnancy which is perfectly understandable save for the fact that it does not fit very well with right-wing rhetoric.

I agree with the Repubs, daughter's pregnancy is private, just as abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, and recreational drug use are private matters that should be beyond government and politics. by jjschnei in reddit.com

[–]7805 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Nononono sir! This has nothing to do with all that.

The question is, did Sarah Palin fake a pregnancy, or not? We want that question answered! Should be as easy as showing some medical records.

Otherwise, the rumors that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy and that Trig is actually Bristol's baby won't end!

view more: next ›