[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

Yo, deuces, thoughts on this please:

https://dhughes.substack.com/p/in-defenc...

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

I think that Deuces has a tizzy whenever "his" thread gets hijacked to discuss more serious matters like flat earth and such. I'd pretty much bet my life that Deuces and Billy are different people.

Billy, did you talk to your ****ing classmates and instructors about flat earth or not?

I'm guessing this is going in the direction of "There was no mass, it was all dustified, ask Judy Wood or look at the photos".

I don't follow orders. Rectify your error and we'll discuss physics. I'm not interested in talking to you at all until you admit that the floors will not stop when striking the floor below.

Of course it is. It's a waste of time talking to someone that stupid.

I actually believe he has the qualifications he claims to have. Seems more insane than stupid to me. Not hugely different to these guys who look like they've spent the last 25 years of their life living in a basement with no access to any sort of tools for trimming hair or clipping fingernails scribbling on a blackboard in a youtube video about how irrational numbers are made up and not real and we don't need them.

There is also something of an "Einstein was wrong" movement with similar types who claim the theory of relativity is wrong and physicists secretly all know and it's all a massive conspiracy etc. I remember watching a reaction to one of these from a guy whose whole thesis was predicated on the fact that the symbol for infinity is a rotated 8 which he then parlayed into infinity being a rotation of 8 by 90 degrees and something something something. Some pretty good stuff out there.

I'm kind of reminded of a JFK conspiracist on International Skeptics a few years ago who produced a blurry black-and-white photo taken from a press car in the Dallas motorcade, looking ahead down Elm to the underpass, and he'd circled two light areas which he said were 'puffs of gunsmoke on the grassy knoll.'

Except rifles have not puffed smoke like that since the 1890s, a rifleman in that position would have been only ten feet from the nearest witnesses, who saw no such person, and the larger 'puff' was actually, identifiably the crown of a young tree on the slope of the 'knoll', and the smaller one, seen against the dark of the underpass, was actually the back end of the President's limousine, bearing him to Parkland.

Judy Wood's failure to interpret photos from the scene at the WTC, and her leap from there to assume the existence of 'some sort of top-down space-based cold-fusion directed-energy beam weapon, don't ask me how it works,' represents a similar delusion on stilts.

I've toyed with the idea that it is actually Judy Wood and (s)he is just brain damaged. Something is definitely going on in that brain that shouldn't be.

To be clear, I don't think it is, but it is very strange how hard he goes for her. It takes a LOT of willful denial of reality to believe her.

Just think for a second what it would mean if those floors STOPPED every time they struck a floor underneath them. That would mean that NO BUILDING COLLAPSE EVER, including all controlled demolitions, happened without DEWs involved. None.

Every one of these:

had to have been done with DEWs to collapse as quickly as they did here. None of these floors stopped for a moment when contacting the ones below them. They all should have taken way longer.

Agreed. They are not the same person.

@Gorgo - I'm pretty sure that in his circular reasoning addled brain it works something like this:

Building was dustified --> there was no collapsing mass --> collapse couldn't have happened that quickly --> building didn't collapse but was dustified.

Totally agree, but it does make one wonder why one disappears when the other shows up.

Which is even stupider. There is no evidence of "dustification," there is no evidence of a weapon that can "dustify" a building even existing. Nothing at all for either. In fact 1.8 million tons of steel was removed from ground zero.

He does the same with the Earth stuff. The Earth is flat because plumb bobs (or suspension bridge towers etc.) are perpendicular to the ground and parallel to each other. When you ask how he knows that they are parallel to each other he'll say it's because they're perpendicular to the flat/horizontal/level ground. He doesn't understand the whole concept of circular reasoning or not assuming the thing you're supposed to be trying to prove.

I suspect she's coining it in pretty handsomely pimping her theories (and qualifications) to the Billy/Deuces/Playbig/Brian James types of this world. One born every minute.

I personally watched one of the towers collapse. LOL at saying that there was no collapsing mass. Also, if the buildings were dustified in the way he describes, how did we end up with such an immense amount of non-dustified wreckage and debris at ground zero?

Not enough debris apparently... but I'm sure Billy will be happy to expound on this himself.

Indeed. I wrote the following six years ago:

Define centrifugal force. And no this is not some "trick" or dumb game. You need to define your terms.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

Excellent idea. First let us see if he knows what momentum is. Actually that is a much more difficult question than I asked.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

Define physics.

Define momentum.

Or retract your statements that include words you cannot define.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

This annoying habit you have of evasively latching onto a tangential point or an aside like a leech is just that, very ****ing annoying. The centrifugal force part is not important, the point is that terrestrial gravitation is the same thing as universal gravitation. It is the force exerted by the mass of the earth according to the law of universal gravitation.

Yes and it is not that difficult to gain quals. Just hard work and time. Two precious resources.

But it is mystifying to some. Who then project.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk