ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cit , lloyde england , pentagon

Reply
Old 10th January 2011, 05:08 AM   #321
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
QED Excellent work.


Now mobertermy are you going act like an adult? Admit you were wrong and learn a valuable lesson from this? Just because you "know" that something is true does not actually make it so.

or are you going to behave like a child and simply put your fingers in your ears and scream "I'm not listening"!

Note that debunking you does not prove that their was no elaborate plot by reptile people or whatever on 911, all we are showing you that what you presented is not evidence of anything other than those pictures were not manipulated as you said they were.
Follow JREF and you will find EVERY piece of evidence of foul play presented by the truth movement has been shown to be simply wrong and that might hopefully lead you to a logical conclusion re 911 and CTs in general.


He chose the "or are you going to behave like a child and simply put your fingers in your ears and scream "I'm not listening" option.
Why am I not very surprised
sheeplesnshills is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 06:31 AM   #322
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,670
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Exactly! But the cab is not between TA3 and TA4 in reality. Get it? The photo can't be right. If you label TA2 and TA3 correctly in relation to the cab you end up with an impossible extra TA. If you label the TA by the turn off correctly you end up with the cab impossibly between TA3 and TA4.

The photo is impossible.
Uhm - how do you know where the cab is "in reality", if not from photos?
Which photo shows the cabe elsewhere?

I think the cab in reality was between TA3 and TA4, but very much closer to TA3. and haven't seen a photo that disagrees with this
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:14 AM   #323
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
I will work on the sight lines next week when I have time.
You'll note that an hour and a quarter after your OP I was able to produce a sight line that refuted your principal points, and that subsequent analysis by other forum members has shown my initial deductions to be substantially correct: (1) The light poles are in the relative positions that would be expected from the position of the cab and the sight line of the photographs, and (2) the traffic arm visible behind the door of the cab is incorrectly labelled as TA2.

It really doesn't take all that long.

Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Now that I've answered your question answer mine - would the Eiffel tower behind the Pentagon be evidence of photo manipulation or not?
Yes, as would any object appearing in the photograph which is known not to have been in the vicinity of the Pentagon on 9/11/01. Please provide a list of all such items you have identified in these photographs. If there aren't any, why are you wasting time hypothesising about them? Your analysis claims that the relative positions of objects in the photographs proves manipulation, not that objects are visible that were known not to be in this area at this time. Therefore, I suggest you try to defend your own position rather than making up imaginary ones.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:20 AM   #324
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It really doesn't take all that long.
It does if you have to shoe-horn them into a predetermined conclusion. For some reason, I have no faith in what he'll come up with.


__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:47 AM   #325
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Uhm - how do you know where the cab is "in reality", if not from photos?
Which photo shows the cabe elsewhere?

I think the cab in reality was between TA3 and TA4, but very much closer to TA3. and haven't seen a photo that disagrees with this
Look at the photo in post 245 for instance.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:50 AM   #326
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Look at the photo in post 245 for instance.
We have looked. The Pentagon looks really close to the over-head sign too.



__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:51 AM   #327
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,471
Look at the photo in 297. The Eiffel Tower is only 4 feet tall!!1!!1!
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:52 AM   #328
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by drewid View Post
1) There's another gate that doesn't appear in any photos which messes up that numbering system anyhow.
Please explain.
Quote:
I labelled it as TA3 because that's the convention that seems to have been settled on. Actually it's TA4 unless you're a programmer and start counting from zero. That's why I prefer the official designation of 'gate 36'
So you are saying the cab is between TA3 and TA4? Or TA2 and TA3?

Also, I have a problem with your placement of the cab in your diagrams. As you can see from the picture in post 245 the cab is parallel to the guard rail , and very near the base of the overhead sign.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 07:58 AM   #329
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,670
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Look at the photo in post 245 for instance.
I did, and looked at your slide "Everything together", and it is pretty clear that TA2 is well outside to the right of the photo in 245, and that the TA we see there must be TA3. I did this by holding a ruler at the screen in your slide, and constructing a line of sight. Everything fits, with the notable exception of the position (X) of the cab - you should move it further north, so that it is almost on the bridge, as defined by your outlines in that slide.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:00 AM   #330
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Was this picture faked too?





Shows the cab location pretty freaking good.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 10th January 2011 at 08:01 AM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:01 AM   #331
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Also, I have a problem with your placement of the cab in your diagrams. As you can see from the picture in post 245 the cab is parallel to the guard rail , and very near the base of the overhead sign.
No, you can't see any such thing. Foreshortening makes it impossible to say with certainty how far the cab is from the overhead sign base from that photograph alone, and will also cause you to underestimate any angle between the front edge of the cab and the direction of the guard rail.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:08 AM   #332
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
the cab is parallel to the guard rail ,
All these kind people have gone out of their way to teach you, where your confusion comes from. Sadly you've learned nothing! Why are you here?
Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:09 AM   #333
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,670
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
...
Also, I have a problem with your placement of the cab in your diagrams. As you can see from the picture in post 245 the cab is parallel to the guard rail ,
Not at all.

Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
and very near the base of the overhead sign.
No. You again underestimate what tele-lenses do.
Construct a line of sight!
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:24 AM   #334
drewid
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,257
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Please explain.

So you are saying the cab is between TA3 and TA4? Or TA2 and TA3?
Seeing as it seems to be a source of some ongoing confusion it's best to stick to the official designation. Gate 35 is just south of the overhead sign, Gate 36 is about 100 feet north, and coloured red in my shots. It's really not difficult.

Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Also, I have a problem with your placement of the cab in your diagrams. As you can see from the picture in post 245 the cab is parallel to the guard rail , and very near the base of the overhead sign.
It's not at all clear that it's "parallel to the guard rail" from that shot and from that distance. Neither does it look "close to the base" of the sign, that's the foreshortening effect of a long camera lens.
drewid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:36 AM   #335
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by drewid View Post
Seeing as it seems to be a source of some ongoing confusion it's best to stick to the official designation. Gate 35 is just south of the overhead sign, Gate 36 is about 100 feet north, and coloured red in my shots. It's really not difficult.
The TAs didn't have those designations on 9/11 so I think it best to stick wiht TA1,2,3,4. I am asking you a simple question. Is the cab between TA2 and TA3?


Quote:
It's not at all clear that it's "parallel to the guard rail" from that shot and from that distance. Neither does it look "close to the base" of the sign, that's the foreshortening effect of a long camera lens.
You can tell how far from the cab is from overhead sign by looking at the guardrail. You have it behind the trees to the left, when you can tell by looking at the guardrail that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:38 AM   #336
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I did, and looked at your slide "Everything together", and it is pretty clear that TA2 is well outside to the right of the photo in 245, and that the TA we see there must be TA3. I did this by holding a ruler at the screen in your slide, and constructing a line of sight. Everything fits, with the notable exception of the position (X) of the cab - you should move it further north, so that it is almost on the bridge, as defined by your outlines in that slide.
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:42 AM   #337
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
Yes, it APPEARS that way. Is everything always as it APPEARS in pictures?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:46 AM   #338
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
You're good at pointing out what "anyone can see".

Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Of course it is. Anyone can see that the arms of TA2 and TA3 go down in different directions.
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
This claim is absolutely preposterous...anyone can look at photo #3 and see that TA3 is unambiguously blocking the lane the cab is in.
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Look at photo #3...TA3 is blocking the lane the cab is in...this has nothing to do with perspective...its just an obvious undeniable fact.
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Apparently so since I unambiguously see the arm of TA3 blocking the lane Lloyde is in...see the guy in the white shirt? He's standing in front of the arm. Are your eyes strained? Take a break from Warhammer and put your glasses on if its not obvious to you the TA3 arm is down in the lane Lloyde is in.
Maybe you should consider the possibility that you may be mistaken.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 08:56 AM   #339
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Maybe you should consider the possibility that you may be are mistaken.

Dave
ftfy
Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:06 AM   #340
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,670
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
No. You again underestimate what tele-lenses do.
Construct a line of sight!
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:09 AM   #341
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
No. You again underestimate what tele-lenses do.
Construct a line of sight!
Reading this thread. Do you honestly believe he could do this competently?


__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:10 AM   #342
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Yes, it APPEARS that way. Is everything always as it APPEARS in pictures?
You can go to google maps and count the numer of vertical guardrail segements there are between the overhead sign and pole number one. I come up with 8. You can tell in the picture in post 245 the cab is in front of segment 3 and 4 (counting left to right according to the google image).
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:13 AM   #343
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
No. You again underestimate what tele-lenses do.
Construct a line of sight!
Let's just say that I am hypothetically as dumb as you guys claim I am and can't competently do a line of sight as DGM suggests. On the other hand you guys claim that doing a line of sight will easily debunk me, and yet you guys adamantly refuse to do one - even though you claim it would prove me wrong. If you think doing a line of sight will prove me wrong...do one.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:15 AM   #344
Gamolon
Master Poster
 
Gamolon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,160
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
How many different people in this thread have tried to explain to you that you are WRONG? 10? 15?

All these people have explained the mistakes you are making and you still refuse to understand. Do you think we are all sitting in a room discussing how we're going to continue to screw you and your claim? You've already admitted to making some mistakes in your analysis.
Gamolon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:15 AM   #345
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
You can go to google maps and count the numer of vertical guardrail segements there are between the overhead sign and pole number one. I come up with 8. You can tell in the picture in post 245 the cab is in front of segment 3 and 4 (counting left to right according to the google image).
So your counting something in the foreground to determine the distance of something further back?





__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:18 AM   #346
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,664
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Let's just say that I am hypothetically as dumb as you guys claim I am and can't competently do a line of sight as DGM suggests. On the other hand you guys claim that doing a line of sight will easily debunk me, and yet you guys adamantly refuse to do one - even though you claim it would prove me wrong. If you think doing a line of sight will prove me wrong...do one.
You have already been proven *WRONG* (debunked) dozens of times in this thread. A line of sight diagram has already been done and you just continue to ignore it.

Everyone that has commented in this thread disagrees with you and I'd guess that everyone reading it is the same.

Now, why do you reckon *YOU* are the only one who believes you are right?
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:19 AM   #347
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,471
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Anyone can see from the photo in post 245 that the cab is closer to the overhead sign than the trees to the left. Look at the guardrail.
Anyone can see from the photo in post 297 that the Eiffel Tower is in fact about 4 feet tall. Look at the girl's hand.

Are you completely unable to take the concept of perspective and apply it to your photos?
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:21 AM   #348
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Count the lane Stripping. They are approx 10 feet in length spaced 30 feet apart. You can clearly see gate 36 in this photo.

__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

Last edited by A W Smith; 10th January 2011 at 09:54 AM.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:21 AM   #349
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Gamolon View Post
How many different people in this thread have tried to explain to you that you are WRONG? 10? 15?

All these people have explained the mistakes you are making and you still refuse to understand. Do you think we are all sitting in a room discussing how we're going to continue to screw you and your claim? You've already admitted to making some mistakes in your analysis.
Gamolon, what you don't understand is that you guys are making contradictory claims with each other. Some people suggest the pole is between TA2 and TA3, others TA3 and TA4. Drewid says there is an extra TA in the pictures that I didn't include, others of you said I was an idiot for suggesting this. One of you said the cab is parallel to the guard rail, others of you insist the cab is not parallel to the guard rail. You guys don't even agree with each other.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:21 AM   #350
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Let's just say that I am hypothetically as dumb as you guys claim I am and can't competently do a line of sight as DGM suggests. On the other hand you guys claim that doing a line of sight will easily debunk me, and yet you guys adamantly refuse to do one - even though you claim it would prove me wrong. If you think doing a line of sight will prove me wrong...do one.



drewid and Dave Rogers did. You just didn't like it. Stop lying and saying it hasn't been done.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 10th January 2011 at 09:23 AM.
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:21 AM   #351
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Let's just say that I am hypothetically as dumb as you guys claim I am and can't competently do a line of sight as DGM suggests. On the other hand you guys claim that doing a line of sight will easily debunk me, and yet you guys adamantly refuse to do one - even though you claim it would prove me wrong. If you think doing a line of sight will prove me wrong...do one.
I did one back on page 1. Did you miss it?

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:22 AM   #352
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,670
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Let's just say that I am hypothetically as dumb as you guys claim I am and can't competently do a line of sight as DGM suggests.
This hypothesis offers an obvious falsifiable prediction:
Prediction: Mobertermy can't and won't draw a line of sight
Please feel free to falsify the prediction

Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
On the other hand you guys claim that doing a line of sight will easily debunk me, and yet you guys adamantly refuse to do one - even though you claim it would prove me wrong. If you think doing a line of sight will prove me wrong...do one.
Sorry pal - your thread, your presentation, your theory - you do the work.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:22 AM   #353
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Count the lane Stripping. They are approx 10 feet in length spaced 30 feet apart. You can clearly see gate 36 in this photo.
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

Last edited by A W Smith; 10th January 2011 at 09:37 AM.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:22 AM   #354
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
Count the lane Stripping. They are approx 10 feet in length spaced 30 feet apart. You can clearly see gate 36 in this photo.
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:9...41RQcIoAkxHnNw
You can?
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:23 AM   #355
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I did one back on page 1. Did you miss it?

Dave
Back on page one you didn't even know what a traffic arm was by your own admission.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:24 AM   #356
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
One of you said the cab is parallel to the guard rail, others of you insist the cab is not parallel to the guard rail.
I thought you were the only one saying the cab was parallel to the guard rail. We're all pointing out that, due to foreshortening, it just appears from a distance to be...

...well, I think the word you were looking for was "perpendicular", not "parallel". But, of course, it isn't perpendicular either.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:25 AM   #357
Mobertermy
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 548
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
This hypothesis offers an obvious falsifiable prediction:
Prediction: Mobertermy can't and won't draw a line of sight
Please feel free to falsify the prediction
You claim that drawing a line of sight will falsify my theory, yet you refuse to demonstrate this. So it cuts both ways.

All I can say is that I've seen alot of talk from debunkers and pro-CITers that doing a line of sight will completely debunk me, and yet you all continue to not demonstrate this.
Mobertermy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:27 AM   #358
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,705
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
You claim that drawing a line of sight will falsify my theory, yet you refuse to demonstrate this. So it cuts both ways.

All I can say is that I've seen alot of talk from debunkers and pro-CITers that doing a line of sight will completely debunk me, and yet you all continue to not demonstrate this.
How many of us have to do it before you will look at it?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:27 AM   #359
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
Back on page one you didn't even know what a traffic arm was by your own admission.
And yet I was able to point out that the object you'd labelled "TA2" was, in fact, TA3, and when we'd sorted out (a) what a traffic arm was and (b) that you were wrong about which way TA3 pointed, it turned out I was right. We may not have traffic arms where I come from, but we have the same laws of geometry. And the sight line makes it perfectly clear that the object you initially labelled TA3 was the same object that you then labelled TA2 in photograph #2.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 10th January 2011 at 09:45 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2011, 09:28 AM   #360
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,618
Originally Posted by Mobertermy View Post
All I can say is that I've seen alot of talk from debunkers and pro-CITers that doing a line of sight will completely debunk me, and yet you all continue to not demonstrate this.
Except post #15 from me and post #288 from drewid, which you seem to have forgotten about.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 10th January 2011 at 09:30 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:00 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.