you will never change a "debunkers" "mind"


"according to reports the NIST says....."

intrepid... really!??? wow.

i'm seriously and sincerely trying to figure out and UNDERSTAND what i did or said that was a violation... i've read the link, but i still don't see what specifically was violated.

would appreciate at least a hint if you wouldn't mind. In fact i can't even go back and look at what i wrote in the message that caused this. Would be nice if mods could implement a policy or something in certain cases where the violation was explained or pointed out.

what egg shells were broken this time?

IMHO, seeking truth and healthy debate/intelligent discourse are the first casualty when you have to walk on eggshells this much.

apologies for whatever wasn't adhered to, but any info would be appreciated to make sure everything is within guidelines/rules in the future

thank you





[edit on 9-4-2010 by Orion7911]

Originally posted by ATH911
weedwacker, can you think of a rational explanation as to why it took the media about a year to report that most of UA93 supposedly buried?

bump

for weedwacker

Originally posted by hooper
you think there is evidence of a conspiracy because the media didn't make a big deal out of the quite understandable notion that when a plane hits the ground at a 40 degree angle close to the speed of sound that some, most, alot, a bit, part of, or any piece is embedded in the ground?

Well, was it some, most, alot, a bit, part of, or any piece? It can't be all.

What is so amazing is that you think this is amazing.

So when did they realize that most of the plane was buried?

By the way, the thing about the assuming the passengers were also all embedded is, well, your assumption. The press really doesn't spend a lot of time explain the rationale behind your assumptions.

Then where were most of the remains speculated to be before the cleanup started?

Originally posted by hooper
Why does the adjective matter? Only you seem to really care.

Something called facts. Probly not a known subject for you.

Why would anyone speculated about the ratio of human remains locations? WHY????

Please see above.

Originally posted by hooper
Why, BEFORE THE RECOVERY STARTED, would anyone speculate about the ratio and the location of the human remains.

Maybe somethig called "crime scene investigation".

Originally posted by hooper
Also, rhetorical question, the answer is no. Same as in Shanksville. Nobody stood around before they started searching and speculated about where the remains would be found.

Thanks again for showing how little you know about things like criminal investigations.

Originally posted by hooper
Tell you what, you show me where it is common practise at a crash scene investigation where everyone stands around speculating about the ratios and locations of the remains before they actually start looking for them.

Well it would be difficult since you do not seem to grasp even the very basics of crime scene investigations.

Originally posted by hooper
Again show me where it is common practise at a crash scene investigation where everyone stands around speculating about the ratios and locations of the remains before they actually start looking for them.

I guess you never heard of or seen CSI doing drawings of the scne BEFORE the investigation?

Hooper is cointelpro for flight 93 imo.