Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
BringBackFootie. said:
The plane was larger than one floor. It clearly came through in tact, and left no hole on the other side. It didn't get crushed because it is in the still from video, clearly not crused to the width of a floor, and you ****ng blond mate <laugh>

Why don;t you scale it, I guarantee you the width is the same as the width that entered the other side.

So it was crused to the size of a gap in the facade and hten expanded as it passed through? Cos it is clearly not crushed in the shot.
You are making no ****ing sense mate, none at all.

That nose is clearly not destroyed, it should be, physically impossibly.
Click to expand...

Sorry to jump in here but are you suggesting that protrusion in the bottom picture is the nose of a plane and not just debris/gases being ejected by the explosion?

I have already stated I wouldn't believe anything I saw on TV as I have seen enough Dinosaurs and spaceships to know anything can be created, has the bottom picture been officially described as the plane because if so, I call bullshit.
 
Diego said:
Sorry to jump in here but are you suggesting that protrusion in the bottom picture is the nose of a plane and not just debris/gases being ejected by the explosion?

I have already stated I wouldn't believe anything I saw on TV as I have seen enough Dinosaurs and spaceships to know anything can be created, has the bottom picture been officially described as the plane because if so, I call bullshit.
Click to expand...

I wasted much of yesterday on this cack.. but if you look at the image again, look at the lighting on this "gas and debris" and the uniform shadow on it, and the shadow it casts on the building, it is clear it is not what you suggest. :) Whatever "it" is, it's not gas and debris.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
you sure its not a sun spot though...
Click to expand...

"Britain and Ireland will suffer a series of major damaging deluges and floods during the period 15th to 28th Sept 2008" these were forecast by WeatherAction using solar activity 7 months previously.

So if he can predict weather 7 months in advance, and be right and he can do this using solar activity. It shows the stupidity of that "funny" comment. <ok>

All the climate scientists and all the IPCC's men can't get it right for the previous years weather. Let alone 7 months ahead.
 
BringBackFootie. said:
"Britain and Ireland will suffer a series of major damaging deluges and floods during the period 15th to 28th Sept 2008" these were forecast by WeatherAction using solar activity 7 months previously.

So if he can predict weather 7 months in advance, and be right and he can do this using solar activity. It shows the stupidity of that "funny" comment. <ok>

All the climate scientists and all the IPCC's men can't get it right for the previous years weather. Let alone 7 months ahead.
Click to expand...

so was this a training exercise prior to 2011?
 
BringBackFootie. said:
"Britain and Ireland will suffer a series of major damaging deluges and floods during the period 15th to 28th Sept 2008" these were forecast by WeatherAction using solar activity 7 months previously.

So if he can predict weather 7 months in advance, and be right and he can do this using solar activity. It shows the stupidity of that "funny" comment. <ok>

All the climate scientists and all the IPCC's men can't get it right for the previous years weather. Let alone 7 months ahead.
Click to expand...

If he can predict the weather 7 months in advance why doesn't he?

Any gambler can hit lucky once, ignore their massive losses, then pretend they still have a "system"
 
astroturfnaut said:
If he can predict the weather 7 months in advance why doesn't he?

Any gambler can hit lucky once, ignore their massive losses, then pretend they still have a "system"
Click to expand...

You are right, I could guess and get it right in 7 months.

But he is not guessing Astro isn't that the whole point I am making here.

He followed that prediction up with predicting floods, and the record snows months ahead in 2010, which was contrary to the Met office and IPCC. He was right and he used science to make his predictions, you are implying he uses a magic 8ball, hardly accurate or a fair point mate.

if he was wrong, the BBC would definitely mention him, but seeing as he gets it right, he is whitewashed by the BBC. All scientists who have evidence the IPCC are wrong never get airtime

He's asked the UN for the scientific evidence that CO2 causes warming and still years later has recieved no reply, because there is no actual evidence.
 
astroturfnaut said:
If he can predict the weather 7 months in advance why doesn't he?

Any gambler can hit lucky once, ignore their massive losses, then pretend they still have a "system"
Click to expand...

Me agreeing with you is becoming a habit................

Getting one right in 2008 means jack **** in isolation.
 
Tobes said:
Me agreeing with you is becoming a habit................

Getting one right in 2008 means jack **** in isolation.
Click to expand...


He's not only got one right, he gets it right most of the time, while the IPCC consistently get it wrong. Proven fackts without a doubt<ok>

Again commenting on something without knowing anything about it Toby
 
BringBackFootie. said:
You are right, I could guess and get it right in 7 months.

But he is not guessing Astro isn't that the whole point I am making here.

He followed that prediction up with predicting floods, and the record snows months ahead in 2010, which was contrary to the Met office and IPCC. He was right and he used science to make his predictions, you are implying he uses a magic 8ball, hardly accurate or a fair point mate.

if he was wrong, the BBC would definitely mention him, but seeing as he gets it right, he is whitewashed by the BBC. All scientists who have evidence the IPCC are wrong never get airtime

He's asked the UN for the scientific evidence that CO2 causes warming and still years later has recieved no reply, because there is no actual evidence.
Click to expand...

He has a string of massive failures, which he wrote off as a "procedural error"

The BBC does not make a habit of listing by name every fraud who has made ****e predictions that week

Since when does the UN reply to individuals who turn up at their door demanding evidence?
 
BringBackFootie. said:
"Britain and Ireland will suffer a series of major damaging deluges and floods during the period 15th to 28th Sept 2008" these were forecast by WeatherAction using solar activity 7 months previously.

So if he can predict weather 7 months in advance, and be right and he can do this using solar activity. It shows the stupidity of that "funny" comment. <ok>

All the climate scientists and all the IPCC's men can't get it right for the previous years weather. Let alone 7 months ahead.
Click to expand...
Any evidence that his predictions are better than others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back