9-11 Truth makes HUGE showing at Los Angeles Peace March as bushkultie Iarndud Crackwhore Kook for War screeches in helpless rage
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Martian meteorite ALH84001 contains fossilized trace of collagen fibril
Next: Wanted: A mathematical definition for consonant...
From: * US on 8 Jun 2010 07:27 Notice how the neocon pawn ran away from this, too. One would think that those massive tower cores would have resisted the downward falls for at least an instant. That's if one did the requisite thinking. On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 17:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... can only reply with weak insults ... That's because you can't dispute the facts presented to you. On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 13:54:12 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... smoking crack... You sure do have problems, there. On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 07:15:49 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >...All debunked ... Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't. "full peer review" http://www.journalof911studies.com/ The neocon pawn doesn't understand even those three words. The neocon pawn isn't qualified as a "peer", obviously. He can't even find any specifics.
From: * US on 8 Jun 2010 08:38 The neocon pawn can't read it. From the link, also undisputed: "countering several popular myths about the WTC collapses" http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM The neocon pawn believes the myths. On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 07:24:45 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... word that means nothing... You don't get the meaning of any of the words. Three words that mean nothing to the bushkultie, but plenty to those still free to think clearly: "full peer review" http://www.journalof911studies.com/
From: * US on 8 Jun 2010 08:39 Notice that nobody can actually dispute this: "d = �gt� (where g = 32.2 ft/sec� or 9.8 metres/s�)" http://mindprod.com/politics/bush911introduction.html#INTRODUCTION http://mindprod.com/politics/bush911insidejob.html It remains undisputed, as the neocon pawn has only fallacy.
From: * US on 9 Jun 2010 07:37 He doesn't know what it says. The neocon pawn can't read it. From the link, also undisputed: "countering several popular myths about the WTC collapses" http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM The neocon pawn believes the myths. On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 07:24:45 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... word that means nothing... You don't get the meaning of any of the words. Three words that mean nothing to the bushkultie, but plenty to those still free to think clearly: "full peer review" http://www.journalof911studies.com/
From: * US on 9 Jun 2010 11:40
He can't name one of the myths, so, obviously, he can't defend it. He doesn't know what it says. The neocon pawn can't read it. From the link, also undisputed: "countering several popular myths about the WTC collapses" http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM The neocon pawn believes the myths. On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 07:24:45 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... word that means nothing... You don't get the meaning of any of the words. Three words that mean nothing to the bushkultie, but plenty to those still free to think clearly: "full peer review" http://www.journalof911studies.com/ |