You'll see, ENT... You'll see.
And me false teeth chatter in fright,,,,,

Well if you are delusional creationist or tin foil head then this is a reasonable thing for you to suggest. And its very good evidence that you are a creationist grade loon who cannot tell the difference between fact or fantasy.
or you could try to prove that you do have a shred of interest in the truth and post the stuff that makes you think the photo was taken during the rescue phase before the recovery/cleanup started.
As for me.... i will sleep fine.... as i know that you tell more lies and speak more bollocks than donald drumpf... which is an achievement in itself. rather like the supper dapper top secret anti-gravity ball drone
Teakdoor CSI, TD's best post-reality thinkers
featuring Prattmaster ENT, Prattmaster Dapper and PrattmasterPseudolus
Dedicated to uncovering irrational explanations to every event and heroically
defending them against the onslaught of physics, rational logic and evidence
^^^Ahh, the ginger-headed neurotic bellend appears.
Hi Ant
You spoke about Occams Razor before. Funny, as your TEFL'ing (skills) allowed you access to the term, yet sadly for you, like most things, the reality of them fly's over your head.
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor, and lex parsimoniae in Latin, which means law of parsimony) is a problem-solving principle attributed to William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar and scholastic philosopher and theologian. The principle can be interpreted as stating Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
So looking at the clip below and using the theory you espouse,
a) This happened due to fire
b) This was a controlled demolition.
And by the way you plank - it's rhetorical for you - although you'll be clambering over your keyboard to spew some more insane drivel no doubt.
![]()
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
And after that, you can go down the pub.
So you do believe that a government is capable of perpetrating such an act on its own people but have no concerns that the same very government doesn't monitor your communications lest you divulge information that uncovers their plot and that they lack the resources to do so?Originally Posted by ENT
Well that's... Interesting.
Incidentally, I'm currently looking at an original copy of a newspaper printed on September 14th 2001.
It shows a picture of the second plane strike on the twin towers. It shows the entire nose cone of the plane exiting the other side of the building.
Nose cones are made of alluminium no?
Not a scratch on it??
![]()
[QUOTE=hazz;3221564].... post the stuff that makes you think the photo was taken during the rescue phase before the recovery/cleanup started.
/QUOTE]
The reference was given in the first post I gave with the pic.
Now don't be lazy, go look it up.
Actually what's funny is that you think that TEFLing skills are somehow a prerequisite to knowing about the concept of Occam's razor - an association that makes absolutely no sense - and then go on to immediately prove that you don't know what Occam's razor is much less how to apply it.Originally Posted by Dapper

^^^ "and the camera don't lie".
Well.....unless you're a TV station and you are like the others who regularly take liberties with photos.
Gotta sell the story, y'know.....
Hang on. I too have ginger hair. Can you call him something else?Originally Posted by Dapper
^^Your saying the picture was doctored by the paper to sell more copies?
Hmmm...
![]()

Originally Posted by Latindancer
Originally Posted by ENT
Recorded for double posterityOriginally Posted by Dapper
![]()
You got that right you fucking retardOriginally Posted by hazz
![]()

The reason you will not post your source... is that you dare not check it. It claims the photo was taken during the rescue phase because of the presence of firemen... which is utter dapper... sorry bollocks.... thinking about it they are the same thing
Quote your source.
Originally Posted by ENT
![]()

^^you want me to quote your sources from your photo, be reasonable,![]()
^ So who took the photo hazz?
When was it taken?
And obviously - show proof that backs up your answers.
![]()
I'll get back to you on that, once I've spoken to my psychiatrist.Originally Posted by Dapper
![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)