So that is how you think it works? you all need to do better homework doncha. Just like fang said you cant time 7's demolition. LOL 7.7 seconds collapse time
Another bull(*)(*)(*)(*) reply. Why did I expect anything different? Come back when you can actually debate the topic instead of doing the bizzare mental masturbation you're doing now.
Why is it that every single one of your attempts to paraphrase turns original statements into something utterly and completely contradictory? Is that another consequence of your 1828 dictionary? Must be.
Woah. I just took a stroll through Koko's Photobucket account. 9/11, Holocaust denial, iraq conspiracies, anti zionism, a whole crapload of screen shots from his trusty 1828 and some kinda weird Tesla fetish. Ron Paul supporter sounds about right.
only an idiot would support a police state. oh and actually literally none of those are from websters 1828. anyone with 1/10th of a brain knows you do not use 20th generation regurgitated words of today to understand a constitution written in 1700's. But then when judges are griping that the average american iq is 70 and dropping nothing would suprise me.
Well, that's a straight up lie. Your pull it post was taken directly from the 1828 dictionary, and I proved it there in that thread. I guess lawyers don't have to know anything about statistics either. IQ is derived from individual intelligence in comparison to the intelligence of the general population. The score is based upon median intelligence. Therefore the average IQ is always based on a median score of 100. Since the scale is adjusted every time the median adjusts, actual intelligence increases by as much as 5 points per decade. Average intelligence can't be 70 if the median is 100. Seems like that judge of yours has no clue what he's talking about. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444032404578006612858486012.html
sure I understand what a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) it is to pick a spec out of someones eye when you cant see past the boulder in your own. .
Are you finally acknowledging the massive boulders in your own eyes? Wow. I'm surprised. I thought you would never see them. Unless, of course, your ego is so large you think you don't have boulders and think it is everyone ELSE that has boulders.
OK, so you have boulders in your eyes and you are in complete and total denial. Gotcha! Tell us again how the government can modify every camera filming an event by inserting CGI of the event from the perspective of the camera. squish squish
They are taken from different angles and it doesn't surprise me incredibly dishonest people would sieze on that fact and try to pretend it means something. But never mind that. Explain to us the technology used to alter the various and different recording mediums used to record the event in real time based on the angle of the camera. Why hasn't a single witness come forward and claimed when they shot the footage they didn't see the plane and only saw the plane when they reviewed the footage? Yet another question you will run screaming from. again, koko.
Real time can mean different things, but in this instance, it doesn't matter as your claim is a blanket claim. Regardless, all media forms record the event to some form of media whether that is digital or analog. In the event of live television, the raw images are recorded directly to media and then transmitted to the station. The station then records the images to media and then after a suitable delay, transmit the images over the air to the audience. But you also claim that all videos showing the plane impacting were modified including all the private cameras. Unless every person filming the event was in on the conspiracy, the government would need the technology to modify the images recorded by the camera before those images were transferred to media. These are your claim. You would think you would be better able to defend them. Then again, they are so seriously (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up I'm surprised you're even going to make the attempt. Get ready for another
Why am I not surprised you arte claiming victorty over your definition of real time without even addressing your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claims. I called it. Truthers can't even defend their own claims. How are those tire tracks feeling, koko? You lost yet again while trying to defend your own claims. It must truly suck to be you.
