Um, in the blue bar at the top of posts where the poster is identified, the join date is displayed.Originally Posted by JayUtah
Um, in the blue bar at the top of posts where the poster is identified, the join date is displayed.Originally Posted by JayUtah
Um, in the blue bar at the top of posts where the poster is identified, the join date is displayed.
That's true, but I was a member of the various previous incarnations of this board that used different software, etc. I don't recall if the date displayed is the real date on which I joined Bad Astronomy or some arbitrary number that arose during various database migrations.
Originally Posted by JayUtah
OK, I was migrated to this board with the merger and the join date for me is definitely my BABB join date. I remember it clearly.
But before the merger of BAUT there was BABB, and before BABB with Software Flavor B on the big server there was BABB with Software Flavor B on the little server. And before BABB with Software Flavor B on any server there was BABB with Software Flavor A. I was a member of that board. I recall discussing Apollo hoax related things on BABB long before 9/11, so I'm skeptical that the Oct 2001 join date is correct in my case. But I simply don't recall when I joined.
Well then, guess that settles that. You're an enigma Jay.![]()
an enigma wrapped in a mystery in a poofy wig.
We used to say "An enigma wrapped in a mystery served with a light Hollandaise dressing."
Back on topic - I see that on Feb. 1, Prof. Jones gave a public lecture at Utah State Valley College in Orem, UT. No real information available as yet, but it seems that there will be audio / video of the event online soon.
Which would make him the best actor ever. I've seen footage of him being asked how he felt about the attacks. He said he did not feel guilty as they simply could not foresee an extreme impact of an airplane that was not in use during the design of the towers. But at the same time his gestures made clear that somewhere inside he was extremely restless as he felt that if anyone, he could have been the one that designed them strong enough to withstand these impacts. (for the record, in my opinion he's not to blame.) I doubt anyone could act those feelings convincingly. Of course it must be the fact that he's in the plot that makes him restless instead...Originally Posted by twinstead
![]()
(I'm not mad at you Twinstead, I got it you were not seriously expressing your opinion)
I'm glad. Appreciating sarcasm is an important skill on this boardOriginally Posted by Nicolas
![]()
I do have a rather sensitive sarcasm meter, and you were very clear on that. I'm mad at those people actually accusing people of horrible things without solid evidence. It's bad enough part of that person is ruined even though he is indeed not to blame. But that will never take away the "what if"'s for him.
I'm always extremely amused when non UK/Aussie people use that word on boards. It means something quite different to me.Originally Posted by phunk
Again, for the CTs here...
3 significant, unprecedented, controlled demolitions, using thermite, mini-nukes, whatever. As I understand it, the CD buildings are always prepped, with internal structure greatly weakened to assist in the fall. They don't just place the explosives, run the great lengths of wires, and push the button.
How was the building prepped, the explosives set, the wires run (literally many miles needed in a case like this) without suspicion being raised? How did they ensure circuit continuity with the jet impacts and fires?
The sequence of "booms" as the floors pancaked were just that, explosive sounding booms as literally acre-feet of air was almost instantly blown out from the open space of each floor in the collapse...of COURSE the debris/fire/smoke is going to be blown out laterally, explosively, as each floor collapses.
Nothing really unnatural here...
Dave
Am I correct to assume that in those countries a poofy wig calls into question the wig's sexual preference?Originally Posted by Lianachan
Originally Posted by twinstead
I would have called it the same and I am from Yorkshire. I think he got the meaning spot on.
Rules For Posting To This Board
All Moderation in Purple
Good idea, but I've already asked this on the other threads and got no satisfactiory answer, the only attempt at one was the suggestion that the Clinton Administration planted the explosives in 1993 (after the bombing) for the Bush(the Younger) Administration to use in 2001.Originally Posted by Dave J
Isn't it funny how the conspiracy theorists raise all kinds of fuss about how now a physics professor believes the theory. Yet when you look at his "theory" it's just the exact same old stuff(much of it debunked repeatedly) conspiracy theorists have been saying since 2001, like that nonsense about how the building fell too quickly.
edited for spelling
Last edited by The Incredible Bloke; 2006-Feb-03 at 03:04 PM.
I agree. I would be more apt to listen to the physics professor if he had actually done some physics. I pretty much blew him off when I saw that all he had done from Day One, basically, was to take all the arguments of the conspiracy theorists -- even the ones I was able to dispel with just a few minutes of research -- and subscribe his PhD to them. He cites Eric Hufschmid as an expert, for pete's sake, and also Kevin Rose as a materials expert. A physicist isn't an engineer, and Prof. Jones' arguments suffer greatly from not being familiar with engineering. But they're not even a physicist's arguments.
As for the UVSC presentation, I didn't know that had been scheduled. I might have been able to do go to it. I wonder why that venue was chosen. It's only about ten minutes' drive from BYU, and much smaller. It also has a reputation for being politically liberal (insofar as that's possible in Utah). I also notice that Jones' writings now carry a disclaimer that BYU does not sponsor his work.
If that's what it means it was unintentionalOriginally Posted by twinstead
![]()
Hmm, that may have been me, and I was using it as an argument against planting explosives/thermite in 1993. If someone else was suggesting it seriously...Originally Posted by Graham2001
Sorry, I just can't take that suggestion seriously.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov
Moderation will be in purple.
Rules for Posting to This Board
I'll have you know that wig is 100% man! (Actually it's 100% polyester.) The rest of the costume, however, could be described as a bit ... "summery".
What show is that from Jay?Originally Posted by JayUtah
The picture is from 1776. The "summery" comment is from Frank Wildhorn's Scarlet Pimpernel, for which some of the same costumes were used.
That's what I was asking about. I thought so. I was one of the Representatives from Delaware in our production two years ago. Col Thomas Mckean . I just got cast as Leo, in Chapter Two. I got a rather nasty shock when I found out I have a two and a half page monologue.Originally Posted by JayUtah
In the other WTC, ChaByu put the following phrase in quotes, rivers of molten steel and then attributed that to some firefighters. If you followed the link he provided, you will see that this is not a quote from a firefighters, but from Etienne Sauret, a French-born New York documentarian. And even if there was molten metal, how would a bunch of firefighter know it was metal?
As we already have several threads going on this subject, I am going to close this one and ask that any further comments regarding the topic be put here.