Fair enough. Just like technically every object around you exerts a gravitational pull or force on you, and you on them, but it's so negligible that we're not really going to place any consideration on the gravitational pull the of the television on your wall is exerting on you, or you on it.
Reminds me of this classic comic:
About thrusters in space? If you don't think that the link I provided there answers how thrusters can work in space, then you REALLY have ZERO grounds to talk conclusively on how the moon landing was faked. I've contributed ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more "valuable" posts and comments to AM than you ever will buddy...
A WHOLE WEEK? Imagine what you can do in a month, or a year? You'll be able to get us to Mars and back if you put your mind to it!I spent alot of time on 9/11 last week which only re-enforced the facts, evidence and science showing it was clearly an inside job, so to be honest Ill be only trolling people from now on. Im just tired of the topic. Sorry.
Welcome back by the way, nice to have you around again
I spent alot of time on 9/11 last week which only re-enforced the facts, evidence and science showing it was clearly an inside job, so to be honest Ill be only trolling people from now on. Im just tired of the topic. Sorry.
Welcome back by the way, nice to have you around again
Exactly. The "stand on a skateboard and throw a bowling ball and you'll move backwards at least a bit" example they gave at the very beginning of the article demonstrates it fairly easily. I suppose perhaps a cannon recoiling back after firing a cannonball could demonstrate this as well? Conservation of momentum and all that.
I guess the people saying bowling alleys were essential businesses were right all along! They're educational! And spherical!
Yes, he's saying you're not dumb, so you should be able to understand what we're saying, you just seem not to want to. A healthy dose of skepticism is good, but past a certain point it's madness. Remaining firm in your convictions is admirable, but is only strength when it's based in reason. To paraphrase Epictetus, remaining firm in your convictions when they're shown to be inaccurate (see thrusters in space), if it is strength, it is the strength of a madman, and pitiable, not enviable.Did you just call me smart?
To answer some of your questions in previous posts (my goodness the volume of your messages) I don’t know what we have or haven’t done as there are a lot of things that make me very skeptic. I don’t think it’s as we have been told and I certainly don’t place any trust or hope in an overfunded government agency. Either they are keeping us dumbed down to what technology they have like Ax1 has eluded too, or they are making fools of us all.I think space is a way for escapism and false hope that is really sad to seen grown men put their faith in. There is way more evil and deceit in the world then people want to admit. No, I don’t think we have been to the moon for a ton of reasons, some of which I’ve already eluded to in previous posts. Yes we have been to very high altitudes but being in space as we have been told/shown has a lot of very big holes in it for it to be definitive for me.
Did you just call me smart?
To answer some of your questions in previous posts (my goodness the volume of your messages) I don’t know what we have or haven’t done as there are a lot of things that make me very skeptic. I don’t think it’s as we have been told and I certainly don’t place any trust or hope in an overfunded government agency. Either they are keeping us dumbed down to what technology they have like Ax1 has eluded too, or they are making fools of us all.I think space is a way for escapism and false hope that is really sad to seen grown men put their faith in. There is way more evil and deceit in the world then people want to admit. No, I don’t think we have been to the moon for a ton of reasons, some of which I’ve already eluded to in previous posts. Yes we have been to very high altitudes but being in space as we have been told/shown has a lot of very big holes in it for it to be definitive for me.
*you're
*you're
Come on man.
But it IS a small group. Their board of directors lists 6 people, 3 of whom are engineers (and PEs). The staff lists 2 more people, neither of whom are engineers. The lead volunteers lists 5 more people, none of whom are engineers. And the contributing authors lists 2 people, one of whom is an engineer.
So 4 engineers (of whom 3 are PEs) is a pretty small group in the context of the overall group of engineers and PEs.
Their IG claims "More than 3,000 architects & engineers call for a real investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC skyscrapers on 9/11." But considering there are over 113,000 licensed architects in the US, and over 1.6 million engineers in the US
You have LESS THAN 0.2% of them showing support for this. That's 1 in 571. But without a full list of people who support it, I'm skeptical it's even that many. That's my conspiracy on a conspiracy.
You know Big Bird was almost on the Challenger. I think this whole thing was a plot to assassinate Big Bird, but he got wind of the plan, and managed to survive:
*you're
Come on man.
But it IS a small group. Their board of directors lists 6 people, 3 of whom are engineers (and PEs). The staff lists 2 more people, neither of whom are engineers. The lead volunteers lists 5 more people, none of whom are engineers. And the contributing authors lists 2 people, one of whom is an engineer.
So 4 engineers (of whom 3 are PEs) is a pretty small group in the context of the overall group of engineers and PEs.
Their IG claims "More than 3,000 architects & engineers call for a real investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC skyscrapers on 9/11." But considering there are over 113,000 licensed architects in the US, and over 1.6 million engineers in the US
You have LESS THAN 0.2% of them showing support for this. That's 1 in 571. But without a full list of people who support it, I'm skeptical it's even that many. That's my conspiracy on a conspiracy.
*you're
Come on man.
But it IS a small group. Their board of directors lists 6 people, 3 of whom are engineers (and PEs). The staff lists 2 more people, neither of whom are engineers. The lead volunteers lists 5 more people, none of whom are engineers. And the contributing authors lists 2 people, one of whom is an engineer.
So 4 engineers (of whom 3 are PEs) is a pretty small group in the context of the overall group of engineers and PEs.
Their IG claims "More than 3,000 architects & engineers call for a real investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC skyscrapers on 9/11." But considering there are over 113,000 licensed architects in the US, and over 1.6 million engineers in the US
You have LESS THAN 0.2% of them showing support for this. That's 1 in 571. But without a full list of people who support it, I'm skeptical it's even that many. That's my conspiracy on a conspiracy.
You asked about thrusters in space, and I provided a link with an example, and then provided another example, and you STILL maintain that the link and I didn't explain it. Either you are incapable of understanding it, which multiple people here doubt, or you are choosing to ignore it and feign ignorance, which I'd argue is worse. You saying I am the one displaying "cognitive dissonance" here is great! You must have an amazing view from that glass mansion of yours my friend. YOU can't grasp how thrusters can work in space despite an article on the topic and MULTIPLE real-world examples, including one you can replicate yourself without too much difficulty, yet YOU maintain that the question has not been sufficiently answered. No. It has, you just cannot, or will not, accept it.
*you're
Come on man.
But it IS a small group. Their board of directors lists 6 people, 3 of whom are engineers (and PEs). The staff lists 2 more people, neither of whom are engineers. The lead volunteers lists 5 more people, none of whom are engineers. And the contributing authors lists 2 people, one of whom is an engineer.
So 4 engineers (of whom 3 are PEs) is a pretty small group in the context of the overall group of engineers and PEs.
Their IG claims "More than 3,000 architects & engineers call for a real investigation into the destruction of all 3 WTC skyscrapers on 9/11." But considering there are over 113,000 licensed architects in the US, and over 1.6 million engineers in the US
You have LESS THAN 0.2% of them showing support for this. That's 1 in 571. But without a full list of people who support it, I'm skeptical it's even that many. That's my conspiracy on a conspiracy.
The 113,000 are architects though, so probably not qualified to speak on structural engineering. I guess we'd have to see what percent of structural/civil engineers are among those "3000+" people and do that math that way. Why'd you pick the smaller number of less-relevant people and not the larger number of engineers? And I KNOW neither of us have even even a fraction of 2.3T to bet haha.
Lol. It's wild, considering not only would most architects not be qualified to speak definitively and authoritatively on catastrophic structural collapse and failure, but neither would most engineers. And of those engineers, only some are civil engineers. And even most of them don't specialize in structural engineering. And even fewer are forensic structural engineers.
You don't have to be in a vacuum to test out the skateboard example... you keep digging that hole of what I hope is feigned ignorance deeper man...Sorry I’ll go throw a ball next time I’m skateboarding in a vacuum
