Messages

Scavenger

Look at the evidence again. If it were a real fire I'd expect to see more paper, trees and people burning. I don't see that. It's just the cars. I can't say for certain what phenomena is doing that but I think it's pretty cool to think about. It's science. It might be something similar to a microwave oven that just targets water molecules. If you watch the end of the video they talk about cold fusion, something that is somewhat of a scientific myth at this stage. From what I understand, early experiments have been carried out by a few scientists that relate to cold fusion. One such scientist is John Brockis

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bockris

Curiously, Judy Wood does not have a Wikipedia entry.

I never mentioned the word laser and I don't think Dr Wood did either. A laser is something hot, isn't it? The evidence seems to point to a cold process.

Mandle

Thanks for actually watching the video. I encourage you to watch the rest though. Keep an open mind.

I believe if there were any issues or questions regarding Dr Wood's data, then NIST would have been the first to jump on it. They haven't. Not as yet since 2007 when Dr Wood's request for corrections was filed.

[FACT:]

Ok. Let's try this again..

FACT: Cars were destroyed in unexplained ways by apparent spontaneous combustion as shown in many photographs and videos. The cars were curiously "toasted" AFTER destruction of the towers. No organic things like people or trees were toasted though. Some videos show cars that appear to be on fire, but the "weird fire" targeted certain materials on the car e.g. a police car plastic lights and tyre were not affected but the surrounding metal was.

The planes obviously took center stage. The planes and the endless talk about them were a distraction from the things that were there in plain sight too, such as the cars and Building 7.

Again. Building 7 was the third to collapse that day, but this event was overshadowed by the taller buildings collapsing and the planes. No plane hit Building 7. The NIST report explanation is that a miscellaneous fire caused the building to collapse. If fire caused Building 7 to collapse, it would be the first ever fire-induced collapse of a steel-frame high-rise in the known universe.

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but..

I encourage EVERYONE to watch the video in its entirity before forming an opinion. I find this stuff intriguing. You should too! Don't judge a book by it's cover.

[FACT:]

FACT: Cars were destroyed in unexplained ways by apparent spontaneous combustion. There are many photographs and videos including news reports showing this. There is even a before and after photograph of a full car park; the cars were curiously "toasted" AFTER destruction of the towers. The images did not receive much publicity in the aftermath.

The planes obviously took center stage and got all the attention that day. But just because we saw it on TV replayed again and again and again does not make it any more true than the cars. The planes appear to be a distraction from the other stuff going on.

And what about Building 7? That building was the third to collapse that day, but like the cars did not receive much attention. No plane hit that building. The NIST report explanation is that a fire somehow started as a result of the destruction of the other two taller buildings, and that the fire caused one single column to fail leading to a total global collapse of the building, symmetrically and neatly into it's own footprint. If fire caused Building 7 to collapse, it would be the first ever fire-induced collapse of a steel-frame high-rise in the known universe.

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but..

I encourage EVERYONE to watch the video in its entirity before forming an opinion.

[Fact.]

A Google search gives me these definitions.

Fact.
noun
A thing that is known or proved to be true.

Conjecture.
noun
An opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.

--------------------------------------

Used in 9/11 context.

FACT:  Cars were destroyed in unexplained ways by apparent spontaneous combustion.

CONJECTURE: The weapon doesn't exist.

--------------------------------------

Talking about questions of who did it and why are distractions from looking at the evidence. Again, I encourage EVERYONE to look at the extensive evidence Dr Wood has compiled in the video.

Thank you Cuiki for actually watching the video.

Again, I encourage EVERYONE to watch it. It is a compilation of evidence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

SOME of the evidence is:

1. The towers fell at free fall speed.

2. The retaining wall structure known as the "bathtub" at the base of the buildings was not significantly damaged. More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process.

3. The seismic signal was too small compared to other controlled demolitions (in particular building 7 that was not much greater than background noise).

4. The debris pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings.

5. Copious dust was created, covering the streets and floating away.

6. Vehicles "toasted" in strange ways found near the site and several blocks away.

7. "Weird fires" with the appearance of fire, but without evidence of heating.

8. Unburnt paper littering the streets.

9. "Melting" steel cap workers boots, but without high heat.

10. Air tanks on fire trucks and fire trucks exploding that were parked near the WTC

11. Hurricane Erin, located just off Long Island on 9/11/01, went virtually unreported in the days leading up to 9/11, including omission of this Hurricane on the morning weather map.

12. Tritium, an extremely rare hydrogen isotope associated with nuclear reactions, was found in abundance at the site.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see there is overwhelming evidence and hence why the video is lengthy. The evidence is there and the official story does not explain it, let alone acknowledge it.

"Conspiracy theory" has a stigma attached to it. Interestingly however, a recent social psychological study shows that people of "conventionalist" or anti-conspiracy persuasion may not be the mainstream now.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/11/22/scientific-study-reveals-conspiracy-theorists-sane/

To avoid bias, let's not label this conspiracy. Let's call it what it is. It's simply evidence you weren't aware of until now.

[Long video (~2.5 hrs)]

Is anyone familiar with the 9/11 research by Dr Judy Wood?

Long video (~2.5 hrs)

http://youtu.be/bITl3lmbWb8

Short video (~15mins)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hBG1LBALXQ&sns=em

I discovered Dr Wood's work earlier this year and have become obsessed with it. Her research is not conspiracy theory. It is evidence. And it is overwhelming evidence too. It is evidence that was somehow obscured from public awareness for a long time but is now readily available. And the evidence must be explained.

I like Dr Wood's approach to the subject. She presents information in a methodical, captivating and creative way. But it's the actual evidence she presents that speaks for itself. It is simply mind boggling.

I felt compelled to share this. People need to know this.

9/11 was basically a crime scene. The first question we ask in any crime is WHAT happened. Then HOW it happened. Then finally WHO did it and WHY. The problem is we were told the answer to those last two questions immediately after the event but bypassed the important first question of WHAT THE FUCK actually happened!

I personally remember watching the horror of 9/11 on the family TV as it unfolded. It was shortly before my final exams at high school and I was 18 years old. It all seemed so surreal and unbelievable. But everyone just accepted the images we were watching and the accompanying interpretation and side stories. I think we'd all been conditioned by similar scenes and plots from dozens of movies we'd all watched prior to the tragic event.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was the government agency responsible for explaining the technical aspects of the demise of the World Trade Center buildings (including building 7). I believe Dr Wood is the only person to date to refute the NIST reports by filing a formal request for corrections.

While the implications of Dr Wood's research are mind blowing, I find it more unbelievable that more people didn't see the reality from the start. The evidence was right there all along and witnessed by many. The only thing missing from 9/11 was a movie soundtrack.

Looks good Erenan. I'll check that out a bit later.

If you think 40% are acceptable odds on a double-or-nothing bet, I'd be happy to bet against you! In any case, the question defined "reasonable" as "would you be making more money than losing it in the long run," and so the answer is no, you won't.

Fair enough. Just as well I'm not a gambling man!

Back to selmiak's cup problem..

you have these feelings again and are really emotional on the internet today because you want to share these emotions.
But to not have smiley spammers, the forum admin has limited the number of smileys to 3 per post.
How many different ways are there to express your important emotions with a set of 20 smileys?

The number of combinations is

C(n,r) = n! / ( r! (n - r)! )

Where
n = total number of distinguishable objects
r = sample size

So for 20 different mug emoticons (n = 20) and 3 selections (r = 3) therefore... (waiting... online combinatorics calculator in process...) ahem, the answer is 1140

<insert nerdy emoticon>

Here's another problem involving mugs..

I'm feeling ambivalent today. I have 5 and 4 and 3 at my disposal.

How many different ways can I arrange all those mugs in a line?

You can draw as many as you wish, and if your total score is 10 points or more, you'll get paid double the amount of money you bet, and if you lose, you lose all of it.

I interpret this as win or loose. If the marbles add up to at least 10 and exclude marble 'X' then you win.

This is how I approached the problem:

Spoiler

[close]

So the answer is:

a) Pick 3 marbles

b) Given you know to pick 3 marbles then you'll have a 40% chance of a win.

It is a 40% chance each time you play. The odds aren't too bad.

Edit: Made a few errors before with the total combinations.. now fixed. Thank-you online Combinations Calculator!

I believe this might be similar to the 'finding a good toilet' problem?

http://youtu.be/ZWib5olGbQ0

My answer..

a) 3 marbles gives you the best chance (40%) of a good outcome.

For 1, 2, 4, and 5 marbles, the chances of a good outcome respectively are 1/6, 1/3, 1/3, 1/6

My method was just grouping the possibilities and counting them. I've forgotten the formulas.

b) Given you know to pick 3 marbles, it's a reasonable game because 40% is not bad. It's nearly 50%

Typically in these situations some dialog options would be available.

e.g.

Duck: (In 1930s gangster talk). Everybody just stay calm, see? And no one gets hurt, see?

Jimmy: Wait! Maybe we can make a deal!

Duck: I'm all ears. Make it quick squirt!

Jimmy:

1. Let us go and we'll let you off with a stern warning.
2. Let us go and we'll reward you with a generous supply of bread crumbs.
3. Let us go and we'll tell you the Secret of Monkey Island.

etc..

I loved D.Duck 2! Never played D.Duck 1 (or D.Duck 3 for that matter) but will definitely give both a go one day. I don't know why I started with 2, but then again I played Duzz Quest 2 before 1, so maybe that's just me.

What a cliff hanger!

Will our hero's escape the peculiar poultry perpetrator? Or will they be.. DUCK SOUP!

Find out after this short festive intermission..

Hehe! Reminds me of part of my wedding speech that I did in Chinese directed to my new in-laws. I followed up with the literal English translation, which from my vague memory went something like: thank-you for cultivating like this excellent daughter. She will much bring come happy.

Ooooh. The plot thickens..

>> Sniff corpse.

[Mia on her 1st birthday]

I wonder.. maybe in another 18 years, when someone revives this thread again, will people still be congratulating me on the birth of my 20 year old daughter?

Anyway, here's some photos so we're all on the same page..



Mia on her 1st birthday

 

Approaching age 2


By staggering coincidence, I've also just recently discovered there is a place in Western Australia called Monkey Mia!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_Mia

We've got to go there one day! They have dolphins there apparently. Better than the seaweed we get here.

Fantastic mate! She'll be two next month. Where has the time gone?! She's now walking, speaking a hybrid of at least two different languages, and at any one time, just when you think she's at the best age, it gets better!

Here we go..

Sinitrena - I like how you've revisited your own creations and brought them all together. I like it when stories mix like this. You must have enjoyed writing it.

Baron - I love this latest batch of crazy characters from a clearly mental author.

Both  stories are well written and explore the theme in a completely different way. Baron gives us the reluctant protagonist all too familiar with the Author's demented fantasies, while Sinitrena, placing herself in the roll of the author, depicts a depressing world where all her forgotten creations dwell. I believe Sinitrena's story is cleverer in this regard and arguably the better interpretation (or best use) of the theme.

I'd say Baron is the winner in the other categories. I think I'm just a sucker for Baron's comedic, cartoon-like writings. I got a bit of a Kill Bill vibe too.

Well, it looks like that sub-plot has come to a bit of a dead end.

>> Climb ladder to roof.

Ha! Good work Baron. Great to see your absurdist pulp noir characters brought to life again through this medium. I'm still waiting for the Tarantino version.

Well, I was going to suggest pushing the flaming barrel into the alley but Mandle's idea of pushing it to the front entrance works just as well. But what about security?

Sorry guys and gals. I've failed to come up with a writing piece. I was tempted with the idea that 'history is written by the winners' as a premise and thought I'd write about a high profile figure in society being controlled by some hidden ruling elite. But the creative juices unfortunately stopped flowing beyond that. Oh well. Fact is stranger than fiction, so the real story of whatever is actually happening behind the scenes in this world would undoubtedly prove to be a better read than any tripe I'd eventually produce.