What do you do with your iPhone?

team47b

You do know they can make plastic sandwich bags out of hemp oil.

dinyull

Can they make tin foil hats out of hemp oil?

Manc33

Let me just get in touch with all the kids currently taking hemp oil for their epilepsy to tell them about how they are wearing tin foil hats, I am sure they will take a lot of notice and stop taking the oil immediately and revert back to having epileptic fits every day.

simon_masterson

Loose Change is available on YouTube as well; I'm guessing you find that credible also?

Manc33

Simon Masterson wrote:

Loose Change is available on YouTube as well; I'm guessing you find that credible also?

Its not a question of whether the video itself is credible, but the people in it. Loose Change is one of the more watered down documentaries. It blames the US Government and pretty much never mentions Israel in any important context. Not sure if it mentions the dancing Israeli's (Mossad guys dressed as Muslims celebrating the towers falling), but it probably doesn't.

So that is one I wouldn't take as seriously as one where for example architects and engineers have compiled the video, like with the Richard Gage one "Blueprint for 911 truth". That one is a bit dry and drags on, but it is probably about the most informative one I have seen although surprise surprise, the dancing Israeli's aren't mentioned in it, or if they are, very briefly.

Is Loose Change the only one you've heard of?

There must be at least 20 other documentaries on 911 and that's the one you pick. No wonder its all wacky to you then. I wouldn't mind if anyone calling me this and that had watched anything I am posting but no one ever has! It gets dismissed out of hand which to me is pretty ridiculous. I dismissed it myself until I watched the various documentaries about it.

Painful Deceptions was one of the first ones about it and is still one of the best ones.

If you just stick to the facts its obvious it was a controlled demolition. Of course the whole thing was infiltrated ages ago, hence all the "space beams took the towers down" theories we can ignore. Too many anomalies but I know about those anomalies and I doubt you do if you haven't even watched anything to comment on it.

Bottom line is people comment instantly on something they have not even seen, or would give any time at all to (except to reply here with guys wearing tin foil hats so you don't have to think any more about whether it might be true).

The best one is "They can't cover that up, it would all come out" when it is all coming out and has been pretty much since it happened. :roll:

Here's a question no one ever answers... if fire can completely demolish a steel and concrete building so it turns into rubble and falls into its own footprint in under ten seconds, why aren't demolition teams now using this amazing new money saving method (fire alone) to do demolitions?

Why are they still using charges?

According to the "official" story of 911, fire alone (on two floors) made the 47 story skyscraper fall down in under ten seconds. I expect all the controlled demolition teams will be ditching all those expensive explosives and simply holding a Bic lighter to structures to bring them down since that's now supposedly possible?

vermin

So, in this one thread you have outwitted various other forumites who are professionals in internet security, medicine and structural engineering, all of whom are in agreement with their global peer groups. You really are quite the polymath aren't you!

I'm just relieved my humble education hasn't burdened me with the same powers of insight.

By the way, you do realise 'they' are reading all your posts, don't you. Especially the ones where you do that code thing with the capital letters.

bondurant

I'm afraid the Painful Deceptions video appears to have been put together by someone who is demonstrably insane, looking at his website: http://hugequestions.com/Eric/

Manc33

Bondurant wrote:

I'm afraid the Painful Deceptions video appears to have been put together by someone who is demonstrably insane, looking at his website: http://hugequestions.com/Eric/

What about "Blueprint For 9/11 Truth" that was put together by architects and engineers?

Guys that have spent decades in their field whom are now risking their careers, are also insane?

FatTed

In reply to the question "what do you do with your iPhone?" well i make and receive phone calls and use a few apps. When I go cycling I put it in a Sandwich bag and stuff it in my rear pocket, the one with a zip, happens to be a Rapha pro team jersey at the moment.
I of course put hemp oil in my water bottle and when I get home smoke a spliff.

Manc33

What is a sandwich bag anyway, a food bag?

imposter2.0

Manc33 wrote:

What is a sandwich bag anyway, a food bag?

really?

Coach H

Manc33 wrote:

Here's a question no one ever answers... if fire can completely demolish a steel and concrete building so it turns into rubble and falls into its own footprint in under ten seconds, why aren't demolition teams now using this amazing new money saving method (fire alone) to do demolitions?

Why are they still using charges?

According to the "official" story of 911, fire alone (on two floors) made the 47 story skyscraper fall down in under ten seconds. I expect all the controlled demolition teams will be ditching all those expensive explosives and simply holding a Bic lighter to structures to bring them down since that's now supposedly possible?

MASSIVELY OFF TOPIC but OK I'll answer for you, as you seem to claim no one does. (This is not my specialist subject by the way but I don't think it needs to be)

Fire used to be used for demolition in this way for CENTURIES. Assuming you are old enough to remember a guy called Fred Dibnah (Steeplejack from Bolton who gained some TV notoriety in the 80's/90's), his preferred method of bringing down brick boiler chimneys was to light a fire at the base. Very effective at bringing down chimneys BUT relied on consistency of construction within the part of the structure being burned and consistency in the fire conditions in order to get it to fall in its footprint(ish). This consistency is obviously unlikely in brick structures that are decades old but FAR more likely to be present in steel/concrete structures such as WT and also where the intensity and extent of the burn is more consistent in relative terms due to its scale.

So why don't modern Demo crews use it on these structures? Dead simple; because the point at which the structure will fall is hugely unpredictable and its difficult to set up and control the burn compared to pressing a detonator.

No conspiracy theory but scientific (and common sense) fact.

As an aside I believe Fred Dibnah lost his Demo licence due to his continuing use of using fires to demolish chimneys. The HSE knew he was continuing to do this as the BBC filmed and transmitted him doing it after he had been given a notice to stop. This was also the reason the BBC stopped producing programs about his steeplejacking and started doing shows about his traction engine hobby (to still capitalise on his TV persona). There is a possibility this is just folklore but there was definitely footage of Fred running out of the way of a falling chimney as the fire had not burned evenly and it ended up falling towards where he and the film crew were standing! That doesn't happen with modern explosive demo techniques, which is why they don't stuff straw into structures and set fire to it any more even though its possible to create the same results.

markhewitt1978

Small explosives are just easier to place and control than lighting fires, there's no more reason than that.

team47b

The flash point of hemp oil is 165c.

chris_bass

team47b wrote:

The flash point of hemp oil is 165c.

that is just what 'they' want you to think, everyone on youtube knows it is really 167c, its just another way 'they' are controlling its use.

Tjgoodhew

Early nomination for Thread of the Year ??

team47b

Chris Bass wrote:

team47b wrote:

The flash point of hemp oil is 165c.

that is just what 'they' want you to think, everyone on youtube knows it is really 167c, its just another way 'they' are controlling its use.

You spotted my little lie, 165c is the smoke point, so I reckon you're right 167c should do it, dam you youtuber

veronese68

Manc33 wrote:

Here's a question no one ever answers... if fire can completely demolish a steel and concrete building so it turns into rubble and falls into its own footprint in under ten seconds, why aren't demolition teams now using this amazing new money saving method (fire alone) to do demolitions?

Why are they still using charges?

According to the "official" story of 911, fire alone (on two floors) made the 47 story skyscraper fall down in under ten seconds. I expect all the controlled demolition teams will be ditching all those expensive explosives and simply holding a Bic lighter to structures to bring them down since that's now supposedly possible?

I think a couple of wings full of aviation fuel hold a bit more propellant than a Bic lighter. :roll:

lancew

OK I use a Topeak ride case RX with my iPhone 5S.

Works a charm, my only issue is that there isn't an iPhone 5C case for it (for friends who I would recommend it to), and you have to have a stem that has M5 bolts which does not come with a Specialized Allez. They do a 6, 5(s) and 4 case.

It's not that cheap but it works a charm and puts the phone at a really good angle to use both navigation and even filming as you can angle the case up and down and put it horizontal or vertical. It also has a silicone cover to keep it waterproof.

imposter2.0

Veronese68 wrote:

I think a couple of wings full of aviation fuel hold a bit more propellant than a Bic lighter. :roll:

I suspect he is talking about 'Building 7' - which also collapsed on 9/11, despite never actually being hit by either of the planes involved.

veronese68

Imposter wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I think a couple of wings full of aviation fuel hold a bit more propellant than a Bic lighter. :roll:

I suspect he is talking about 'Building 7' - which also collapsed on 9/11, despite never actually being hit by either of the planes involved.

Aah, my mistake then. Couldn't be arsed to read through all of the nonsense so skimmed it and only picked up on it later.

chris_bass

manc33 has gone very quiet, anyone else worried that they found out he was on to them and they bumped him off?

bondurant

He's safe. There are far bigger lunatics ahead of him in the queue, as I found last night when looking at some of the videos he posted plus related nuttery.

Eye opening.

bondurant

Like the writer of this, for instance: https://erichufschmidandthejews.wordpress.com

city_boy

Coach H wrote:

MASSIVELY OFF TOPIC but OK I'll answer for you, as you seem to claim no one does. (This is not my specialist subject by the way but I don't think it needs to be)

Fire used to be used for demolition in this way for CENTURIES. Assuming you are old enough to remember a guy called Fred Dibnah (Steeplejack from Bolton who gained some TV notoriety in the 80's/90's), his preferred method of bringing down brick boiler chimneys was to light a fire at the base. Very effective at bringing down chimneys BUT relied on consistency of construction within the part of the structure being burned and consistency in the fire conditions in order to get it to fall in its footprint(ish). This consistency is obviously unlikely in brick structures that are decades old but FAR more likely to be present in steel/concrete structures such as WT and also where the intensity and extent of the burn is more consistent in relative terms due to its scale.

You're right it is massively off topic but I feel compelled to correct you slightly. Fred didnt actually use the fire itself to drop the chimneys. He actually cut away a recess in the bricks at the bottom the chimney on side of the direction of preferred fall and used timber props to then temporarily support the chimney in lieu of the bricks. He then started a fire at the base to burn away the timber props causing the chimney to collapse, hopefully in the desired direction!

That's my piece of useless information imparted for the day :roll:

downhill paul

We have gone from discussing what case/bag/pocket/handlebar mount to use with your iphone during a ride, to conspiracy medical theory's, building demolition and what happened on 9/11. plus god knows what else that I couldn't be arsed reading through. talk about diversity.

Manc33

No steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire - except on 9/11.

You'd know this if you watched Blueprint for 9/11 Truth.

Most people don't even know three towers fell that day.

The best (and saddest at the same time) answer I ever got after telling someone about WTC7 was "I don't know anything about that tower" after only just discussing with me how it must all be above board etc. :shock:

We are our own worst enemies, seriously!

That to me just proves people want to live in their own little world and have some inkling this stuff is going on but can't take it, well OK I can understand that, but admit it then. I mean I never ask anyone to believe what I say, you only need to know it anyway.

Many times people have suddenly realized "What that guy said 5 years ago must be right because of this" and I don't care who believes what or how many tin foil hat pics are posted, I am only relaying the info, plus I have had it for the last ten years talking about this stuff anyway and it has never put me off because I know why people have to do it. I did it myself for the first few weeks of finding anything out.

Only when you switch off the mighty Wurlitzer in the corner (or stop reading the Daily Fail) you can start to get other info, I mean info far more detailed about an event. You also find stuff going on that is never reported on the news despite being a bigger story than anything the news has on it. Yep, thats because it isn't the news folks, not in reality, it is a gigantic bullchit machine.

So who are the terrorists this week then ummmm Australians? Buddhists? Lesbians? :roll: The sad thing is the media could convince people any/all of those are terrorists. You'd have people saying "Bloody Australians, I always knew there was something not quite right about them" and they WOULD believe it because it was on the news. Look at how on a leash people are to it and the unshakable faith they have in it being totally correct and unquestionable.

Thank god for the internet.

bobmcstuff

My phone goes in something called an ECase, which is essentially a glorified, more rugged sandwich bag. Warranty on the waterproofing claims to cover the contents of the bag.

Manc33

I honestly don't know what a sandwich bag is, no.

Is it something southerners say? Up here its a food bag.

I remember the first time I saw "Manchester Tarts" being sold on a butty van, was laughing my head off. I was in my thirties. :oops:

I thought "union" said onion until I got to about 25 years old, I wish I was joking.

I only learned recently that "incredible" means unbelievable. I thought it meant amazing.

chris_bass

Manc33 wrote:

No steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire - except on 9/11.

You'd know this if you watched Blueprint for 9/11 Truth.

Most people don't even know three towers fell that day.

The best (and saddest at the same time) answer I ever got after telling someone about WTC7 was "I don't know anything about that tower" after only just discussing with me how it must all be above board etc. :shock:

We are our own worst enemies, seriously!

That to me just proves people want to live in their own little world and have some inkling this stuff is going on but can't take it, well OK I can understand that, but admit it then. I mean I never ask anyone to believe what I say, you only need to know it anyway.

Many times people have suddenly realized "What that guy said 5 years ago must be right because of this" and I don't care who believes what or how many tin foil hat pics are posted, I am only relaying the info, plus I have had it for the last ten years talking about this stuff anyway and it has never put me off because I know why people have to do it. I did it myself for the first few weeks of finding anything out.

Only when you switch off the mighty Wurlitzer in the corner (or stop reading the Daily Fail) you can start to get other info, I mean info far more detailed about an event. You also find stuff going on that is never reported on the news despite being a bigger story than anything the news has on it. Yep, thats because it isn't the news folks, not in reality, it is a gigantic bullchit machine.

So who are the terrorists this week then ummmm Australians? Buddhists? Lesbians? :roll: The sad thing is the media could convince people any/all of those are terrorists. You'd have people saying "Bloody Australians, I always knew there was something not quite right about them" and they WOULD believe it because it was on the news. Look at how on a leash people are to it and the unshakable faith they have in it being totally correct and unquestionable.

Thank god for the internet.

Why do you not believe the news but believe everything on YouTube?