Vetting Shills and Trolls: Classic Examples

[nonhocapito]

Sigh. I am assuming the demolition of the Murrah building shown in that video is real, if anything because it actually looks like a real demolition.

The images of building collapse on 9/11 are all fake, they are created at the computer and do not describe reality.
So any comparison between these two videos can only mean that you are trying to slip by the idea that the images of 9/11 are real, ignoring all the evidence to the contrary available on this forum.

Besides, it is completely ridiculous to imply that the connection between the Oklahoma bombing and the WTC is that in the end the buildings were demolished. This is no connection. You have one post to make things more interesting or useful in any way, after which I'm deleting this thread.

[pov603]

Its not hard to draw the similarities between these two events.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Atbrn4k55lA

Funny, that at 2:51-2:56 the silver car in the foreground stops at the initial zoom-in and then only moves again at the zoom-out.
Maybe the computer hacks can't multi-task when generating one 'cgi' next to another or at least couldn't then?

[corncob2]

[Admin Observation by SCS: Notice how this “Corncob2” character was on Cluesforum for just a shade over 48 hours, and managed to post 12 times. Quite a pesky hit and run job.]

What a thread.

I originally found these forums through a YouTube comment somewhere, strangely enough. I'll admit the 9/11 stuff was (and still is) highly intriguing. However, I was stunned and frankly extremely embarrassed to find this section.

I'm not going to 'introduce myself' in some other thread so I can make a comment here, and you can ban my ass if you like. The statements made in this thread in regards to satellite technology are absolutely laughable. Just recently, I've been studying geomatics and remote sensing at the university level. I've also worked as a field surveyor in projects in northern Canada, using highly precise GPS receivers.

If you deny the existence of satellites and suggest that GPS is some kind of ionospheric ping system that doesn't utilize computers that are in orbit around the earth, that's fine, you're just likely mentally ill. On even a cheap GPS system you can watch the display of satellites in orbit around your location on the monitor. This is interesting as you can watch the accuracy of your measurements increase as your satellite coverage improves and the thus triangulation of your location becomes known to a greater precision. These geographic coordinates are not invented from thin air, billions of dollars are riding on this information and its accuracy in the world of construction, for example.

In regards to the world of remote sensing I would point you folks to the large number of very reputable academic journals which have been cataloging the developments of these technologies and associated academic fields for more than a decade (remote sensing of environment is one big one). Thousands upon thousands of academics, scientists and engineers have been involved in the development of this technology. This is not the results of a conspiracy, it's a developing and collaborative scientific effort whose very development can be examined from square one. The technology is also consistent with what is understood about electrical engineering, rocketry, etc. This body of information is massive, and can be viewed by anyone.

Thousands of engineers make careers of developing the technology in remote sensing, brilliant mathematicians and academics have collaborated to produce sensors and platforms which are useful to science (the landsat program for example) and THEN, the most damning of all, Geologists, Hydrologists, Biologists and Ecologists etc. use the measurements provided by remote sensing platforms in peer-reviewed research.

To sum it up: The Earth as viewed by space is, surprise, consistent with reality as measured by other sources. Real scientists have used satellite technology as the basis for entire careers spanning tens of years while over-stimulated morons on the internet were posting in threads like this.

Again, I'm frankly embarrassed for ever taking Simons work seriously based on this whole section. What a joke.

-Perp # 124135135

[corncob2]

To Really dumb this down for those of you that deny the absolute fact of GPS satellites, I was working in a northern location where the ENTIRE survey crew would structure its coffee breaks around the location of satellites. This was based on standards set out by the oil company for whom we worked... you know, that multi-billion dollar entity with trained, educated people calling the shots based on legitimate information.

[corncob2]

Let's forget the so-called bullshitologist and their reliance on modern remote sensing to inform their science and decision making, how about world governments that rely on the constantly-recorded images of the ever-changing earths surface from remote sensing systems? This ever-dynamic and accurate visual information is not created in a quantum computer on Venus, the Earths surface is CONSTANTLY measured and imaged and more importantly archived by satellite based technology such as Aster, IKONOS and Quickbird. To deny this is absolutely idiotic. I can find quickbird imagery of your city last march with the trees and fields exactly as they appeared at that time, why? Because there are reliable and awesome (0.6m) resolution instruments in space, and they're in use every day by real decision makers. With enough money you can task these instruments to take custom measurements at your request for a given objective as well.

Keep raging against those damned "ologists", champ.

http://www.satimagingcorp.com/satellite ... kbird.html

[corncob2]

The moon landing? The space program? I didn't come here to analyze some goofy old NASA footage.

I came here to state that while people here smugly deny the existence of space borne platforms and sensors, terabytes of information about the earths surface is being recorded by this technology. Airplanes! Wow!

Here's a great exercise. Go to mapmart.com. You can use their tools to define any fucking point on the earths surface and then scroll through visual data spanning back a number of years from a number of different sensors. When one of the sensors has a bad pixel or other technical malfunction, surprise surprise, years of imagery all over the planet will be negatively effected by the malfuction. If you really think the absolute ridiculous wealth of data collected by quickbird, worldview etc. etc. are not the result of space-based systems, great, YOU are the one making outrageous claims with no evidence.

[corncob2]

I think where you're going wrong is that you assume that the mere existence of an abundance of data proves that the data is true. However there is no logical reason to assume that. The existence of data only proves that the data exists, not that it is true or that its source is as claimed.

Wrong. I am not pointing to 'the data' as if it is an abstract monolith from which truth emanates. "The data" are an internally consistent body of information based on an active scientific field of inquiry that is ALSO consistent with other fields of legitimate inquiry. I wont spoon feed you any more than that.

The whole coffee break statement was based on this: I was not allowed to take geographic location 'measurements' (which would be used to define the location of extremely expensive industrial equipment) when satellite coverage was poor. These decisions were made based on the PREDICTABLE, PERIODIC and ORBITAL nature of GPS satellites.

[corncob2]

Internally consistent? So are the beliefs of most major religions. That doesn't mean they're true. "Internally consistent" data can simply mean the lies match. Adolph Hitlers philosophy of life was "internally consistent."

How irrelevant. You missed the important part of my statement where I alluded to the fact that this technology is consistent with everything else that we know about technology, science and the universe. The technology simply exists and people interact with it, use it, and swear at errors and problems that are the emergent result of a system of orbital sensors and transmitters every fucking day. This may be inconsistent with some fringe concept that you hold to be gospel, but that doesn't make your doubts any more realistic. Fortunately, I'm guessing we live within a reality where your beliefs and assessments don't hold very much weight to influence others.

[Kentrailer]

What I'm stating is that I have used orbital systems to solve real problems of all descriptions and will continue to do so reliably because this shit works....

What a stream of shit! mindless fools might "wonder the world"

A stream of shit huh? Cool down there buddy..

Just because you use something doesn't mean you know how it works.

Satellite dishes for example- that pick up television signals are focused at a geostationary location in the sky that most people think is a satellite owned by the TV station.. Who's to say maybe ground based large satellite dishes aren't just broadcasting a high energy signal to a local area on the ionosphere, which the other smaller dishes in turn pick up?

Most people assume their votes are counted, because they drop them into a box and go on faith Sadly, the whole thing is a rigged joke.

Most people believe that planes hit the WTC, because they were told they were- it's not true.

Most people think we landed on the moon... you getting the point?

There is no such thing as a dumb question- so cool your jets Cornholio.

Believing in something you can't see, simply because other people tell you it is there is a faith-based exercise, we on this forum are more interested in hard proof.

My post was here about the ISS faked footage under "satellites" because technically what it is (or is supposed to be). Would you like to discuss the footage I posted earlier, or just continue your two line diatribes (which, frankly, I'm suprised haven't gotten you banned yet).

[Kentrailer]

Terrence. I'd like to ask YOU a question before we proceed. Just the other day I was watching a live TV feed from India (transmitted solely by underground cables and well-protected, high-speed boats, I assure you), and you know what? It was raining.. pouring.. a downpour even! And you know what else? While the rain was absolutely thrashing the people that I could observe through the television, MY ass was dry. And I'm on the earth, too! Dry as a bone! Can you explain this?

Can we please ban this person? They are just making filler crap comments and trying to provocateur the good conversation we were having-

It's funny how you just "appeared" right after how I exposed exactly how the ISS hoax was done.

[Kentrailer]

How do we know those points aren't just the coordinates that ground-based satellite dishes are being programmed for?

Bouncing a signal off the ionosphere?



An app of where the "signal" will be doesn't really prove anything.

[Kentrailer]

I would ask in a mutually respectful manner that: ...
Corncob2 please refrain from more cynical and blatant ad hominem remarks and get back to the focus of provable information so that we may better bring this matter to a more coherent dialog for the benefit of all parties. From your opening remarks on this forum I have been happy to see another person who seems to have some hands on and academic experience with the subject at hand. I understand your frustration, but if it is kept to a minimum, your chances of making a case are greatly increased....

So, dear Mitch, how do you propose we entertain diplomatic and open-minded discussions with such entities? Do you believe that, for the sake of plurality/freedom of speech, this forum should allow such antics - no matter how rude/ antagonistic/ provocatorial they get? And lastly, what exactly do you mean by "dogmatic platform"? Isn't this forum's focus precisely to try and challenge/pick apart/shatter the many dogmas of our times?

So.. Simon.. hate to say it, but you sound exactly like "Mitch Matrixx"...

Doing a Search for "Mitch Matrixx" and "Corncob2" I see a lot of circular stuff going on regarding their posts.. This is obviously just multiple accounts set up by.. "ahem" the same person.

Your "allowing" Corncob to stay baffles the imagination.. especially considering your usually "strict" attitude toward such characters.. What's going on here?

[corncob2]

Kent - Interesting thought. A representation of reality that is based on a mountain of science may actually be completely false. Wow, consider my mind blown... The powers of your speculation are formidable!

In fact, you've inspired me... I would like you to find the Hydrogen atom which is exists within the cellular matrix at the furthest tip of your nose. Yes, that one... can you explain to me how the electrons of that atom are related to its nearest neighbors so that a relationship between these which is called a "bond" forms?

Good! Cool! I'm assuming you've provided an explanation which is consistent with the repeatable, observable laws that govern our universe. Of course, I doubt your description.. what I'd really like is a polaroid photograph. Can you provide that in order to substantiate your understanding of the laws of the universe? Thanks in advance.

[Kentrailer]

You know which users on this forum seem like maybe the same user.. corncob2.. Terence drew, lux, Mitch Matrixx, , Whatsgoingon, truthseeker.. and a few others

3 replies in 3 minutes.. two of them in the same minute?

[corncob2]

LOL! Maybe there are a few disparate individuals on the earth (well shielded from pesky asteroids) that are participating in this discussion. Maybe there are a number of people who are interested in truth rather than speculation. Maybe there are a number of people that enjoy watching speculative, paranoid fools squirm under the hard rays of sunlight.