Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Creative Speculation

superbeachnut

(381 posts)

8. that is funny

Reply to William Seger (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 22, 2014, 12:08 PM

Jun 2014

Missing a 900 plus foot wide 77 foot high Pentagon, does make a 200 or 150 foot wide zero foot high runway an impossible task for pilots for truth

pilots for truth failed to hit 911 targets in simulators, so they claim, said it was impossible, for them it is

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Open Invitation to Publicly Debate "William Seger" regarding the work of P4T. [View all] johndoeX Jun 2014 OP

This is the venue, go... superbeachnut Jun 2014 #1

Congratulations, Rob, you got one right! William Seger Jun 2014 #2

Thank you Seger! johndoeX Jun 2014 #3

why can't you debate here? because you are running away again superbeachnut Jun 2014 #6

What I've always wondered... William Seger Jun 2014 #7

that is funny superbeachnut Jun 2014 #8

Beachy screws the pooch again. johndoeX Jun 2014 #14

Case in point William Seger Jun 2014 #23

This is funny stuff superbeachnut Jun 2014 #30

no one takes YOU seriously William! n/t wildbilln864 Jun 2014 #4

(Sniff) Would it help... William Seger Jun 2014 #5

sniff... wildbilln864 Jun 2014 #11

Anytime you are ready.... let us know. We can set up a mutual venue agreed upon by you and me. superbeachnut Jun 2014 #9

Cap'n Bob can't bring weapons to this venue William Seger Jun 2014 #10

Jackpot! johndoeX Jun 2014 #12

Debate time, where is johndoeX when the debate is on superbeachnut Jun 2014 #13

Beachy - do you agree with Seger or not? johndoeX Jun 2014 #15

You could at least get the terminology right William Seger Jun 2014 #16

link? johndoeX Jun 2014 #17

Is that a "no"? William Seger Jun 2014 #18

Yes johndoeX Jun 2014 #19

Aw, c'mon, it's only 50 imaginary bucks William Seger Jun 2014 #22

Wrong again Seger... johndoeX Jun 2014 #26

You are not current, you can't instuct in flight now superbeachnut Jun 2014 #29

Drop by this other forum, too William Seger Jun 2014 #32

Two days and no reply, why am I not surprised. johndoeX Jun 2014 #33

Vd is defined as? superbeachnut Jun 2014 #34

I thought you already knew the definition of Vd..... johndoeX Jun 2014 #35

You can't explain "by an increase of 20 percent in equivalent airspeed at both constant Mach number" superbeachnut Jun 2014 #21

Stop evading Beachy... johndoeX Jun 2014 #27

Why can't you explain it? 7th time, you can't make a point superbeachnut Jun 2014 #28

Debate time superbeachnut Jun 2014 #20

Too bad Phillip Marshall isn't around to tell us nationalize the fed Jun 2014 #24

a paranoid conspiracy theorist kills himself and his kids superbeachnut Jun 2014 #25

"...absolutely no experience in Aviation nor Engineering. " delphi72 Jun 2014 #31

You and your crew have been losing public debates on dozens of websites for years, greyl Jun 2014 #36

And yet.... johndoeX Jun 2014 #37

lots of people lose public debates all the time.... wildbilln864 Jun 2014 #38

The most hilarious part is.... johndoeX Jun 2014 #39

yeppers! wildbilln864 Jun 2014 #40

Thank YOU! wildbillin'..... n/t johndoeX Jun 2014 #43

Debate is off, pilots for truth show their paranoid side superbeachnut Jun 2014 #41

Beachy, it has been debated long ago and put to bed. johndoeX Jun 2014 #42

Debate lost due to lack of physics at pilots for truth, and fake Vd definitions from journalist superbeachnut Jun 2014 #44

Post it again Beachy! johndoeX Jun 2014 #45

Last time he was asked to debate, he got upset superbeachnut Jun 2014 #46

Hmmm.. do you believe everything you read on the net? johndoeX Jun 2014 #48

Beachy, at what altitude what this pic taken? johndoeX Jun 2014 #47