Darius11 12 #1 May 20, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dn2M484o-k&feature=popular Love Mr. Ventura no BS take on things.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #2 May 20, 2009 Quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dn2M484o-k&feature=popular Love Mr. Ventura no BS take on things. Mr. Ventura is all BS on things ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #3 May 20, 2009 Dude tell me what I don't know. I have only watched a few of his interviews and I like what he says and how he says it. I even like the fact that he lives in Mexico and surfs for half the year.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #4 May 20, 2009 Never heard of either of them before but that Hannity is one irritating prick, like a mindless, yapping little dog that doesn't shut up.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #5 May 20, 2009 Quote Hannity is one irritating prick, like a mindless, yapping little dog that doesn't shut up. Yes he is. Every time I have watched him it’s like watching a religious sermon. His arguments are very passionate, and not based on any facts.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #6 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuote Hannity is one irritating prick, like a mindless, yapping little dog that doesn't shut up. Yes he is. Every time I have watched him it’s like watching a religious sermon. His arguments are very passionate, and not based on any facts. I've never seen him or listened to him - at least not that I am aware of. But from what I've heard, he is an extremist. I ignore extremists of pretty much any flavor. Jesse is more of an odd duck. Having him for a governor was like having the state run by a cartoon character at times. A straight talker to be sure, but sometimes he would behave more like Yosemite Sam or GI JOE than a governor. He'd often waffle between good common sense and irritating ignorance; depending on the topic. His political acumen was low, not in itself a poor trait, but also not likely to accomplish much given the slippery eels that occupy most of the legislative seats in this country." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #7 May 20, 2009 Hannity is annoying and preachy, but not an extremist. That word gets used a little too often by both sides.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #8 May 20, 2009 QuoteHannity is annoying and preachy, but not an extremist. That word gets used a little too often by both sides. Well said. I remember a while back Ventura was going on about how he believed in the 9/11 conspiracies. Whatever respect I had for him being a maverick was completely lost when I realized he was also a moron. I can't watch the youtube video, did he mention if he still believes in that crap?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #9 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteHannity is annoying and preachy, but not an extremist. That word gets used a little too often by both sides. Well said. I remember a while back Ventura was going on about how he believed in the 9/11 conspiracies. Whatever respect I had for him being a maverick was completely lost when I realized he was also a moron. I can't watch the youtube video, did he mention if he still believes in that crap? He said yesterday that the collapse of the WTC buildings is inconsistent with his demolition training, however, he also said that he could easily be convinced otherwise by setting a building on fire instead of blowing it up when it has been scheduled for demolition. He said he didn't believe the building would fall directly down as both did unless they were blown. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #10 May 20, 2009 QuoteHe said he didn't believe the building would fall directly down as both did unless they were blown. He should retake high school physics then.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #11 May 20, 2009 We pretty much never see buildings collapse except when they are planned, so we have nothing else for comparison. Also, the buildings did not fall directly down. They obviously didn't fall off to the side as much as they might have, but they definitely didn't fall straight down.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #12 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteHe said he didn't believe the building would fall directly down as both did unless they were blown. He should retake high school physics then. Yeah, that SEAL demolition training has nothing on high school physics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #13 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHe said he didn't believe the building would fall directly down as both did unless they were blown. He should retake high school physics then. Yeah, that SEAL demolition training has nothing on high school physics. Apparently not. The buildings fell exactly as they should have according to very basic laws of physics; specifically Newton's 1st and 2nd. They fell more or less straight down for the same reason the Jenga blocks in this video do not topple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9BmTmMEOhQ Buildings will topple if only one side fails, but if the center fails first, then they pretty much have to fall straight down.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #14 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHe said he didn't believe the building would fall directly down as both did unless they were blown. He should retake high school physics then. Yeah, that SEAL demolition training has nothing on high school physics. Apparently not. The buildings fell exactly as they should have according to very basic laws of physics; specifically Newton's 1st and 2nd. They fell more or less straight down for the same reason the Jenga blocks in this video do not topple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9BmTmMEOhQ I guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuote Hannity is one irritating prick, like a mindless, yapping little dog that doesn't shut up. Yes he is. Every time I have watched him it’s like watching a religious sermon. His arguments are very passionate, and not based on any facts. So, he's like Olberman or Matthews, then?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 May 20, 2009 QuoteI guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. My guess is that you've missed quite a bit.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteApparently not. The buildings fell exactly as they should have according to very basic laws of physics; specifically Newton's 1st and 2nd. They fell more or less straight down for the same reason the Jenga blocks in this video do not topple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9BmTmMEOhQ I guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. And *I* must have missed the part where they explained how fire modifies the effect of gravity - can you point me to a reference?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #18 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Hannity is one irritating prick, like a mindless, yapping little dog that doesn't shut up. Yes he is. Every time I have watched him it’s like watching a religious sermon. His arguments are very passionate, and not based on any facts. So, he's like Olberman or Matthews, then? I'd say they're roughly analogous. If you think Olbermann is a nut case, then you're seeing what the left sees in Hannity and what people in the middle see in both of them.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #19 May 20, 2009 of course. Olbermann and Matthews fill the same niche for the left that Limbaugh and Hannity fill for the right. It's just that Hannity's *style* is so offputting. I really don't understand why his guests allow themselves to be bullied like that. I swear if i was on that show i would just stop talking every time he interrupted me and let the gasbag deflate a bit.Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #20 May 20, 2009 QuoteSo, he's like Olberman or Matthews, then? Yes. Sold there souls for ratings.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #21 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteI guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. My guess is that you've missed quite a bit. I'm prepared to be dazzled. On one hand, I have a Navy SEAL trained in demolition and experienced in it as well talking about crashing a jet full of fuel into the upper levels of an iron framed building. He doesn't believe that the collapse of the building is consistent with the circumstances, but would like to recreate the circumstances to either support or disprove his theory. On the other hand, I have Quade. You have high school physics and jenga blocks. Tough decision as far as credibility. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #22 May 20, 2009 Quote I'm prepared to be dazzled. Well, then this should keep you occupied. https://www.mybedazzler.com/quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #23 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuote I'm prepared to be dazzled. Well, then this should keep you occupied. https://www.mybedazzler.com/ Even better than jenga blocks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #24 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. My guess is that you've missed quite a bit. I'm prepared to be dazzled. On one hand, I have a Navy SEAL trained in demolition and experienced in it as well talking about crashing a jet full of fuel into the upper levels of an iron framed building. He doesn't believe that the collapse of the building is consistent with the circumstances, but would like to recreate the circumstances to either support or disprove his theory. On the other hand, I have Quade. You have high school physics and jenga blocks. Tough decision as far as credibility. Maybe you (or Jesse) can tell us all where the demo was placed in this incident?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #25 May 20, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteApparently not. The buildings fell exactly as they should have according to very basic laws of physics; specifically Newton's 1st and 2nd. They fell more or less straight down for the same reason the Jenga blocks in this video do not topple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9BmTmMEOhQ I guess I missed the part of that video where the jenga blocks were set on fire. And *I* must have missed the part where they explained how fire modifies the effect of gravity - can you point me to a reference? His opinion is that the bottom of the iron support structure would have to be compromised for the building to collapse in the manner that it did. That would mean that the jet fuel and fire would have had to have made it all the way to the bottom of the building. He didn't think that was feasible. It was his opinion that the jet fuel would have burned up while it was still on the upper floors of the building and the base of the building would have had to have been blown for the collapse to occur. He said he could also be wrong and that we should recreate the circumstances to see what would happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
