Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 UK: Holy Smoke!
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  16:46:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Interesting how the news of this event seems to be developing. Instead of this being (as seemed obvious to Dude and I) a simple home-grown plot by disaffected British Muslims like the series of deadly London subway bombings, it's beginning to appear that this may have been a part of a long-planned Al Qaeda operation. These physicians may have been set up as moles within the British National Health system, just to allow them to act as suicide bombers. Doctors! Weird and bizarre.

Isn't religious faith, like a hydrogen bomb explosion, an awesome thing?



Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  17:07:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I predict that Iranian passports will be found!




Jerome, you really should not take offense when are called for shooting your mouth off with opinions based upon nothing whatsoever. Your repeated unevidenced, nonsensical pronouncements are growing wearying. Dude and I, though perhaps wrong in thinking these attacks were homegrown British ones, were at least basing our guesses upon the earlier London subway attacks, which were homegrown. You threw in Iran, apparently without a single stitch of a reason. But you got attention, right? Is that all that matters to you?


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 07/03/2007 21:02:59
Go to Top of Page

Dude
SFN Die Hard

USA
6891 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  18:53:15   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Dude a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Half said:
it's beginning to appear that this may have been a part of a long-planned Al Qaeda operation.


As one investigator from the UK said on TV today (I'll paraphrase), the lack of sophistication of these attacks indicate that Al-Qaeda was likely not involved. The people responsible were obviously radicalized, but were just copycats who lacked any real skill at causing harm. They had to set off their "bombs" with matches at close range, and there was no way their "bombs" were capable of exploding.

You can't just mix up propane, gasoline, and nails and expect it to explode...

These guys were (thankfully) complete amatures.


Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson

"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin

Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  19:02:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
If this is a "long-planned Al Qaeda operation", why was it relatively amature in comparison to the defeat of Americas air defense system?

This make little sense.


What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  19:08:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I predict that Iranian passports will be found!






Nope. Busted Jordanian Doc.

Sorry to break up the hate you were gonna get on for Iran from the fearmongering department of homeland security.



Another in the long list of examples of assuming what one means and arguing against that assumption.




More evidence of fundie activity.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, more often than not, it's a duck.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  19:16:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

If this is a "long-planned Al Qaeda operation", why was it relatively amature in comparison to the defeat of Americas air defense system?

This make little sense.




Gee, Dude said that based on the amateur nature of the bombs (Al-Qeida actually makes things go boom) it likely wasn't Al-Qeida.

And the defeat of the American air defense system? What? This is giving credit where none is due. The operatives who carried out the 9/11 attacks used the history of terrorist usage of planes and merely getting on the plane with concealed weapons.

Until 9/11/2001, terrorists blew up airplanes in flight (Lockerbie) or hijacked them to foriegn nations. They had not used the aircraft as a projectile to bring down tall buildings. This was a one time deal and the terrorist knew it.


Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  19:40:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

If this is a "long-planned Al Qaeda operation", why was it relatively amature in comparison to the defeat of Americas air defense system?

This make little sense.




Gee, Dude said that based on the amateur nature of the bombs (Al-Qeida actually makes things go boom) it likely wasn't Al-Qeida.

And the defeat of the American air defense system? What? This is giving credit where none is due. The operatives who carried out the 9/11 attacks used the history of terrorist usage of planes and merely getting on the plane with concealed weapons.

Until 9/11/2001, terrorists blew up airplanes in flight (Lockerbie) or hijacked them to foriegn nations. They had not used the aircraft as a projectile to bring down tall buildings. This was a one time deal and the terrorist knew it.





America and Canada have had in place an air defense system for over 50 years; this was defeated.




What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  19:42:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Valiant Dancer, are you stating that the 9/11 attacks were amature?



What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  20:54:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dude

Half said:
it's beginning to appear that this may have been a part of a long-planned Al Qaeda operation.


As one investigator from the UK said on TV today (I'll paraphrase), the lack of sophistication of these attacks indicate that Al-Qaeda was likely not involved. The people responsible were obviously radicalized, but were just copycats who lacked any real skill at causing harm. They had to set off their "bombs" with matches at close range, and there was no way their "bombs" were capable of exploding.

You can't just mix up propane, gasoline, and nails and expect it to explode...

These guys were (thankfully) complete amatures.


Actually, a very, very powerful explosive device can be created with propane and/or gasoline -- and air -- for the main ingredients, with only a small amount of explosive used to disperse the fuel into a large volume of air prior to ignition. (Propane is nearly ideal as the fuel.) It's called a thermobaric weapon, or a fuel-air bomb. Such weapons used by the US Air Force are the most powerful bombs in its arsenal, short of nukes. I don't know what was on the list of materials that were found in those vehicles, nor how they were arranged. Until we know more, it's impossible to know whether the devices were of effective design.

Wiki says:
The effects produced by FAEs (a long-duration high pressure and heat impulse) are often likened to the effects produced by low-yield nuclear weapons, but without the problems of radiation. However, this is inexact; for all current and foreseen sub-kiloton-yield nuclear weapon designs, prompt radiation effects predominate, producing some secondary heating; very little of the nominal yield is actually delivered as blast. The significant injury dealt by either weapon on a targeted population is nonetheless great.





Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 07/03/2007 21:10:21
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  21:03:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner

Originally posted by Dude

Half said:
it's beginning to appear that this may have been a part of a long-planned Al Qaeda operation.


As one investigator from the UK said on TV today (I'll paraphrase), the lack of sophistication of these attacks indicate that Al-Qaeda was likely not involved. The people responsible were obviously radicalized, but were just copycats who lacked any real skill at causing harm. They had to set off their "bombs" with matches at close range, and there was no way their "bombs" were capable of exploding.

You can't just mix up propane, gasoline, and nails and expect it to explode...

These guys were (thankfully) complete amatures.


Actually, a very, very powerful explosive device can be created with propane and/or gasoline -- and air -- for the main ingredients, with only a small amount of explosive used to disperse the fuel into a large volume of air prior to ignition. (Propane is nearly ideal as the fuel.) It's called a thermobaric weapon, or a fuel-air bomb. Such weapons used by the US Air Force are the most powerful bombs in its arsenal, short of nukes. I'm not sure what was on the entire list of materials were found in those vehicles. Until we know more, it's impossible to know whether the devices were of effective design.





Little damage would be enough information to discern that these devices were ineffective.

How many died?

How many were injured?

How many bombs of the three exploded?

How much damage was caused?



What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  21:08:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Jerome invented:
America and Canada have had in place an air defense system for over 50 years; this was defeated.
It was not defeated, but circumvented by the nature of the attacks. A boxer is not "defeated" by his opponent's manager pulling out a gun and shooting him.



Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  21:13:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner

Jerome invented:
America and Canada have had in place an air defense system for over 50 years; this was defeated.
It was not defeated, but circumvented by the nature of the attacks. A boxer is not "defeated" by his opponent's manager pulling out a gun and shooting him.






I do not see your analogy. Could you relate the terms?


What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9688 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  22:39:28   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

If this is a "long-planned Al Qaeda operation", why was it relatively amature in comparison to the defeat of Americas air defense system?
I could answer that question, but since I'm supposed to visit America by the end of August, I'll refrain from doing so. I don't want to be turned away by "internal security" folks at the border control...

The question relies on the false presumption that the 9/11 attacks were professionally executed.


Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  23:03:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

If this is a "long-planned Al Qaeda operation", why was it relatively amature in comparison to the defeat of Americas air defense system?

This make little sense.




Gee, Dude said that based on the amateur nature of the bombs (Al-Qeida actually makes things go boom) it likely wasn't Al-Qeida.

And the defeat of the American air defense system? What? This is giving credit where none is due. The operatives who carried out the 9/11 attacks used the history of terrorist usage of planes and merely getting on the plane with concealed weapons.

Until 9/11/2001, terrorists blew up airplanes in flight (Lockerbie) or hijacked them to foriegn nations. They had not used the aircraft as a projectile to bring down tall buildings. This was a one time deal and the terrorist knew it.





America and Canada have had in place an air defense system for over 50 years; this was defeated.






That is a load of crap.

It was by no means defeated. There was no contingency for this form of attack because it had never been tried before. Before you go making such absurdly wrong statements like that, perhaps you could try, just a little bit, to actually research your claims before you make them.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 07/03/2007 :  23:03:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Valiant Dancer, are you stating that the 9/11 attacks were amature?





Are you incapable of making all your responses to one message in one message?

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.14 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000