Liberal Forum

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 9:23 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:23 am

You mean kinetic energy. There is no such thing "actualized energy." Stop trying to act like you know what you are talking about. Explosives don't need to be seen from the anterior of the building. They can easily be exploded from the middle. In fact, many demolitions are exploded from weakening the inside middle columns.

Wouldn't have started to collapse at the points the airplanes impacted if detonated on the lower floors. Damage from the planes caused the collapse or explosives detonated near these points of impact. I will tell you which is more plausible, the **** planes. 
 
 Kinetic energy is a measure of force for an object in motion. Potential energy is a measure of weight vs gravity or a similar situation. Actualized energy is the conversion of potential to Kinetic. These are junior high level concepts. Did you go to junior high before or after there were 57 genders to memorize? I know you are better than this but your admonishment reeks of gen z. 
 
 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:28 am

Wouldn't have started to collapse at the points the airplanes impacted if detonated on the lower floors. Damage from the planes caused the collapse or explosives detonated near these points of impact. I will tell you which is more plausible, the **** planes. 
 
 Kinetic energy is a measure of force for an object in motion. Potential energy is a measure of weight vs gravity or a similar situation. Actualized energy is the conversion of potential to Kinetic. These are junior high level concepts. Did you go to junior high before or after there were 57 genders to memorize? I know you are better than this but your admonishment reeks of gen z.

Jesus man. There are mathematical equations for potential and kinetic energy. This is because it can be measured. You cant measure 'actualized energy' because it's redundant. You are already including it in the calculations. If something is already in motion, then it's kinetic. There are no 'actually kinetic' or 'actually potential'. It's just kinetic or potential. 

Look. Neo, you don't know what you are talking about. You are trying to use fancy wordings in the hope that you will fool me. It isn't working. Now that I made you me little bitch. Go and make me a sandwich. 

Mrkelly » 02 Oct 2023, 7:19 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 7:19 am

I have asked you if you watched it at least three times


 

Z09 doesn't answer questions. She only demands others to answer hers. This is why I don't answer her questions. She needs to learn what debate is about. 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 9:39 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:39 am

What a bunch of crap!

"In essence he admitted..."

No he didn't!

Hidden cameras taking words out of context..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THBnSIjr70E

out of context   

  you truly are an useful idiot

did you know that gullible is not in the dictionary?  

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 9:41 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:41 am

Look. Neo, you don't know what you are talking about. You are trying to use fancy wordings in the hope that you will fool me. It isn't working. Now that I made you me little bitch. Go and make me a sandwich.

I reduced you to speaking like a Vietnamese hooker. 
"I made you me little bitch. Make me sandwich GI!" 

Potential energy convets to kinetic energy and other energies over time during a fall or similar event. Actualized might be a redundant term in your view but it implies not all the potential energy has been converted to kinetic or other energies. It's vaild. Me luv u long time GI.
 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 9:52 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:52 am

You find some website and clip that some kids are talking to the cab driver and he said something and it doesn't add up?

Like the site "Loose Change" that leaves out entire quotes to change the answer...

Remember?

"I have no idea what that plane part is.."
Loose Change:  Plane manufacture says that part isn't from their plane....!

What he really said...
"I have no idea what that plane part is.....But I'm not an mechanic or engineer.  I'm just a spokesman for the company"..

Same answer..
But they cut off the second part

  Butwhatabout   

im talking about the INTERVIEW 

what kids?  

what a maroon 

what an idiot   
 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 9:47 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:47 am

I'm gullible?

You tried to convince us another poster gave you $250,000 in a paperbag and his limo driver dropped it off...(Cause your wife was sick)

Remember?

  butwhatabout   

$25K no paper bag 

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 9:56 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 9:56 am

I reduced you to speaking like a Vietnamese hooker. 
"I made you me little bitch. Make me sandwich GI!" 

Potential energy convets to kinetic energy and other energies over time during a fall or similar event. Actualized might be a redundant term in your view but it implies not all the potential energy has been converted to kinetic or other energies. It's vaild. Me luv u long time GI.

Lol. I tell you what, cupcake. If you produce the mathematical formula for "actualized energy," then I will agree that I am your little bitch. If you can't, then you are my bitch. You will get me a beer on demand. 

Vegas » 02 Oct 2023, 10:03 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 10:03 am

Lol. I tell you what, cupcake. If you produce the mathematical formula for "actualized energy," then I will agree that I am your little bitch. If you can't, then you are my bitch. You will get me a beer on demand.

It's a **** descriptive term, not a different or unique state of energy. 
 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 10:03 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 10:03 am

Kelly...

Did you hear them..?

"In essence he admitted.."

No he didn't....

It's nonsense

Did you hear him?

kids   

damn you are an idiot    
 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 10:10 am

Hey Kelly..
Since you called me "gullible.."

Can you perhaps tell us what happened to the plane that day since you don't think it crashed into the Pentagon...?

Awaiting your answer

  butwhatabout   

Useful idiot   

Neo » 02 Oct 2023, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 10:06 am

It's a **** descriptive term, not a different or unique state of energy.

Exactly. Which is why I don't give a ****. If it can't be measured, then who cares? 

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am

The one making the claim that a plane did NOT hit the Pentagon is you...

I simply expressed doubt about YOUR claim and asked for proof. And then you mouth-shat and went on the offensive, demanding all manner of stupid ****. You expected me to produced a complete narrative, and explain every last thing that must have happened in order for that narrative to be so.

I owe you neither narrative nor explanation - you are the one insisting that your masters in the intelligence community under George W. Bush were playing straight as an arrow with you, ya fruitcake. The same ones that got us into iraq on WMDs - which I am going to assume you ALSO defend, boot licking neocon.

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am

Then...
Show everyone the evidence...

I owe no such thing. But let's stand that fact stand to the side for a moment.

Here is my proof that your narrative is **** - for the hundredth time, you moron:

The intelligence communities you defend and represent refused to release any photos of the event. When they were sued and forced, the ONE very short video they released showed that whatever hit the pentagon was not a plane.

Good enough, you hysterical, intelligence-community defending **** stain?

Z09 » 02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2023, 6:29 am

Can you maybe show us the link debunking the taxi cab driver?

Are you cum drunk?

I've shown it to you three times - can't force you to look at it, you idiot. Not posting it again.