Tucker Carlson Blows 9/11 Open, Controlled Demolition, Implicates Israeli Agents. Prompted Real ID Even Though Suspects Were Known

[Toddsterpatriot]

hint - if you can get 2 million years of ice cores from AA without getting to the bottom, 2.5 miles down, then 2.5 mile thick glacier is probably a bit older than 70k years, which is what Milankovich claims...

Why does Greenland's much older ice mean the ice over Hudson Bay couldn't be 2.5 miles thick?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How thick would ice get in 100k years?

Over Hudson Bay, probably 2.5 miles.

 

[EMH]

Over Hudson Bay, probably 2.5 miles.

LOL!!!

Any backing for that estimate, or did you just "choose" to pick it out of your ass...


Greenland's ice, barely 1 mile thick, has 130k ice core layers, and that wasn't even halfway down...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL!!!

Any backing for that estimate, or did you just "choose" to pick it out of your ass...


Greenland's ice, barely 1 mile thick, has 130k ice core layers, and that wasn't even halfway down...

Any backing for that estimate,

Yeah, you just said it was 2.5 miles thick. Did you forget?

Greenland's ice, barely 1 mile thick, has 130k ice core layers, and that wasn't even halfway down...

That ice is much further north. Why would it be identical to Hudson Bay ice?

 

[EMH]

This person is trying to argue that ice 2.5 miles thick was only 70k years old.

Ice cores from the top half of Greenland's 1 mile thick ice yield 130k years

Ice cores down about a mile and a half in AA yield 2 million years, AA being 2.5 miles thick



Yet somehow Milankovich and hence faux skeptic Toddster claim 2.5 miles thick ice during NORTH AMERICAN ICE AGE, the real name of it, was only 70k years old....

and they have no empirical data at all to support that claim, other than CO2 FRAUD says so...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This person is trying to argue that ice 2.5 miles thick was only 70k years old.

Ice cores from the top half of Greenland's 1 mile thick ice yield 130k years

Ice cores down about a mile and a half in AA yield 2 million years, AA being 2.5 miles thick



Yet somehow Milankovich and hence faux skeptic Toddster claim 2.5 miles thick ice during NORTH AMERICAN ICE AGE, the real name of it, was only 70k years old....

and they have no empirical data at all to support that claim, other than CO2 FRAUD says so...

This person is trying to argue that ice 2.5 miles thick was only 70k years old.

Or 100,000 years old? Or more? Or less?

Do you have a point?

 

[hjmick]

LOL look how fast the Zionnist mods buried this in CT. NSA knows who they are.

Poor baby...

You should consider yourself lucky it's this high up, it belongs in the Rubber Room.

 

[BackAgain]

You have lost every single science related debate with EMH.

 

[EMH]

and if we have ever had any, you did too. EMH is undefeated.

Hard to rebut truth....

 

[BackAgain]

and if we have ever had any, you did too. EMH is undefeated.

Hard to rebut truth....

You’re amusingly delusional.

Your notion of “winning” is saying one unsupported piece of a conspiracy theory to provide “proof” of your full idiotic conspiracy theory.

Just to help you out, you assclown joke; declaring victory doesn’t actually mean that you e ever won anything.

You’re so far gone, you can’t comprehend how completely delusional and unmoored you are from reality.

I’d laugh at you more, but honestly, I’m starting to just pity you.

 

[EMH]

You’re amusingly delusional.

Your notion of “winning” is saying one unsupported piece of a conspiracy theory to provide “proof” of your full idiotic conspiracy theory.

Just to help you out, you assclown joke; declaring victory doesn’t actually mean that you e ever won anything.

You’re so far gone, you can’t comprehend how completely delusional and unmoored you are from reality.

I’d laugh at you more, but honestly, I’m starting to just pity you.

One thing you cannot do is ID one single issue where EMH "lost."

Typical...

We've seen you in Environment. You are not exactly "good at science" to put it mildly.

 

[BackAgain]

One thing you cannot do is ID one single issue where EMH "lost."

Typical...

We've seen you in Environment. You are not exactly "good at science" to put it mildly.

You can’t point to anything that you’ve won. And it was your initial claim.

You carry the burden. And you can’t meet it.

By the way, you suck ass in environment.

As always, you spew gibberish and declare yourself “the winner.” You’re totally delusional.

 

[EMH]

You can’t point to anything that you’ve won

EMH has proven on USMB

1. what does cause Earth climate change, Land Near the Poles
2. what doesn't = CO2
3. Earth is not warming
4. the motorized paraglider narrative of 107 is impossible and absolute bullshit
5. official narrative of 911 is complete BS


and EMH is indeed undefeated here on USMB.

 

[Unkotare]

EMH has proven on USMB

1. what does cause Earth climate change, Land Near the Poles
2. what doesn't = CO2
3. Earth is not warming
4. the motorized paraglider narrative of 107 is impossible and absolute bullshit
5. official narrative of 911 is complete BS


and EMH is indeed undefeated here on USMB.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All 12 voices in his head agree, it was the Jews.

 

[knuckles]

Many reasons, but the simple one is that preparing a building for CD takes weeks or months. It could not possibly have been prepared for CD in 1 day, which is what your post demands.

True. I thought of that.
So, there are 2 possibilities.
1) It's was planned in advance.
2) I am suffering from false memory syndrome.

 

[PeterPilot]

knuckles

I like an honest man with a sense of humor!

 

[BackAgain]

EMH has proven on USMB

1. what does cause Earth climate change, Land Near the Poles
2. what doesn't = CO2
3. Earth is not warming
4. the motorized paraglider narrative of 107 is impossible and absolute bullshit
5. official narrative of 911 is complete BS


and EMH is indeed undefeated here on USMB.

Nah. Those are again just silly claims where you’ve claimed “victory.” Claiming victory doesn’t mean you’ve won anything.

You’re a goofball.

 

[EMH]

Nah. Those are again just silly claims where you’ve claimed “victory.” Claiming victory doesn’t mean you’ve won anything.

You’re a goofball.

Unfortunately, you actually have to disprove something if you want to claim it isn't right, and you and your treasonous chosen pals here can't do that...

LOL!!

 

[BackAgain]

Unfortunately, you actually have to disprove something if you want to claim it isn't right, and you and your treasonous chosen pals here can't do that...

LOL!!

No ma’am. You are the one making the claims. Ergo, you have the burden of proof.

Do try to meet it or stfu.