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

William Seger

(11,421 posts)
6. ROFLMAO
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 02:26 AM
Jun 2014
Priceless. Especially the title. Sorry, Cap't Bob, but you shot yourself down. Again.

The question you've been asked too many times to count is, when are you going to support your nonsensical claims with something besides your own apparently non-existent expertise? Why do you keep pretending to know the maximum speed of a 767 when you don't understand how airplanes are designed? Why can't you read either the FAR or the response from the FAA, or the engineers on two professional forums, or the text that I took that graphic from and understand what they are saying?

Why is it that the best you can do is keep posting the same nonsense over and over and over, and try to impress your miniscule fan club with personal attacks and pointless diversions from the actual issues here? Why do you keep trying to win points in a juvenile "gotcha" game instead of addressing ANY of these questions?

If you think the FAA would support your claims, then "man up" and go ask them. I already did that, and your prediction of what would happen was indeed an "epic fail," since it proves your lack of understanding about those claims. Either you just don't understand the answers I got or you simply refuse to understand them, but either way, you have demonstrated that you are manifestly unqualified to make the "impossible speed" claims, and manifestly unable to support them with anything but bravado.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Maybe Billy is SIGDEV nationalize the fed Jun 2014 #1
Cult-leader wannabes are usually paranoid delusional egoists (n/t) William Seger Jun 2014 #4
Pilots for truth can't source structural failure speed of a 767 - failure again superbeachnut Jun 2014 #2
Beachy - do you agree with this person? johndoeX Jun 2014 #9
Sorry, Cap't Bob, but I have an unimpeachable source. William Seger Jun 2014 #3
Spin, obfuscate, deflect. johndoeX Jun 2014 #5
ROFLMAO William Seger Jun 2014 #6
When are you going to email the FAA with your claims Seger? johndoeX Jun 2014 #7
I've noticed that most "truthers" are hypocrits William Seger Jun 2014 #8
The only thing you have proven.... johndoeX Jun 2014 #10
No, I don't, and having to repeat myself so many times is really annoying William Seger Jun 2014 #12
"Uh, no I shouldn't if he's wrong. And he is.".... johndoeX Jun 2014 #13
Is that a "never?" (n/t) William Seger Jun 2014 #15
quote mine, who cares what the real defintion is, pilots for truth can find a quote to say otherwise superbeachnut Jun 2014 #16
BTW, is "EagleEye" one of your socks on your own forum? William Seger Jun 2014 #11
No he isn't me. johndoeX Jun 2014 #14
LOL, I don't recall even thinking about you since your last disaster here William Seger Jun 2014 #17
Hmmm... johndoeX Jun 2014 #18
U mad, Bro? (n/t) William Seger Jun 2014 #19
Actually... johndoeX Jun 2014 #21
A more recent face with a name William Seger Jun 2014 #22
lol... nice johndoeX Jun 2014 #23
Thanks William Seger Jun 2014 #24
"Thanks for the bump"? johndoeX Jun 2014 #25
You do know that SOME people will read past the OP, right? William Seger Jun 2014 #26
Of course - johndoeX Jun 2014 #27
Oh, by now, I know who your target market is William Seger Jun 2014 #28
pilots for truth make personal attacks on those murdered on 911 by speading lies superbeachnut Jun 2014 #20
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»William Seger - Epically ...»Reply #6