User talk:Quantumhead

Article dispute
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Journal_of_9/11_Studies

Hi guys,

This page is absolutely farcical, as are the attempts of those moderators attempting to prevent it from being edited. It is essentially a page-long political smear attack against any scientist who associates him/herself with the idea that the 9/11 official story is false. The language is purposefully loaded to employ mockery as a political weapon and to manufacture a false, one-sided narrative. For example, without producing a single iota of evidence that the peer-review process is in any way defective or flawed in this journal, the author arbitrarily decides to place inverted commas around the term, peer-reviewed. Ironically, the NIST study sponsored by the US government has never been peer-reviewed, because NIST won't release its data to the public. Hence, the author is literally making an attempt to turn the facts upside down. None of the malicious allegations made by the author are supported by any evidence, or even a reasoned argument. Instead, he/she uses mockery as a catch-all offence against the journal and the hundreds of different pieces of scientific research it hosts in an overt attempt to discredit it for personal political reasons.

I would like to make an appeal to users to modify this page. At the very least, I think we should remove the loaded language which implies the author has proven something he has not proven. The author has not proven that The Journal Of 9/11 Studies is a "crank" journal, nor does mocking something he agrees the journal is correct about (i.e. debunking Judy Wood's hypothesis) prove that the journal is wrong about anything. At best, this page is dripping with bias. At worst, it is a total aberration of the truth.

Thanks.
 * First, that's called a "quote". Second, you're not using "proof" correctly. Third, your edits were really poorly formatted so even if they were grounded in reality (which 9/11 truthing is not), it would've gotten reverted anyway. 17:40, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

It's clear you don't know how to edit articles. Try starting here first. 21:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * You quoted an anonymous blog. You couldn't even reference the author's name because you have absolutely no idea who wrote it. If anonymous internet blogs and public debate forums are your idea of reliable sources with which to debunk professional scientists then you clearly need to be under adult supervision. Quantumhead (talk) 22:17, 12 September 2018 (UTC)Quantumhead.
 * I Copy/pasted the article into the talkpage since you were being pig ignorant and demanding that we present our case. And I will repeat my comments on the article's talkpage: You still haven't proven that these "Scientists" are actual scientists and not merely woo promoters, charlatans, conspiracy theorists and/or pseudo-scientists. This literally isn't rocket science kiddo. 22:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * For the second time in five minutes, anonymous internet blogs are not "a case" for labelling peer-reviewed scientific research the work of "cranks". If I copy/paste an anonymous blog from FlatEarther.Com into the talk section then that is not "presenting a case" that the world is flat. Calling me names hardly helps your case either, because that's exactly the extent of your criticism against the scientists who publish at The Journal of 9/11 studies: name-calling and political smear attacks. Your article is utterly false rubbish which is not supported by a single reliable source of information and you know full well this is true. Earlier today you blocked me for removing your false statements of fact and when that failed you locked the page to prevent your misinformation from being removed. Everything you have thus far said has been irrational and false, which is ironic given the site you are using as your personal propaganda tool. Quantumhead (talk) 22:38, 12 September 2018 (UTC)Quantumhead
 * Yes they are. They are because I say so.
 * ^See how just asserting your case works? It means I can do the same with anything I want. Fun fact, my assertion above is no more correct than your repeated assertions. Why? Because neither assertion proved anything. 22:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, what's your specific beef with those disgusting blogs? I know my beef with Dreary Pail and Urban Dictionary and Gish Gallops, and I feel I don't have to explain those. 22:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * All I see is how stupid the things you are saying are. No, anonymous internet blogs are not reputable sources with which to discredit the work of professional scientists. I don't know how many ways I can explain that to you without it actually sinking in. Would you like me to draw a diagram for you? Or perhaps you would like me to write it in Chinese? Would that make it easier to understand why we (i.e. scientists) don't scoff at peer-reviewed science written by professionals because we read it in an anonymous online blog? I mean, why even stop at 9/11? Let's just write articles purporting that evolution is a scam because we read it in an anonymous blog. Obviously, everybody who does not have the IQ of a dyslexic goat is aware that you are an idiot. Quantumhead (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)Qunatumhead
 * Shut up and read dumbass. 23:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you also implying that dyslexia somehow negatively affects IQ score? You really need to be acquainted with your mental health disorder terminology and maybe the people who have them before you start recklessly throwing those around as insults. 23:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * UPDATE: After debating this all night on the talk page of the relevant article I got sick of having my posts removed and/or moved around the page by the two adolescent trolls responsible for the page (i.e. LeftyGreenMario and GrammarCommie). After hours of having my own posts removed and/or tampered with in what was a deliberate effort to avoid being disproved, they then blocked my account the moment I removed their own content. I was then labelled a "dishonest prick" for "censoring" them despite the fact that they had been incessantly censoring my own posts for several hours prior to that moment. At least Wikipedia has it right about what these idiots are:-


 * '''According to a Southern Poverty Law Center report published in February 2018, over 100 people have been killed and injured in 13 attacks by alt-right influenced perpetrators since 2014. Political scientists and leaders have argued it should be classified as a terrorist or extremist movement.

''' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right) Did you hear that? We're Alt-Righters/Nazis now!!! Even though That's not consistent with reality!! Gee, it's almost as if someone else is insulting us in order to hide from their own personal failings... 00:53, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * He's on to something. Correcting constant improperly formatted comments leads to people getting killed by the alt-right. This is a factually accurate statement of objective truth. 00:55, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh, you are most definitely Nazis. And invoking Godwin's Law isn't going to help you either because even Godwin agrees that you're Nazis:-


 * https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/godwins-law-mike-godwin-internet-hitler-charlottesville-virginia-donald-trump-a7892171.html


 * You can deny being part of the alt-Reich if you like (to be honest I would too!!) but the fact is that NOBODY cries and wails about fake censorship except the internet 4Chan Nazis who were kicked off Reddit and migrated to Voat. Your claims that it is "inconsistent with reality" are, like everything else which leaves your bumbling mouth, a complete lie. Remember dummy, you are the one who thinks accusations are de facto true unless proven otherwise, and when they are proven otherwise, you are the one who thinks it is OK to delete said proof. Hence, prove you are not a Nazi or stfu. I'm done being reasonable with you because you're a lying cunt who deleted all my posts, then later cried victim and blocked me for doing the same back to you. You are an intellectually redundant, dishonest scumbag troll.
 * What kind of censorship are you crying about then? Factually accurate censorship? By the way, nothing is getting censored. In fact, just check out the revision history and just pretend your revision is the current one. 01:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * OKIEDOKIE!!!! Time to explain shit to morons!!! I'm not a Nazi, I'm a socialist. I believe that class system is inherently harmful to society, not that we should murder everyone who looks different in a fit of childish rage. Further, I'm neither antisemitic nor racist, in fact I believe both strains of thought to be primitive and barbaric. Further my edit history bears these claims out (see how I provided evidence for my claims?). Your edit history on the other hand leads one to believe you to be an idealogue who cannot coherently explain their positions to others and must resort to lies and censorship in order to make yourself seem even remotely reasonable. You can pull this name calling shit on your home turf of conspiracy forums, but here we record almost everything. 01:37, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't made any claims of censorship. Your lies keep continuing to stack up like chips on a poker table. Don't put words which YOU used into MY mouth, son. I pointed out that you have twice blocked me from this website for removing the astonishing misinformation hosted on The Journal of 9/11 Studies page, which is factually accurate and verifiable by the log record. For once in your pathetic excuse for an existence stop telling lies. The fact of the matter is that you blocked me for correcting an article which is shockingly inaccurate, hopelessly biased, and extraordinarily poorly written. So fuck you. You're a lying extremist piece of shit who is purposefully proliferating misinformation on this website.
 * "So fuck you. You're a lying extremist piece of shit who is purposefully proliferating misinformation on this website."
 * whoa there 02:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I kill Nazi zombies for fun! ;O}D 02:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * do you even know what a nazi is, lmfao 01:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It actually means "concerned editors that revert edits they deem poor quality and poorly formatted and try to argue with promoter of edits that was deemed poor quality, who posts poorly formatted comments and bad English that are constantly unsigned and not indented, tries to erase discussion after being owned, and accuses opponents for having autism and having an IQ lower than that of a cute dyslexic goat." 01:34, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * They insult Goats? When? Why? WHAT DID THOSE POOR GOATS EVER DO TO THIS PERSON!?!?!?!?! 01:42, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not really an insult since pretty much all goats don't read or care about written human language. 02:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * LIES VILE LIES!!!! 02:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, PROVE IT! The image is not a rational factually accurate truth fact. You're probably censoring the nonspecific inerrant factual truth that fascist Democratic Communist Nazis like you are doing. --It's-a me, Lefty  Green  Nazio ! 02:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC) 02:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Goats are clearly members of the Educated Proletariat, and therefor can read as any good Comrade should! 02:27, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not proof! That's a blog post! How would you feel if my statements of factual truth are based on pro-IPU Illuminati blogs! You lying dishonest pathological perfidious pellucid partition propagandist! If that isn't proof that you're a pro-censorship reptilian Maoist Muslum Kenyan Mussolini tankie gas chamber, I don't know what is! --It's-a me,  Lefty  Green  Nazio ! 02:37, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Lmfao. You know who else claimed to be on the left? Hitler. You're a pathological liar who is proliferating far right propaganda and banning everybody who challenges it with facts. Your whimpers of innocence have about as much credibility as the article you keep banning me for correcting. You are an absolutely shameless liar who has been abusing the platform all evening in order to frustrate and cajole me, and now you are trying to cover your tracks in case there is any blowback. You are transparent, nauseatingly dishonest and you have no place writing articles for any publication in the world with the possible exception of The Daily Stormer.

Here is my perfectly formatted revision, liar. The one you kept repeatedly deleting from the talk page and the one you have just deleted again from my OWN PAGE!!!

(I also can't Wiki format out of a paper bag so this part got censored by LeftyGreenNazio)


 * I'm sorry for censoring your wonderful revision that disrupts the talk page and makes it all weird and unreadable. It's all in the name of cleaner talk pages and far-right censorship. --It's-a me, Lefty  Green  Nazio ! 02:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * can you make me a nazified version of my name too? ⊙ω⊙ 02:16, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Just call yourself "BabyNaziOnFire", with your fancy cyrillic of course. --It's-a me, Lefty  Green  Nazio ! 02:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Of all the accusations I've seen thrown against RW, I must say, I never expected someone to call us alt-right. I see new shit every day. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano Make a Reservation  02:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

The truth comes out today!!
THE DEATH STAR WAS AN INSIDE JOB AND I CAN PROVE IT

'''Did the Rebel Alliance really blow up the Death Star, or was it all planned by Vader and the Emperor to drum up support for their war against the terrorists? What evidence is there that it was really Skywalker and the other rebels? Answer: None!'''

1). Vader and Emperor Palpatine were part of an elaborate scheme to blow up the Death Star in order to drum up support for their Empire. 

2).The X-Wings and Y-Wings were remotely controlled or flown by droids. Why would the "Rebels" put so many men into such a dangerous mission?

3).There were numerous conflicting reports of the number of X-Wings and Y-Wings that attacked the Death Star, which proves that there was a conspiracy.

4). Darth Vader had ties to the Rebel Alliance.  His very own son was one of their pilots and it was later discovered that Princess Leia herself was his daughter.  This proves that Vader likely created the Rebel Alliance in order to back up the story that the Death Star was attack by such a terrorist organization to create an excuse to increase military funding.

5).Let's examine the footage of the Death Star explosion. Explosions like that can't happen in space. There's no air, so you wouldn't see a fireball. The explosion was STAGED.

6).There are two versions of the footage of the Death Star Explosion. The first is just an outer space explosion, but the second (of the same event) shows some rings coming out of it! How can this be? Answer: the whole explosion was just a special effect!

7). Why would there be an obvious vulnerability in the Death Star like that ventilation portal or whatever it was? The Empire WANTED the Rebels to blow that shit up, yo.

Keep bein' free thinkers, dudes. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano Make a Reservation  02:36, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The font needs more green. 02:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. The vent was put in the Death Star by the chief engineer in charge of designing it as a "fuck you" to the Empire... 02:44, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And how the hell do lightsabers work? Also, X-Wing fuel can't melt Starwarnian beams. 02:42, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * My sig already has unhealthy amounts of green. that's just what Vader WANTS you to think.  Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano  Make a Reservation  02:45, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Lightsabers work by focusing light through Magic space crystals. 02:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Censorship
You don't get to complain about censorship when you do shit like this and censor other users solely so you can make an attack screed. That's called hypocrisy dumbass. Further, I alone actually gave you a chance to prove your case but, rather write something similar to the post I ended up writing for you, you engaged in nitpicking, demand to see our case, claimed that the article didn't count as our case, and when I got fed up with your shit and wrote a very polite and respectful post for you, you blanked the page. Twice. You have proven yourself intellectually dishonest and unjustifiably proud, A child who insults others and engages in deceitful hypocrisy, which you have continued even during the writing of this very post. You don't get to play the victim here. Your talkpage privileges will be returned after this message, though if you continue to remove other users' comments they will be suspended again until your three day block is over. 13:07, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As you may have noticed I've taken your talkpage privileges away from you after you ignored my warning and removed another user's comments yet again. You'll get them back in three days when your block ends. Hopefully by then you'll have learned to change your behavior cease this sort of dishonesty. My apologies for not posting this comment sooner. 15:26, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Screed
'''LOL. It is genuinely amusing watching you parade your near-total ignorance of science as if it were some kind of badge of honour. Harassment of Rational Wiki users is not a form of argument (including flagging me for spam, parading me, blocking me, unilaterally removing my edits from my own talk page and goading me with idiotic rhetoric inside pink admin badges). This is the behaviour of adolescents, not of adults prepared to engage in rational discussion. You represent a complete aberration of everything this website ostensibly stands for. I could literally spend all day illustrating what awe-inspiring idiots you are simply by referencing your own behaviour, but of course the reaction of idiots is never to critically analyse their own behaviour. Rather, the reaction of idiots is always to attack the critic.'''

'''The fact of the matter is that your article is precisely the type of pseudo-science this website claims to refute. You are so insurmountably stupid that you think ScrewLooseChange, a blog purporting to "debunk" the Loose Change documentary, is a relevant reference to use to discredit a website which has absolutely nothing to do with the Loose Change documentary. One almost has to gawk in disbelief at the sheer level of incompetence. It's like arguing with 13 year old children who have the power to cut your internet -- frustrating, and ultimately pointless.'''

'''You bizarrely claim to be on the political left, yet here you are touting a right wing conspiracy theory, proliferated by the same right wing government which let the attacks happen, and which is contradicted by almost all of the available scientific research. Indeed, most of the fallacies you have been using to attack me have been pulled directly out of the Joseph Goebbels Handbook For Aspiring Nazis, such as mockery absent argument, bullying, distortion and Freudian projection. At this point it is abundantly clear that if you are not wingnuts you are simply idiots with no understanding of Hegelian dialectic. However, I am fairly certain it is the former. The Nazis themselves falsely claimed to be on the left, which I pointed out last night (before you removed that entry too, on top of all the others). '''

'''Your article is blatant unscientific rubbish which is supported by literally nothing other than the semantic ramblings of a single deranged cretin who put out a video documentary. And this, in your oh so wise opinion, is sufficient to dehumanise dozens of professional scientists who have risked their careers to produce independent research on 9/11. It is simply beyond pathetic. You might have the power to harass and bully me from the site, sure, but when all is said and done you are still halfwits who think Newton's laws of motion and elementary mechanics are something to be mocked because you saw it on a documentary directed by a notorious liar who has been counter-debunked more times than flat-Earth theory. A simple Google search lists numerous people who have meticulously responded to his bullshit, but like all information which doesn't substantiate your own grossly inaccurate opinion you simply pretend it doesn't exist.'''

'''In summary, you are a couple of intellectually retarded edgelords, who are so pathologically butthurt from being called stupid your entire lives, you come to places like this to flaunt the fact that other people now have to put up with it or leave the site. Well congratulations. What overachievers you are. Lol.'''

Lay off the Chuckola Cola.

18:50, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Translation: "WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH BUSH DID 9/11 WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH I'M RIGHT WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH STOP LAUGHING SERIOUSLY GUYS WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH I'M LEAVING NOW WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH WAH" Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano  Make a Reservation  03:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * can i have whatever you're on 03:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)