All I said was that it is nearly impossible to perfectly micromanage a multi-million dollar operation - I don't think anyone needs convincing of that as fact.
As for the different "shoes issue", I will simply encourage everyone to do their own research - I am comfortable letting the VERY CLEAR evidence speak for itself. #differentshoes
I wish I was paid to post here. But alas, I waste time here with ya'll for free.
Why? Is it that you just enjoy trolling conspiracy forums?
Of course it is impossible to micromanage these things. Mistakes happen on movie sets all the time, and we have these funny accidental Easter Eggs. They usually go off without a hitch, though.
Therefore, just because it is true that mistakes happen, doesn't mean you've demonstrated that 1) there was a mistake here and 2) that the shoes are different.
"Oh, he thinks the shoes are the same, he must be a shill" is, forgive me saying so, a George W. Bush level take. I'm not calling you evil like he is, but using a "if you're not with me you're against me" logic is, frankly, a George W. Bush level approach.
Trolling? No. Don't take disagreement as trolling. I get pretty good information here and different takes on things. I appreciate it, even if there is an ocean of garbage before you get to an island.
lol - you just completely contradicted yourself, but... will get there...
Therefore, just because it is true that mistakes happen, doesn't mean you've demonstrated that 1) there was a mistake here and 2) that the shoes are different.
i don't need too... the evidence speaks for itself:
Contradict myself? As I noted, most of the time mistakes DON'T happen. Did you miss that part? Hell, the biggest question the question the shoes are different folks don't have an answer for, is why the hell would anybody change shoes in the first place?
Me and tons of other conspiracy theorists looked into it and come to a different conclusion. If the evidence "spoke for itself" why did we come to a different conclusion? Anyone who says the evidence speaks for itself and then follows it up with commentary, well, it means the evidence doesn't speak for itself.
All I said was that it is nearly impossible to perfectly micromanage a multi-million dollar operation - I don't think anyone needs convincing of that as fact.
As for the different "shoes issue", I will simply encourage everyone to do their own research - I am comfortable letting the VERY CLEAR evidence speak for itself. #differentshoes
Why? Is it that you just enjoy trolling conspiracy forums?
Of course it is impossible to micromanage these things. Mistakes happen on movie sets all the time, and we have these funny accidental Easter Eggs. They usually go off without a hitch, though.
Therefore, just because it is true that mistakes happen, doesn't mean you've demonstrated that 1) there was a mistake here and 2) that the shoes are different.
"Oh, he thinks the shoes are the same, he must be a shill" is, forgive me saying so, a George W. Bush level take. I'm not calling you evil like he is, but using a "if you're not with me you're against me" logic is, frankly, a George W. Bush level approach.
Trolling? No. Don't take disagreement as trolling. I get pretty good information here and different takes on things. I appreciate it, even if there is an ocean of garbage before you get to an island.
lol - you just completely contradicted yourself, but... will get there...
i don't need too... the evidence speaks for itself:
cop cam footage:
https://twitter.com/more_shower/status/1643752101158490114
security cam footage:
https://twitter.com/more_shower/status/1643751622022135810
...more to the point of my post, i was simply confronting the often used "debooonker" phrase "they are not that stupid".
here's noam chomskoy saying the same bullshit:
These are typical techniques used to dismiss mistakes.
correct
correct
Contradict myself? As I noted, most of the time mistakes DON'T happen. Did you miss that part? Hell, the biggest question the question the shoes are different folks don't have an answer for, is why the hell would anybody change shoes in the first place?
Me and tons of other conspiracy theorists looked into it and come to a different conclusion. If the evidence "spoke for itself" why did we come to a different conclusion? Anyone who says the evidence speaks for itself and then follows it up with commentary, well, it means the evidence doesn't speak for itself.