Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: ribonucleic on March 20, 2007, 01:44:46 PM
-
"More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/279827_conspiracy02ww.html
There are 217.8 million people in the United States who are 18 or over.
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/population/001703.html
So that makes at least 72,600,000 "conspiracy nuts".
-
They came to this conclusion by polling 1,010 people. How can they extrapolate out to 72,600,000 from a poll that only included 1000 people? Polling can be a dangerous thing.
-
They came to this conclusion by polling 1,010 people. How can they extrapolate out to 72,600,000 from a poll that only included 1000 people? Polling can be a dangerous thing.
Actually they can scientifically measure it to 3-4% accuracy.
Basic statistics, probabilities, and bell curves. You take the odds of 363 out of 1,010 people answering "inside job" then apply the standard deviation. it's remarkably accurate for elections all the time.
When you step back and consider that they called a thousand people, and 363 of them believed 911 was an inside job... think about that. Fucking incredible.
-
Actually they can scientifically measure it to 3-4% accuracy.
Basic statistics, probabilities, and bell curves. You take the odds of 363 out of 1,010 people answering "inside job" then apply the standard deviation. it's remarkably accurate for elections all the time.
When you step back and consider that they called a thousand people, and 363 of them believed 911 was an inside job... think about that. Fucking incredible.
I'm dubious of those claims, a 3-4% measure of accuracy is just too much when polling 1,010 people and extrapolating out for the entire voting age country. I agree that more people think something is fishy about 9/11 but the 72,600,000 number I won't believe until everyone is polled.
The subject is too far fetched and the number is simply too high to be believable.
-
They came to this conclusion by polling 1,010 people. How can they extrapolate out to 72,600,000 from a poll that only included 1000 people? Polling can be a dangerous thing.
How can polling be dangerous? I work in psychological sciences and we use data from polls all day long and conduct our own. That's why it's called a poll and not a Census. Will you please stop arguing with every poll number because the pollster didn't favor your position.
The world uses polls to support views and shows relevent information. Polls are credible and are accurate when representive samples are given. CDC, Pentagon, White House....all use polls and census data. No conspiracy here
The margin of inaccuracy in polls is very slim.
If polls were not a viable and reliable tool, they would no longer be used for social, political sciences.
-
The paper printing this and the university conducting the poll are more fishy than any 911 conspiracy. Can anyone else smell the agenda?
-
Something like this will really mean something when a serious call for a new investigation is made after 2008 in congress or the senate.
I don;t think we will see anything significant happen until then save a few polls like this one.
-
How can polling be dangerous? I work in psychological sciences and we use data from polls all day long and conduct our own. That's why it's called a poll and not a Census. Will you please stop arguing with every poll number because the pollster didn't favor your position.
The world uses polls to support views and shows relevent information. Polls are credible and are accurate when representive samples are given. CDC, Pentagon, White House....all use polls and census data. No conspiracy here
The margin of inaccuracy in polls is very slim.
If polls were not a viable and reliable tool, they would no longer be used for social, political sciences.
I've never argued about a poll before so I'm not too sure where you're coming from with that little ditty. ::)
Polls are dangerous because they can be skewered to fit a preconceived notion and because they can influence the way people think even though the polls themselves might not be totally accurate.
-
The paper printing this and the university conducting the poll are more fishy than any 911 conspiracy. Can anyone else smell the agenda?
"The survey was conducted by telephone from July 6-24 at the Scripps Survey Research Center at the University of Ohio under a grant from the Scripps Howard Foundation. The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points."
What further invalidates this poll is the fact that the only people who would waste time responding to such a survey are unemployed losers who have nothing better to do than chase wacky conspiracy theories.
-
Scripps is a reputable polling firm.
A poll released last month by Zogby International found that 42 percent of all Americans believe the 9/11 Commission "concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence" in the attacks. This is in addition to the Zogby poll two years ago that found that 49 percent of New York City residents agreed with the idea that some leaders "knew in advance" that the attacks were planned and failed to act.
Is Zogby also an unreliable polling firm now?
The fact we're now debating the validity of polls entirely, and the agendas of Scripps and Zogby, CNN, and others who have shown large % of Americans believe something it fishy - instead of the evidence - shows that some of you don't want to talk evidence.
For example - if your local police chief accused you of some crime - what would your defense be? "I didn't do it. Here is my alibi. Here is why your evidence is flawed". You wouldn't say "the police chief is biased!"
2008 is gonna open up a lot of doors.
-
"The survey was conducted by telephone from July 6-24 at the Scripps Survey Research Center at the University of Ohio under a grant from the Scripps Howard Foundation. The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points."
What further invalidates this poll is the fact that the only people who would waste time responding to such a survey are unemployed losers who have nothing better to do than chase wacky conspiracy theories.
Right. Cause only unemployed losers have telephones.
-
"The survey was conducted by telephone from July 6-24 at the Scripps Survey Research Center at the University of Ohio under a grant from the Scripps Howard Foundation. The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points."
What further invalidates this poll is the fact that the only people who would waste time responding to such a survey are unemployed losers who have nothing better to do than chase wacky conspiracy theories.
LOL. I'm shocked. Not. I wish they would have called me. :)
-
I've never argued about a poll before so I'm not too sure where you're coming from with that little ditty. ::)
Polls are dangerous because they can be skewered to fit a preconceived notion and because they can influence the way people think even though the polls themselves might not be totally accurate.
Oh thought you did.
There are usually and often sampling tests done that make assumptions according to the "Standard Normal" distribution. Sure possible innacuricies can take placea where they select their tested group from, and if they seleceted to heavily from a group. If we selected heavily from NYC, you could not take those results and say that they are applied to all Americans.
-
LOL. I'm shocked. Not. I wish they would have called me. :)
They only ask a few simple questions, they don't provide counseling.
-
They only ask a few simple questions, they don't provide counseling.
I could definitely use free counseling. :) Where do I sign up?
-
Remember that we're still in year 5 of the 911 aftermath.
In 2007 alone we've had rosie tell 10 million housewives to investigate WTC7, we've had EMT/NYPD/NYFD/military all come fwd and say WTC7 was a controlled demolition. We've had the BBC film come out, where a reporter stands in front of WTC and tells us all it has collapsed, when it's standing plain as day. She predicts it by 26 minutes.
Each year, more evidence comes out, and the number of 911 skeptics grows exponentially. it will come out. And people like BB, MM69, and others will just mock it (and the 3000 victims) like they always have. What will change though, is that THEY will be the minority soon. Soon, the 36% of skeptics (2004 - before that huge 2006 media coverage) will grow to 50,60,70,80 percent.
Then what?
-
Bwahahahaha!!!
-
I could definitely use free counseling. :) Where do I sign up?
Depends on what can, plenty of resources available. Clinic, Community Mental Health Centers, try going to your county or parish website.
-
Depends on what can, plenty of resources available. Clinic, Community Mental Health Centers, try going to your county or parish website.
I'll look for the one that treats parents who have to raise teenagers. Has to be one nearby . . . .
-
Bwahahahaha!!!
Probably less than 1% believed "inside job" right after 911. it was 36% in 2004. Imagine what it is today. Or what it will be in 2008 when 911 legislation begins against the ousted white house admin.
beach bum, I'll mail you my "CT" t-shirt in a few months. Soon, your point of view will be the outlier.
-
Among educated people, the percentage is much lower.
-
Probably less than 1% believed "inside job" right after 911. it was 36% in 2004. Imagine what it is today. Or what it will be in 2008 when 911 legislation begins against the ousted white house admin.
beach bum, I'll mail you my "CT" t-shirt in a few months. Soon, your point of view will be the outlier.
If you thought conspiracy in 2001-02 you were labeled a nutcase, now it's the norm.
-
Among educated people, the percentage is much lower.
Can you show evidence of this, or just your guess?
My guess is that educated people have:
1) better understanding of oil motives in middle east and therefore understand what could be 911 motives
2) better understanding of physics, and the 3 basic laws violated when the towers fell.
3) access to internet which means they'll see the videos
i could go on, but you see my point. Do you have anything which proves your theory?
-
Among educated people, the percentage is much lower.
I agree. Educated people don't generally talk about things as silly as missiles hitting the WTC, faked news coverage, holograms, etc.
-
I agree. Educated people don't generally talk about things as silly as missiles hitting the WTC, faked news coverage, holograms, etc.
Show us the stats ;)
Truth is, educated people have more to lose and don't bring it up in more constricted circles.
I challenge you, Bb and Cav, to provide some evidence to back up your opinion.
-
Among educated people, the percentage is much lower.
My guess is education doesn't have anything to do with it but i would take a guess and say that most of the rich certainly don't want to second guess such an event...The last thing they want to do is upset their way of life...
-
Also understand that if a person is educated thru the system that they already have shown that they are more likely to be brainwashed and believe or relate to anything the mainstream is showing them...
-
My guess is education doesn't have anything to do with it but i would take a guess and say that most of the rich certainly don't want to second guess such an event...The last thing they want to do is upset their way of life...
Rich people will likely do BETTER, as they own stocks, and stocks do well during war. Haliburton was up 500% at one point. most poor folks don't own haliburton stock. Plus, rich people don't dodge bullets in baghdad.
In 2006 (whether you believe it is correct, no nonsense), the presence of large numbers of educated people in the 911 skeptics group + NYPD, NYFD, etc coming forward - caused a HUGE jump in the media coverage, and resulted in more people believing it was an inside job.
I'm an MBA and I have a decent number of MBA friends. When we talk politics, it rarely, but sometimes does, come up. And most believe it was a "LIHOP" - let it happen on purpose. Which is incredible. They believe a leader let innocents die to incite war.
-
Also understand that if a person is educated thru the system that they already have shown that they are more likely to be brainwashed and believe or relate to anything the mainstream is showing them...
LOL... to play devil's advocate...
OR, if a person is educated, they possess stronger ciritical thinking skills and are more likely to analyze and evaluate statements given to them. They will holes in the story, and will inquisitively search for more.
Poor people - obviously less educated statitsitcally - are more likely to just believe what they are told cause they don't understand it or possess the training/motivation to delve deeper. Hell, I was an MBA and I took on the 911 stuff to disprove it. I thought it was insane and asinine. however, the evidence doesn't lie.
-
LOL... to play devil's advocate...
OR, if a person is educated, they possess stronger ciritical thinking skills and are more likely to analyze and evaluate statements given to them. They will holes in the story, and will inquisitively search for more.
Poor people - obviously less educated statitsitcally - are more likely to just believe what they are told cause they don't understand it or possess the training/motivation to delve deeper. Hell, I was an MBA and I took on the 911 stuff to disprove it. I thought it was insane and asinine. however, the evidence doesn't lie.
although i agree with what your saying, my point is that most educated people thru the system have never fought the system...They did better in school because they could regurgatate everything they were told better then the "uneducated"...That is what i meant when i say brainwashed...But i do see your point...I just been spending to much time on Alex Jones's site ;D
-
although i agree with what your saying, my point is that most educated people thru the system have never fought the system...They did better in school because they could regurgatate everything they were told better then the "uneducated"...That is what i meant when i say brainwashed...But i do see your point...I just been spending to much time on Alex Jones's site ;D
Yes true. They can't think outside the box, cause to effects reasoning is nill
-
Hmmmmmmmm..............h ere's an observation about polling. Depending on Where, when and what you ask, the poll could be erroneous.
Question: Are the Federal Taxes we pay to high?
I'll bet dollars to donuts more than 2/3 of WORKING Americans say yes, and the 1/3 who collect Government money for a paycheck (welfare or assistance) and the non working say no.
Though 1/3 said no, are they right?
-
we don't know if they're right or wrong. but we know this is what 1/3 of Americans believe.
Whather it's correct or not, the fact it divides our nation (in this time of war) is very bad, isn't it? I mean, does 1/3 of America (at least) believe this wntire war is based on a self-inflicted lie? That CAN'T be good for military men like mm69 who need to feel loved to fight effectively and blame our opinions here for their lack of success.
A second 9/11 investigation will clear this up. Will set the record straight and re-unite america.
-
Remember that we're still in year 5 of the 911 aftermath.
In 2007 alone we've had rosie tell 10 million housewives to investigate WTC7, we've had EMT/NYPD/NYFD/military all come fwd and say WTC7 was a controlled demolition. We've had the BBC film come out, where a reporter stands in front of WTC and tells us all it has collapsed, when it's standing plain as day. She predicts it by 26 minutes.
Each year, more evidence comes out, and the number of 911 skeptics grows exponentially. it will come out. And people like BB, MM69, and others will just mock it (and the 3000 victims) like they always have. What will change though, is that THEY will be the minority soon. Soon, the 36% of skeptics (2004 - before that huge 2006 media coverage) will grow to 50,60,70,80 percent.
Then what?
Who cares if me and BB are the last 2 sane people in America. It will never be proven because it didn't happen.
-
we don't know if they're right or wrong. but we know this is what 1/3 of Americans believe.
Whather it's correct or not, the fact it divides our nation (in this time of war) is very bad, isn't it? I mean, does 1/3 of America (at least) believe this wntire war is based on a self-inflicted lie? That CAN'T be good for military men like mm69 who need to feel loved to fight effectively and blame our opinions here for their lack of success.
A second 9/11 investigation will clear this up. Will set the record straight and re-unite america.
240 I love how you make shit up. You are a moron if you don't thikn public opinion affects ROE, maybe you don't know what ROE means?
-
Who cares if me and BB are the last 2 sane people in America. It will never be proven because it didn't happen.
Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up.
-
Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up.
You have to use some common sense on this issue 240. You and the rest of the sheeple keep thinking it was deliberate. There is no way that not ONE credible person has suggested this. You are telling me that EVERY media outlet is playing along. every single one.....you just don't use any common sense in your arguments.
-
You have to use some common sense on this issue 240. You and the rest of the sheeple keep thinking it was deliberate. There is no way that not ONE credible person has suggested this. You are telling me that EVERY media outlet is playing along. every single one.....you just don't use any common sense in your arguments.
I agree. There isn't a lick of common sense involved in this nonsense.
-
Show us the stats ;)
Truth is, educated people have more to lose and don't bring it up in more constricted circles.
I challenge you, Bb and Cav, to provide some evidence to back up your opinion.
Here's a clip that aired on Swedish TV last night, shows that it is a plane crashing into the WTC.
Forget about the missile theories.
Look at 1:33 into the clip:
http://svt.se/content/1/c6/78/40/86/2-11-11_september.asx
-Hedge
-
Here's a clip that aired on Swedish TV last night, shows that it is a plane crashing into the WTC.
Forget about the missile theories.
Look at 1:33 into the clip:
http://svt.se/content/1/c6/78/40/86/2-11-11_september.asx
-Hedge
Forgive me for asking Hedge I just can't recall...aren't you a CTer?
-
Here's a clip that aired on Swedish TV last night, shows that it is a plane crashing into the WTC.
Forget about the missile theories.
Look at 1:33 into the clip:
http://svt.se/content/1/c6/78/40/86/2-11-11_september.asx
-Hedge
I guess the CIA doesn't control the Swedish media.
Wait . . . is Sweden involved in this conspiracy too? :o
-
I guess the CIA doesn't control the Swedish media.
Wait . . . is Sweden involved in this conspiracy too? :o
Everyone is man, Jag accused China of holding info over our head today to make more money! The whole world is covering this up!!!
-
Everyone is man, Jag accused China of holding info over our head today to make more money! The whole world is covering this up!!!
Jag also believes Bush has bribed the media.
-
Jag also believes Bush has bribed the media.
Yeah Jag is a real winner.....I feel bad for her and 240..they trust no one. It has to suck going through life looking over your shoulder all the time
-
LOL... to play devil's advocate...
OR, if a person is educated, they possess stronger ciritical thinking skills and are more likely to analyze and evaluate statements given to them. They will holes in the story, and will inquisitively search for more.
Poor people - obviously less educated statitsitcally - are more likely to just believe what they are told cause they don't understand it or possess the training/motivation to delve deeper. Hell, I was an MBA and I took on the 911 stuff to disprove it. I thought it was insane and asinine. however, the evidence doesn't lie.
A close friend in the NYPD who was at the scene on 9-11, expressed confusion when building 7 fell on it's "footprint" at 5pm on 9-11. He said the building was barely damaged. He....not I, believes something "fishy" was going on.
Personally......I have no idea.
-
A close friend in the NYPD who was at the scene on 9-11, expressed confusion when building 7 fell on it's "footprint" at 5pm on 9-11. He said the building was barely damaged. He....not I, believes something "fishy" was going on.
Personally......I have no idea.
no disrespect to you 240. But i see a title wave of posts coming.... :)
-
A close friend in the NYPD who was at the scene on 9-11, expressed confusion when building 7 fell on it's "footprint" at 5pm on 9-11. He said the building was barely damaged. He....not I, believes something "fishy" was going on.
Personally......I have no idea.
At least two television networks made premature announcements of the collapse of WTC 7. The BBC unequivocally announced the collapse about 23 minutes before the fact, and even featured a New York correspondent speaking of the collapse in past tense with the still-erect skyscraper standing behind her.
-
Much taller than people realize. This building went from 500 feet of steel, concrete, and metal, into 20 feet of melted steel and giant clouds of talcum-powderized fine dust in only 6.5 seconds.
Here is an EIGHT SECOND video clip which should absolutely convince you it was brought down in a controlled demolition:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8403741864603265979&q=wtc+7+new&hl=en
-
Much taller than people realize. This building went from 500 feet of steel, concrete, and metal, into 20 feet of melted steel and giant clouds of talcum-powderized fine dust in only 6.5 seconds.
Here is an EIGHT SECOND video clip which should absolutely convince you it was brought down in a controlled demolition:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8403741864603265979&q=wtc+7+new&hl=en
I hadn't seen that clip..........pretty much what my buddy described from ground zero.
-
I hadn't seen that clip..........pretty much what my buddy described from ground zero.
Not only how and where it fell - but the fact that EVERYTHING in that building that was non-metal (concrete, walls, office material, appliances, etc) was vaporized into this fine 100 mc talcum powder-sized particles.
Gravity can't do that. Explosives can.
And there were pools of molten metal, far above the temperature that even a live fire can deliver. For weeks afterwards. Another thing that gravity cannot do but explosives always do.
-
Anyone who can watch this and still accept the 9/11 Commission Report is someone who refuses - probably out of sheer intellectual laziness (hi, Bum!) - to think for themselves.
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-2179339594842383954
Forget the video of the building coming straight down. Forget the firemen saying the building is going to come down.
It shows pictures of other skyscrapers that didn't collapse when every single window on the floor had flames pouring out. Then it shows WTC7 with two or three isolated pockets of subdued fire.
And this is supposed to be what brought down a skyscraper for the first and only time in all of architectural history.
Give me a fucking break. :)
-
I'm dubious of those claims, a 3-4% measure of accuracy is just too much when polling 1,010 people and extrapolating out for the entire voting age country. I agree that more people think something is fishy about 9/11 but the 72,600,000 number I won't believe until everyone is polled.
The subject is too far fetched and the number is simply too high to be believable.
stat 101
its an easy course
-
Forgive me for asking Hedge I just can't recall...aren't you a CTer?
Never was, never will be.
If there are any evidence that there was a self-employed attack, then sure, I will accept that. Wouldn't most people?
But I'm not gonna grasp for different kinds of conspiracies.
Until there are any kind of evidence, I don't buy it.
Conspiracy Theory per se is something I find very unattractive.
I will admit that I believe that Kennedy wasn't killed by Oswald, but rather by a larger group of men. I can't say who they were though. That's as far as CT'ing you will get me.
My take on CT'ers is pretty clear: These guys live in a fantasy world, and have problems keeping reality and fiction apart. They watch too many movies.
-Hedge
-
My take on CT'ers is pretty clear: These guys live in a fantasy world, and have problems keeping reality and fiction apart. They watch too many movies.
-Hedge
I agree.
-
Never was, never will be.
If there are any evidence that there was a self-employed attack, then sure, I will accept that. Wouldn't most people?
But I'm not gonna grasp for different kinds of conspiracies.
Until there are any kind of evidence, I don't buy it.
Conspiracy Theory per se is something I find very unattractive.
I will admit that I believe that Kennedy wasn't killed by Oswald, but rather by a larger group of men. I can't say who they were though. That's as far as CT'ing you will get me.
My take on CT'ers is pretty clear: These guys live in a fantasy world, and have problems keeping reality and fiction apart. They watch too many movies.
-Hedge
Cool man, I just wasn't sure
-
I will admit that I believe that Kennedy wasn't killed by Oswald, but rather by a larger group of men. I can't say who they were though. That's as far as CT'ing you will get me.
THe only difference here is TIME.
In 1968, you might not have been open to the JFK possibilities, or level of evidence, that you are in 2007.
Likewise, if we have this many questions/holes in the 9/11 story already... one can only imagine the level of 911 skeptics by the time 2030 or 2040 rolls around.
IMO, it'll end up just like JFK. He was killed and the military industrial complex quickly took power and got us into vietnam and a huge pattern of interfering with other nations' operations. I think in 40 years, people will see 911 as the self attack used to justify a series of mid east invasions. And just like 9/11, no one will ever see a jail cell.
-
If you had a poll asking "Do you think that no plane really hit the pentagon but it was a missile from the plane and the plane flew away"
im sure you would get 36% ::)
If you asked "Do you think those planes that hit 9/11 were really halograms?"
Im sure you would get 36%
-
stat 101
its an easy course
The stats course I had to take for my major was Statistics 246 or 286 or 346, something like that. Thanks for the tip though.
By the way, I'm still curious how a sampling of 1010 can be extrapolated out to account for more than 200,000,000 people with near complete accuracy. People have different beliefs in different parts of the country. What's true for New York might not be true for Texas or Oklahoma. I'm still skeptical of this polls accuracy.
-
The stats course I had to take for my major was Statistics 246 or 286 or 346, something like that. Thanks for the tip though.
By the way, I'm still curious how a sampling of 1010 can be extrapolated out to account for more than 200,000,000 people with near complete accuracy. People have different beliefs in different parts of the country. What's true for New York might not be true for Texas or Oklahoma. I'm still skeptical of this polls accuracy.
I think we hit 300,000,000 million this year. I'm sure that wouldn't throw it off though....lol
-
I think we hit 300,000,000 million this year. I'm sure that wouldn't throw it off though....lol
You continue to embarass yourself:
There are 217.8 million people in the United States who are 18 or over.
God, you are stupid. Did you not understand the numbers Ribo posted, or did you just skip over them?
-
You continue to embarass yourself:
God, you are stupid. Did you not understand the numbers Ribo posted, or did you just skip over them?
There are still 300,000,000+ americans. And it wouldn't suprise me if the left polled 1000+ 3rd graders for their numbers. Do you have to ask if I look at Ribo's posts? That nut job is worse than you.
-
There are still 300,000,000+ americans. And it wouldn't suprise me if the left polled 1000+ 3rd graders for their numbers. Do you have to ask if I look at Ribo's posts? That nut job is worse than you.
We're only counting people over the age of 18.
You didn't read that.
Now, in the last 3 days, you have:
1) Admitted that part of the reason you kill in Iraq is oil
2) Admitted you spoke authoratively on world oil resources without knowing anything about them
3) Admitted you joined into this argument without even reading the first post, which set a very important premise for this discussion. And, you were a smartass to a person who understood this, because you did not.
I think it's safe to say you are a stupid man, mm69.
-
We're only counting people over the age of 18.
You didn't read that.
Now, in the last 3 days, you have:
1) Admitted that part of the reason you kill in Iraq is oil
2) Admitted you spoke authoratively on world oil resources without knowing anything about them
3) Admitted you joined into this argument without even reading the first post, which set a very important premise for this discussion. And, you were a smartass to a person who understood this, because you did not.
I think it's safe to say you are a stupid man, mm69.
actually thanks for putting words in my outh...
1. never admitted that (see my response in the other thread)
2. authoratively? lol
3. Ribo is an idiot
-
3. Ribo is an idiot
Ribo is smarter than you.
You might find ten people here who completely disagree with his politics or views.
But you won't find one person who says mm69 is smarter than him.
So if he is smarter, and you call him an idiot, that puts you at sub-idiot level.
-
Ribo is smarter than you.
You might find ten people here who completely disagree with his politics or views.
But you won't find one person who says mm69 is smarter than him.
So if he is smarter, and you call him an idiot, that puts you at sub-idiot level.
OK I'll play cardio...prove he is smarter!! lol