Dear Internet, I’m Bob. I have arrived.

I totally have a new phone background.

For the backstory, or a version of the backstory, at least, go to We Are Change Atlanta. (Honestly, I was stunned to hear what I was up to.) Then go to my bosses at the “Georgia Tech Institute of Technology” [sic] and demand that I be fired, because it cracks me up.

RJB

About these ads

29 Responses to Dear Internet, I’m Bob. I have arrived.

  1. T. DAVIDSOHN says:

    You’re just upset because they pierced your miasma.

  2. Bob says:

    It was MY asma. They had no right to touch it.

    RJB

  3. Zagrobelny says:

    Was this the same guy complaining about your supposed ad hominem attacks in the other post? “how do you sleep at night?” indeed.

  4. David Gerard says:

    Added to RationalWiki’s Clogosphere page.

    Wow, they pulled out the LOLcats. It’s serious.

  5. postman says:

    Stop censoring him by linking to his website. That’s just evil !!

    • Bob says:

      They live in a desert. They actually say that I’m lying about only banning Camron, that I banned another guy. No, the fellow included so many links that the spam filter thought it was spam (which it only sort of was). I approved it and he could post here today if he wanted to. Indeed, I’d happily show the entire spam filter if it didn’t show exactly which elements of his profile I use to recognize Camron.

  6. Katrina BlackOps says:

    Well Bob is this really any different that your responding to anyone to disagrees with you with a cat face??, i’m not sure what the problem is. Bob can dish it but can’t take it.

    • Fleegman says:

      Dear Katarina “BlackOps” – Hell yeah! That is so kick-ass.

      Could you please point out where Bob “can’t take it?” I’m having a hard time finding it. Is it the bit where he posts the kitteh pic on his blog for all to see, and has a good old laugh about it?

      What else could he have done? You know, in a way that showed he could, indeed, “take it?”

      What would you have done, Ms BlackOps? Would you have used bad grammar and lots of caps do make a point? Maybe that’s Bob’s problem: not enough caps, and good grammar. Your truther friends are big on caps, as though the more “cap” something is, the more “true” it is. Is that argumentum ad capum?

      Anyway, it should be noted, and applauded, that you didn’t use a single cap in your post there; you just went with the bad grammar. In future, try leaving both at the door when you come in. It’s quite possible, in that case, that you might be taken seriously, but I doubt it, somehow. You still have the hurdle of “making sense” to clear before that becomes a reality. And making sense, I’m afraid, takes a bit more thought than losing caps and forming sentences properly.

      Good luck in your endeavours, however,

      Fleegman (McAwesome)

      • David Gerard says:

        I wonder what “argument from capitals” would be in Latin, given Latin didn’t have capitals (though modern Latin does). Anyone?

      • Ken says:

        The Romans had cursive, book, and lapidary hands, for respectively casual note-taking, legal or archival documents, and stone inscriptions. I suppose their equivalent of argumentum ad capslock would be to cut it into a stone and throw it through your window.

  7. Pacal says:

    “Truthers”, keeping it, has always, classy. (sic).

    Also its not very funny. “Truthers” you can do better!

    • Pacal- We can do better! We’ve got an awesome 30 minutes worth of video exposing Bob on the Georgia Tech Campus. Personally, as a Native Georgian and Veteran of the phony war on terror, it sickens me that my tax dollars are paying Bob to be complicit in the continued criminal cover-up of pre-meditated mass murder!!!

      Daniel Edd Bland III

  8. Bob- You did censor my posts after my first two or three. Did you ever write the 10th Anniversary piece for the Skepical Enquirer?

    DBIII

    9/– TRUTH NOW!!!

  9. John D says:

    Thank Baphomet they haven’t caught wind of your CIA ties.

  10. Bob says:

    Or the fact that I am a 33rd degree Mason.

  11. John D says:

    But as a show of good faith I think you should resign from the Trilateral Commission.

  12. What strange enemies you have, Bob.

  13. Bob says:

    I see them as comic foils more than enemies. I’m actually pretty nice. I barely kill anyone. :)

  14. drwhiteycat says:

    As teh only kitteh admin of dis bwog, i wants to say dat dat is teh uggliest kitteh i haz ever seed and iz a insult to kittehkind. i tink we shud ban anywun what doez dat to a kitteh pitchur.

    Worst. Kittening. Ever.

  15. Victims' Family Member says:

    Bob & Co. still have yet to acknowledge the govt. admitting free fall in WTC 7. High school physics teacher David Chandler confronted NIST in its public hearing and mentioned there was observable and measurable free fall, which only means one thing in all of human history when it comes to skyscrapers coming down symmetrically into their own footprint. Wonder if Bob & Co. feel they know more than these brave people who have researched the facts of the case: http://www.RememberBuilding7.org/ When military officers, rescue workers, and family members stand with pilots, architects, engineers, whistleblowers, physics teachers, scholars, even the Commissioners themselves, it proves there is a huge problem with the govt.’s conspiracy theory. For the sake of peace in the world, we all should be demanding an impartial, comprehensive investigation.

  16. Bob says:

    Hi, Manny.

    If the entire building collapses happened all at once, I would agree with you. But it didn’t.

    The “free fall” phase of the collapse is actually not hard to explain. You have the initial phase of collapse, the one that brings down the penthouse–that was caused by the fire. That internal collapse damaged the support columns throughout the building over several seconds. So how is it that the whole building exterior collapsed at once? The integrity of the columns is important. Imagine a soda straw right out of its wrapper set up vertically. You can actually put a good deal of force on it before it fails–many times the weight of the straw itself. However, if you put a kink in it, the straw gives completely with almost no force at all, offering no resistance, which is what we are seeing in the external collapse. The steel beams were damaged and lost their integrity. Easy peasey.

    RJB

  17. RJB,

    How do you have all the answers Bob, that not even the Commission or NIST was able to provide? Why do over 1,600 professionals with more experience than you or I doubt anything but the use of explosives, which is corroborated by video, audio, eyewitness, physical, and forensic evidence? Please listen to a man who doesn’t make things up out of this air – this presentation is one of many that has yet to be refuted by anyone in the scientific community: Structural Aspects of Building 7’s Collapse: Why the NIST Report is Non-explanatory by Tony Szamboti http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l183LaNay0A

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,579 other followers

%d bloggers like this: