Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
Xraye said:
Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.
Click to expand...

Thanks. If you click on the link in my signature, it will start the download of 5 Mb .doc file. The entire text of "Loose Change" is there, in order, along with my comments and a subject index, so it's easy to follow. That will be much faster than reading the 3,000+ posts here. (I think you should read the posts here, I'm just suggesting what would be faster).
 
Xraye said:
Shrinker, I'm surprised that you don't feel welcome to post in the other forum. What gives you that impression? Gravy and Shrinker, on your advice I'll wade through the previous posts and make note of any relevant posts that may adress my questions, as well as the websight you've made which addresses the Loose Change video.

It may take me some time to research my response to your guy's questions, so please be patient.
Click to expand...
Hehe, sorry Xraye, but that question's been answered on this thread too. Have you not noticed over there how non-believer's questions get moved rapidly into the under-the-bridge board? haven't you noticed how folks get banned if they don't convert within a couple of days?

JREF poster Geggy has been posting here for several days now, possibly several weeks. He's a CT believer and brings some lousy evidence to the debate, but nobody here wants him banned for it. Thanks to geggy, and the good folks debating him, I know no more about the truths and fictions of this whole 911 thing than I did a month ago.
 
Last edited:
Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
From reading that site's opening post, I'm gonna go off in the woods and become a hermit, 'cause there may be no hope for mankind.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, it makes just as much sense when altered thusly:

I recently watched the film ATTACK OF THE KILLER TOMATOES and couldn't believe what I learned. I thought that I had read and heard everything about 9/11, but I was wrong. This film makes quite a case for an alternate view of what happened on September 11th, 2001.
Click to expand...
 
geggy said:
Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.
Click to expand...

Yes, Xraye, geggy has already explained to us that its a controlled demolition because it looks like one, but it doesn't look like one because They designed it not to look like one. So you can skip that part.
 
geggy said:
Thank god for your presence, xraye.
Click to expand...

YOU'RE WELCOME, GEGGY. NOW, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO START USING THAT BRAIN I GAVE YOU?

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

....the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo....
Click to expand...

The cardinal rule of controlled demo: MAKE SURE THE PENTHOUSE FALLS FIRST!
 
Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.
 
geggy said:
Thank god for your presence, xraye. I've already pointed out several things that you've posted above such as evidence of squibs in the collapsing of the towers, the wtc7 collapsing showed penthouse dropped first before everything else pointed out a characteristic of controlled demo, PNAC's agenda, etc, but many have refused to believe it. So maybe you'll do a better job of addressing the anomalies surround sept 11 than I have in this thread so ya can give me some breathing room for me to discuss the things I know more about. My wife is a psycho therapist and a friend is working on obtaining phd in psychology, we've all had interesting discussions regarding sept 11 and the psychological impact that it had on everyone. Please do stick around.
Click to expand...

Hi geggy. For the fifth time: Assuming your version of 9/11 is correct, and the current administration are a bunch of heartless mass murderers, could you please tell me what we as Americans should do about this?

(This is sort of fun in a monotonous kind of way...)
 
Gravy said:
Please check this post:http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1565506&postcount=1169
Click to expand...

Thanks for mentioning this Gravy. I was just about to post on it anyway. My one month long suspension, caused by asking what the rules were, was supposed to have ended 6 hours ago.

It may have, because the error message has changed. It now simply says "You do not have permission to view this board."


Unbelievable.

I know some people have talked about disabling cookies. Assume that I am computer illiterate. Is disabling cookies a difficult thing to do? I'd love to read the other forum again, or at least be able to see what people here are referencing when they link to it.
 
Xraye said:
here's a video of an interesting perspective givin by 2 foriegn intelligence agents. in it they cite the neo conservative document "Rebuilding America's Defenses", as well as a book entitled "The Grand Chessboard" written by Zbigniew Brzezinksi who was the National Secretary Advisor to Carter and who worked with Regan in an intelligence capacity. both are very interesting pieces of evidence that give much credence to the possibility of a governmental conspiracy in which 9/11 was used as a catalyst to gain popular support for thier foriegn adjenda.

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8274552561914055825
Click to expand...

Watched it. Xraye, you're going to have to do much, much better than that unless you're just here, like geggy, to express your opinions. This video is your "evidence?"

Most of the video is British MP Michael Meacher speaking. He's not a "foreign intelligence agent." Meacher is a former Environment Minister, and is now a Labour MP.

Nearly all of the video is statements of conjecture. They do make a few valid points about intelligence lapses. THose same points are addressed in the 9/11 Commisison Report.

Meacher claims to have read that report. But get this:
Meacher:
The first hijack happened at the latest at about 8:20. For the next hour and forty minutes, no aircraft was put into the air, even though there was at the U.S. Andrews Air Force Base, 10 miles from WAshington, D.C.,...a whole squadron of top-level fighter planes.

No planes were flown in from other air bases, even though at top speed, they were certainly within range. Why did that happen?

...(about tthe lack of fighter response) why, on this single day, did that not happen?

...(about tthe lack of fighter response) why did that not happen on that very important day? That question has never been answered.

Narrator:
After the hijacking it took 100 minutes for the first fighter aircraft to take off. Remarkable facts.
Click to expand...
Xraye, can you point out the errors here?

In an interview with Andrew Harvey (not in your video):
Andrew Harvey: You do quote that, you suggest that the American forces stood by while that attack took place.

Meacher: I did not say that, it is absolutely not my view.
Click to expand...

Xraye, you are welcome here. But if you persist in insulting our intelligence with stuff like this, it's going to turn out for you like it has for geggy.
 
Last edited:
geggy said:
Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.
Click to expand...

Some people don't find that painful at all. A large proportion of the folks you are debating with aren't even American. If Bush did it for power and money then it would be quite a relief for the non US citizens worried about Al Qaeda's next attack. Would it not?
 
NobbyNobbs said:
Thanks for mentioning this Gravy. I was just about to post on it anyway. My one month long suspension, caused by asking what the rules were, was supposed to have ended 6 hours ago.

It may have, because the error message has changed. It now simply says "You do not have permission to view this board."


Unbelievable.

I know some people have talked about disabling cookies. Assume that I am computer illiterate. Is disabling cookies a difficult thing to do? I'd love to read the other forum again, or at least be able to see what people here are referencing when they link to it.
Click to expand...

You mean that you can't view the site at all? That doesn't sound right. I'm banned but I can view the site. If there's a cookie issue, your web browser's help menu will tell you how to reset cookies. Cookie settings usually range from "Never ask" (accept all cookies) to "Never accept," (which you don't want).

p.s. I hear that mentioning my critique is a bannable offense there, so watch it!
 
geggy said:
Sure, retort yourself to mocken and insulting because it's easier for you to deal rather than opening up to the painful idea that the bush admin may have had a hand in the attacks.
Click to expand...
I'm open to the idea that Bush may have had a hand in the attacks. Please provide, in your 156th post, any evidence that supports it.
 
Shrinker said:
Some people don't find that painful at all. A large proportion of the folks you are debating with aren't even American. If Bush did it for power and money then it would be quite a relief for the non US citizens worried about Al Qaeda's next attack. Would it not?
Click to expand...

Oh man, wouldn't it be great if it really were Bush? Then we could get rid of his sorry butt and live without worrying about further attacks. And all those "fake" terrorists, you know, the ones that have been vowing to destroy us for decades, we could just laugh and say "C'mon guys, we know you're just kidding. We got the real menace locked up!" And under the wise and benevolent rule of President Avery, America would be without fear, a land of peace and plenty, a sunny place where children play and birds sing and the lion lays down with the lamb and unicorns frolic in the meadow.
 
Xraye said:
physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor
Click to expand...
That's not a "research paper", that's a website. Research papers are submitted to research journals, where they undergo peer review.

Professor Jones could do with a little peer review, especially as he's often talking about areas outside of his own expertise.

When he does talk about physics he is profoundly disappointing :

... with the upper part falling nearly as rapidly as ejected debris which provide free-fall references (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/proofs/speed.html; Griffin, 2004, chapter 2). Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel support columns – the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass.
Click to expand...
Well Professor Jones --- may I call you "Jonesy"? --- there are indeed laws of physics. And they are a set of quantitive equations. And it is, stop me if I'm wrong, YOUR JOB, TRADE, AND PROFESSION TO APPLY THEM TO PHYSICAL SITUATIONS. So why don't you?

He admits that the building is not in fact falling at free-fall acceleration. So the next step would be to find out what the acceleration is, and so how much resistance the collapse met with.

It's his JOB to do stuff like that. But he hasn't. This is why this is not, and never will be, a "research paper". Scientists have a very expressive phrase for an argument in this stage of development. They call it "handwaving".
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom