• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was discussing 911 CTers with my dad and he said that this wasn't like the fact that Bush got all of Osama's family etc etc out of the country right after 9/11. I know this comes from fahrenheit 911 but is this also CT bunk?

Thanks again for all the useful information about this. Given the rabid anti-bush slant of some of my relatives I can expect to come across some of this [rule 8] at an upcoming family event, and it is nice to have the information necessary to shoot down this kind of [rule 8 again].
 
One to watch:
"PENTAGON VIDEOS TO BE RELEASED TOMORROW!":
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4266

Obvious prediction: it won't show very much, and the CTs won't believe it anyway.

Not so obvious prediction: the CTs will clamor for the other 84 confiscated videos to also be released, and it will become part of accepted CT lore (and a tirelessly repeated talking point) that something incriminating is contained on one of the other videos that was not released.
 
I was discussing 911 CTers with my dad and he said that this wasn't like the fact that Bush got all of Osama's family etc etc out of the country right after 9/11. I know this comes from fahrenheit 911 but is this also CT bunk?

Thanks again for all the useful information about this. Given the rabid anti-bush slant of some of my relatives I can expect to come across some of this [rule 8] at an upcoming family event, and it is nice to have the information necessary to shoot down this kind of [rule 8 again].
According the the 9/11 Commission, it's bunk:
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp

Of course, people who buy into this stuff view the 9/11 Commission with extreme suspicion, but I'm sure you could follow up on original sources to confirm this if you're resourceful enough. The Report cites all their sources.

Edit: There are several media sources listed at the bottom of the Snopes article.
 
Last edited:
Dylan is still under the impression the Michael Meacher is going to show Loose Change on June 14. He refers to an email dated 5/5/06 from "T.S., Managing Director, MMI Ltd":
http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/2006/05/parliament-funk.html

Perhaps we should refer MPs to Gravy's critique anyway, just in case?
Dylan is aware that Meacher cancelled. Now he's trying to create a pressure campaign to get him to go ahead with the screening:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4264
 
I sent Dylan Avery an email today:
Gravy, maybe you can sweeten the deal by appearing on Roxdog's 50-listener show first.

jenabell said:
Funny why would he ask for this when he was unwilling to go on RD's show?

Did he change his mind about the show?
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4032&view=findpost&p=4476828

I know jenabell is misrepresting your position, but I think if you give the Loosers a taste of what you're bringing to the table, they're going to want blood and demand that Dylan debate you.
 
Gravy, maybe you can sweeten the deal by appearing on Roxdog's 50-listener show first.


http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4032&view=findpost&p=4476828

I know jenabell is misrepresting your position, but I think if you give the Loosers a taste of what you're bringing to the table, they're going to want blood and demand that Dylan debate you.

If Gravy does appear on Roxdog's show we should ensure that we are all on IM at the time to aid in quick fact checking so he doesn't get overwhelmed in a pile of drek, a la Hovind v Shermer.
 
wtc3.jpg

first squib going off the allow the top to fall without toppling over and break into pieces.
wtc4.jpg


wtc5.jpg


wtc6.jpg

second squib ejecting to allow the portion above to fall without toppling over and break into pieces
wtc7.jpg


wtc8.jpg


wtc9.jpg


wtc10.jpg



click on pic to play video of witnesses account of hearing bombs

September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero A chunk of hot metal being removed from the North Tower rubble about eight weeks after 9/11. [Source: Frank Silecchia]
In the weeks and months after 9/11, numerous individuals report seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Center:
Ken Holden, who is involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at Ground Zero, later will tell the 9/11 Commission, “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6.” [9/11 Commission, 5/1/2003]
William Langewiesche, the only journalist to have unrestricted access to Ground Zero during the cleanup operation, describes, “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” [Langewiesche, 2002]

August 27, 2003: NIST Investigators Rule Out Weak Steel as a Factor in Collapses At the end of a two-day meeting to discuss the progress of their investigation of the WTC collapses on 9/11, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigators say that early tests on steel beams recovered from the World Trade Center showed they met or were stronger than design requirements. It also will point out: “Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250�C. ... Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250�C. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 �C.”

July 23, 2002: A “lost tape” of radio messages from firefighters inside the WTC on 9/11 is made public. Supposedly, “city fire officials simply delayed listening” to this tape until after the official report on the fire department’s response to the attacks was published, and they still refuse to allow any officials to discuss the contents. The tape reveals that two firefighters were able to reach the crash site on the 78th floor of the South Tower. While there, “Chief Palmer could see only two pockets of fire, and called for a pair of engine companies to fight them.” [New York Times, 9/4/2002; Guardian, 9/5/2002]

Explosive Evidence. The FEMA report titled World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C (Available at http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm) “Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination. They do not draw this conclusion though. Instead, the authors write (in these selected sentences [The coloring of the text is added here. See below for reason]) “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure.”... “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.”...“The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper.”...“A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.”... â€

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/
 
mushroom.jpg


Look on right side of the tower. Concrete flying straight outward at an accelerating speed. how do you explain this?
 
Why do you even bother posting a link that contains a proven myth in the first sentence?

Although virtually all of the structural steel from the Twin Towers and Building 7 was removed and destroyed, preventing forensic analysis

I just don't get it.
 
[qimg][/qimg]

Look on right side of the tower. Concrete flying straight outward at an accelerating speed. how do you explain this?

Here's a better idea: If this is caused by explosives as you are hinting, calculate how many tons it would require.
 
July 23, 2002: A “lost tape” of radio messages from firefighters inside the WTC on 9/11 is made public. Supposedly, “city fire officials simply delayed listening” to this tape until after the official report on the fire department’s response to the attacks was published, and they still refuse to allow any officials to discuss the contents. The tape reveals that two firefighters were able to reach the crash site on the 78th floor of the South Tower. While there, “Chief Palmer could see only two pockets of fire, and called for a pair of engine companies to fight them.” [New York Times, 9/4/2002; Guardian, 9/5/2002]

Yeah, the 78 floor wasn't an inferno. Shame about all the floors above them.

More lies from geggy.
 
September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground Zero A chunk of hot metal being removed from the North Tower rubble about eight weeks after 9/11. [Source: Frank Silecchia]

Link?


In the weeks and months after 9/11, numerous individuals report seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Center:
Ken Holden, who is involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at Ground Zero, later will tell the 9/11 Commission, “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6.” [9/11 Commission, 5/1/2003]

Link?


William Langewiesche, the only journalist to have unrestricted access to Ground Zero during the cleanup operation, describes, “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” [Langewiesche, 2002]

Link?

August 27, 2003: NIST Investigators Rule Out Weak Steel as a Factor in Collapses At the end of a two-day meeting to discuss the progress of their investigation of the WTC collapses on 9/11, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigators say that early tests on steel beams recovered from the World Trade Center showed they met or were stronger than design requirements. It also will point out: “Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250�C. ... Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250�C. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 �C.”

Link?

July 23, 2002: A “lost tape” of radio messages from firefighters inside the WTC on 9/11 is made public. Supposedly, “city fire officials simply delayed listening” to this tape until after the official report on the fire department’s response to the attacks was published, and they still refuse to allow any officials to discuss the contents. The tape reveals that two firefighters were able to reach the crash site on the 78th floor of the South Tower. While there, “Chief Palmer could see only two pockets of fire, and called for a pair of engine companies to fight them.” [New York Times, 9/4/2002; Guardian, 9/5/2002]

They waited two months to report this? Oh, and Link?
 
[qimg]http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/present/mushroom.jpg[/qimg]

Look on right side of the tower. Concrete flying straight outward at an accelerating speed. how do you explain this?

So, you're saying that the concrete that is "flying straight outward" is accelerating? Are there rockets on the concrete? Do you mean that they're falling toward the earth and experiencing acceleration due to gravity? Oh, big question here, how can you determine acceleration from a still photo?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom