• 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 - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brainster said:
Welcome, Earl. As one who once believed the CIA (or the oilmen or Nixon's plumbers) killed JFK, I know how seductive the CT can be.

One suggestion; I am trying to get rid of the "truth" part of this movement. It's the 9-11 Denial Movement. Semantics count, and if we're debunking the truth what does that make us? ;)
Click to expand...

Done and done Denial Movement from now on.
 
Earl The Tall said:
Hey guys, new to the board and I just wanted to come on and say that your doing a great job in countering the whole 'truth movement.' Awesome awesome work.

And this is comming from a former CTer.
Click to expand...
I'm curious as to what CT you formerly believed. Also, what caused you to change your mind?

Welcome to the JREF. It's a terrific place (and be sure to visit the many subforums).
 
Guys;

over at my blog, a truther is claiming the IW paper is useless to him, as it doesnt address the Pulversized Concrete Issue. As well, he claims there is footage around with smoke/dust cloud at bottom of WTC just prior to colapse (insinuating a bottom floor explosion for CD theory). ANy thoughts on either of these two issues.

Thanks
TAM
 
Regnad Kcin said:
I'm curious as to what CT you formerly believed. Also, what caused you to change your mind?

Welcome to the JREF. It's a terrific place (and be sure to visit the many subforums).
Click to expand...

It was few, roswel/UFOs, JFK, NWO, I believed most of them. Now what changed my mind is a intersting story. Sorry though if derails the thread somewhat. But, back in senior year of High School (2001-2002) *Note at the time I did not believe 9/11 was an inside job.

I had a great US Government teacher who knew about my obessions with CTs and would love to just debat with me about. They were always fun, and he then challenged me that if I could get enough information to convince him that there was something off about JFKs assanation he would give me an 'A' and let me skip class. Not wanting to waste an oppertunity like that I gladly accepted.

Over the course the next few months I read several books on the assantion, went to several websites and did a lot of digging. Here's where it just intersting, I decided to not just stick with the normal conspiracy throires sites and books. I went to every resource I could get my hands on. I mean to skip class the rest of the year and not get in trouble for it, I wanted to cover all my bases.

The more I researched it though, more the theories began to fall apart. Magic bullet was explained, the famous 'back and to the left' head movement, why over the years no one has said anything about it. (I found it during this our government can't keep long terms sercets, short-terms sure. Past a few months not so much.) the list went on.

Face with this new mountian of evidance I had to face facts. I was wrong, and when I would go back to the conspiracy books and sites and would not get any answers to counter this. Truth be told the feeling I got after this was wrong. So I went up to my teacher and told him that I couldn't prove it. I showed him all the information I had. From that day on I relized I need to take the time to look at all the information myself and not listen to just this one side and blinding agree with it. So my days of a CTer was at their end. And I haven't looked back.

As a side note, I got an A in the class, but was not allowed to skip the class.:(
 
Last edited:
Earl, that is such an inspiring story. What a way to learn critical thinking and a great teacher.
 
Man the guys over at LC...I actually feel bad for them...

They are so caught up in their delusions, that some have lost partners, others cannot find them, others do not want to...

One smart CTer over there summed it up...

"What is the point in fighting for our country and freedoms, if you've got noone to share them with?"

I certainly hope there is noone over here on the debunking side that has fallen that far out of touch with the real world.
 
brumsen said:
Drawing a conclusion not based on any reasoning is logically faulty - it simply cannot be called a conclusion.
Click to expand...

You do not base a conclusion on reasoning, you base it on evidence.. Evidence that a controlled demolition brought down WTC: None. Hence, investigating controlled demolition as a possibility without a shred of evidence = waste of time, ressources and money.
 
Also new here, from across the pond :)

Thank God for this forum. I watched Loose Change for the first time a few weeks ago from a link on an online gaming forum - OmG GUYZ U HAVE TO SE THIS PORVES THAT 9/11 WAS An INSiDE JOB LOLZ - and managed to get into some conversations surrounding it and the whole 9/11 CT.

I'll give you an example of a chat I had with a very good and well learned friend of mine:-

Chum: It was a Skyhawk / Cruise Missile / Truck Bomb that hit the Pentagon
Me: There's no evidence to say that's the case.
Chum: Of course there's no physical evidence, they aren't stupid, they removed it.
Me: *repeatedly bang cranium against hard surface*

I'm sure this sort of conversation is probably quite old news to you guys, but it really opened my eyes at the time. The Loose Change forum only made my blood pressure worse with the circularity of arguments, every 4th word being 'clearly' or 'obviously' or 'this is FACT', and worst of all, the obscene use of smilies. If Dante had emoticons, Inferno would be the LC forum.

It's good to be here. And the ninja thing is punka!

@ Abby - Just thought you'd maybe be interested to learn that your blog made me laugh so much whilst on the night shift at the hospital I nurse in that I woke 2 patients up. My explanation cut very little ice.

:)
 
I second Abby on the teacher comment. I would like to believe that is not uncommon! I think what Artistic always says will happen, will sooner than later anywho! " They will awaken the academic beast", then this will really get interesting. Way to go Tall, and welcome!

DT
 
Last edited:
NickUK said:
Also new here, from across the pond :)

Thank God for this forum. I watched Loose Change for the first time a few weeks ago from a link on an online gaming forum - OmG GUYZ U HAVE TO SE THIS PORVES THAT 9/11 WAS An INSiDE JOB LOLZ - and managed to get into some conversations surrounding it and the whole 9/11 CT.

I'll give you an example of a chat I had with a very good and well learned friend of mine:-

Chum: It was a Skyhawk / Cruise Missile / Truck Bomb that hit the Pentagon
Me: There's no evidence to say that's the case.
Chum: Of course there's no physical evidence, they aren't stupid, they removed it.
Me: *repeatedly bang cranium against hard surface*
Click to expand...

Same thing happened to me about three weeks ago. I have since led him away from the Dark Side. This is a great place to find answers. Done good, and WELCOME!
 
Gravy said:
You claim definitively that NIST did not look into the idea that explosives were used in the towers. Perhaps you are right. There is only one way to find out: contact NIST. Again, have you or anyone else done so?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did. My query has gone unanswered to this date.

ETA: Gravy, do you mean to say that NIST may well have studied events beyond collapse initiation, and alternative hypotheses, just not included the results of those studies in the reports? And your point with me is that I should not conclude from these things not having been written up that no research was conducted?
Well, OK then. This could have been resolved many posts back, had you given me clear direct answers. I am fine with retracting the claim that NIST did not study these things. The discussion started when I was asked over what problem I have with the NIST report: it simply is that - whether they researched them or not - nothing was written about them in the report. In the case of post-collapse initiation events, that is because it should have been within the focus of the report for reasons stated earlier in discussion with R. Mackey and Wildcat. In the case of alternative/CD hypotheses, they should have writen about it since they drew a conclusion about it - which now appears to come from nowhere.
 
Last edited:
Earl The Tall said:
It was few, roswel/UFOs, JFK, NWO, I believed most of them. Now what changed my mind is a intersting story. Sorry though if derails the thread somewhat. But, back in senior year of High School (2001-2002) *Note at the time I did not believe 9/11 was an inside job.

I had a great US Government teacher who knew about my obessions with CTs and would love to just debat with me about. They were always fun, and he then challenged me that if I could get enough information to convince him that there was something off about JFKs assanation he would give me an 'A' and let me skip class. Not wanting to waste an oppertunity like that I gladly accepted.

Over the course the next few months I read several books on the assantion, went to several websites and did a lot of digging. Here's where it just intersting, I decided to not just stick with the normal conspiracy throires sites and books. I went to every resource I could get my hands on. I mean to skip class the rest of the year and not get in trouble for it, I wanted to cover all my bases.

The more I researched it though, more the theories began to fall apart. Magic bullet was explained, the famous 'back and to the left' head movement, why over the years no one has said anything about it. (I found it during this our government can't keep long terms sercets, short-terms sure. Past a few months not so much.) the list went on.

Face with this new mountian of evidance I had to face facts. I was wrong, and when I would go back to the conspiracy books and sites and would not get any answers to counter this. Truth be told the feeling I got after this was wrong. So I went up to my teacher and told him that I couldn't prove it. I showed him all the information I had. From that day on I relized I need to take the time to look at all the information myself and not listen to just this one side and blinding agree with it. So my days of a CTer was at their end. And I haven't looked back.

As a side note, I got an A in the class, but was not allowed to skip the class.:(
Click to expand...

Great story Earl.

I myself am a former CT nutter (*shock* *gasp*). My conversion came about in a more abrupt fashion though.

I was at an annual convention for a political party I was involved in with a group of conspiracists determined to stage a takeover of the party, get ourselves elected and banish the new world order from Alberta forever.

During the course of the days events, I found myself a pal of sorts among our little group with whom I agreed on nearly everything. I actually liked the guy and thought he had a good head on his shoulders.

Until that is, he told me that people in interracial marriages should be put to death. He was not kidding either. I was aware beforehand of the accusations of anti-semitism and various other prejudices about our movement. I never believed in racism or bigotry of any kind. When people pointed out the cartoons of the guys with big noses in the SPOTLIGHT (yeah, them...) or The Micheal Journal I just wrote them off as, well... guys with big noses.

But when that guy, who ten minutes before I respected, basically grabbed me by the shoulders, shook me and effectively said "Hey! WAKE UP AND SMELL THE NAZIISM!!!" I did wake up.

I was floored. I didn't talk to the guy for the rest of the day, or ever again for that matter. I stopped going to our groups meetings (it was the mid-90's, the 19.2 kilobaud was the internet standard and meeting people face to face was still the way to go) after that because I knew that guy was going to be there.

Seperated from thier influence I started to gain a clearer perspective and become more skeptical of some of thier outrageuos claims. I was also young and rebellious back then (like 90% of the loosers) but I've mellowed a bit since.

If Earl and I are any indication, the "truth" movement (except for the crotchety old men like Fetzer, Jones, et al) will fade away due to the onset of maturity. Until then, you all may carry on debunking. :)
 
simakperrce said:
Putting your meaningless reply aside for a moment, would you agree or not?
Click to expand...
No.

A conclusion is based both on premisses and reasoning. Premisses by themselves do not generate the conclusion; reasoning is needed for that.

The premisses may be propositions about (statements of) facts - which in some contexts would be called 'evidence' - but they may also be propositions about values, or analytical truths.
 
Earl The Tall said:
Hey guys, new to the board and I just wanted to come on and say that your doing a great job in countering the whole 'truth movement.' Awesome awesome work.

And this is comming from a former CTer.
Click to expand...
So was it the hush money, blackmail, or death threats that turned you around?

;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom