• 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.

Truthers Take On NIST

After my 1337 google badge earning skillz, I believe that may be him. A whois search for the above domain gives an email that seems to be used on the NISTchallenge website.
 
Wizard said:
They have manipulated nothing. I hope you are careful if you intend to defame them. For once, make an original fim supporting the official story instead of pasting crap over someone elses hard work

My age is not your concern.
Click to expand...

Hard work; Just lies; why does Wizard gravitate to lies?

Darn, it is just a lie!

If Doc is making a film to show the lies he deserves a medal for doing it. That film sucks, and if he took the time he was tortured as he had to wade thru BS for days and weeks just to show some truth.
 
Bandersnatch said:
I found this guy in less than a minute.
Click to expand...

I hope, for that guy's sake, that it is really him. If it is not, and if the guy at the link is a legitimate architect, etc. and is not the author of the crappy paper, his reputation is going to be trashed as a result of a crappy paper written by someone else aligning himself with the troofers. Of course, if it is really him, he deserves the trashing.

(That said, the linked website is pretty lame and I certainly wouldn't contract his services to design even a deck at my cottage let alone anything else on the basis of that site. Most legitimate architects would actually provide credentials, office address, fax numbers, CV, details on their education, expertise and experience, etc. so I am instantly doubtful about this whole thing. Alas, it is late so the rest of this will have to wait until tomorrow, but suffice it to say that like nearly all of the other "experts" that align themselves with troofers, they always seem to fall short in the details, and always seem to be pretty obscure. Of course, I'll revisit that if evidence to the contrary is provided, but those are my initial reactions.)
 
doctorfungi said:
Ha!



Not true. I obtained permission beforehand. You should avoid making assumptions buddy.

No one has copyright to the word "Screw" anyway.
Click to expand...

So there is absolutely nothing original in your film. Oh my.

Heres what I predict it will be like:

911 Mysteries Narrator: The towers fell in 10 seconds

Fungi: No it was 13 actually

911 Mysteries Narrator: Building seven collapsed mysteriously

Fungi: It wasn't mysterious

911 Mysteries Narrator: There were bombs in the building

Fungi: I don't believe you

etc etc


Pathetic
 
Thanks beachnut :)

I find it funny how Wizard thinks he is qualified to talk about this project before he's seen it. Much like he dismissed al Qaeda videos as fake without having seen them.
 
Wizard said:
911 Mysteries Narrator: The towers fell in 10 seconds

Fungi: No it was 13 actually

911 Mysteries Narrator: Building seven collapsed mysteriously

Fungi: It wasn't mysterious

911 Mysteries Narrator: There were bombs in the building

Fungi: I don't believe you
Click to expand...

NOTHING like that.

I actually do analysis. Unlike yourself.
 
doctorfungi said:
Ha!



Not true. I obtained permission beforehand. You should avoid making assumptions buddy.

No one has copyright to the word "Screw" anyway.
Click to expand...

Wizard is sensitive about the having to screw on his head after loading it with CT stuff.

If you are doing the Mystery rebuttal you deserve high praise; I get sick watching that pile of lies and junk. It must be the voice that brainwashes the CT inclined.
 
The draft copy is being uploaded now. 3 people have been selected to peer-review it.

After this, corrections might have to be made. The video will then be re-encoded and uploaded again for public release.
 
Wizard said:
They have manipulated nothing. I hope you are careful if you intend to defame them. For once, make an original fim supporting the official story instead of pasting crap over someone elses hard work.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, Wizard, but you said you'd "love to be proved wrong."

Then why are you not welcoming critiques of conspiracist literature and videos?

Please explain, Wizard.


As an aside, do you know that I appear in "911 Mysteries" as a government agent? It's true! :)
 
doctorfungi said:
Thanks beachnut :)

I find it funny how Wizard thinks he is qualified to talk about this project before he's seen it. Much like he dismissed al Qaeda videos as fake without having seen them.
Click to expand...

I know, he is blasting your video based on what he thinks someone would put in it?

Maybe the reason he leans to the CT world could be his primary research tool is google, not his brain. I would tell him google can work if he uses his head and finds real work.
 
beachnut said:
Hard work; Just lies; why does Wizard gravitate to lies?

Darn, it is just a lie!

If Doc is making a film to show the lies he deserves a medal for doing it. That film sucks, and if he took the time he was tortured as he had to wade thru BS for days and weeks just to show some truth.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's easy for those with zero credentials, zero research skills, zero expertise, and zero willingness to learn, to criticize others who actually do more than post on message boards, which is all that "Wizard" does.

Semi-appropriately, the Wizard of Oz springs to mind, specifically the line, "Pay absolutely no attention to the man behind the curtain" to which it is appropriate to add in these circumstances, "For he is but a troll, plain and simple."
 
Wizard said:
Analysis? What are your qualifications for this analysis?
Click to expand...

Well. I think you have misunderstood my statement.

I did an analysis of the film. Which included obtaining all the stock footage that 9/11 Mysteries used and comparing it to the footage used in their film. This includes interviews, collapse footage etc. That alone will prove that the creators of this film are manipulative and liars.

Furthermore, I used common and advanced scientific knowledge and peer-reviewed papers to prove that 9/11 mysteries claims are based on nothing. This goes from showing how much thermite would be needed to bring down the towers, to showing how certain weight claims etc are false.

But most of all, I show how many claims they make are based on absolutley nothing. Claiming that molten "steel" was found under the towers. They fail to prove this - I point it out. Obviously there are many more things I have pointed out but you'll see them later on.

The logic in 9/11 Mysteries is also a serious issue that is addressed.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Excuse me, Wizard, but you said you'd "love to be proved wrong."

Then why are you not welcoming critiques of conspiracist literature and videos?

Please explain, Wizard.


As an aside, do you know that I appear in "911 Mysteries" as a government agent? It's true! :)
Click to expand...

Critiques are good. If they come from qualified people that is. A guy on a foirum pasting non expert views over a film in Windows Movie Maker does not impress me.
 
Wizard said:
Critiques are good. If they come from qualified people that is. A guy on a foirum pasting non expert views over a film in Windows Movie Maker does not impress me.
Click to expand...
How does the source of an informed criticism affect its validity? Please explain. Shouldn't a work stand on its merits?
 
doctorfungi said:
Well. I think you have misunderstood my statement.

I did an analysis of the film. Which included obtaining all the stock footage that 9/11 Mysteries used and comparing it to the footage used in their film. This includes interviews, collapse footage etc. That alone will prove that the creators of this film are manipulative and liars.

Furthermore, I used common and advanced scientific knowledge and peer-reviewed papers to prove that 9/11 mysteries claims are based on nothing.
Click to expand...

Could I have links to these peer reviewed papers?

If they are manipulating footage they would surely know that people could see the original and expose them. I hope your sources for this footage was primary
 
Gravy said:
How does the source of an informed criticism affect its validity? Please explain?
Click to expand...

If a neutral structural engineer analysed 911 mysteries I would be delighted.

Fungi has an agenda and no expertise.

Gravy, you wont even give the time of day to an Architect's critique of NIST
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom