• 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.

Bush Administration Science

If 9/11 film makers were oh so worried about making money, they'd sooner do a Girls Gone Wild thing. According to people here there shouldn't be too much money in "truth" videos. Not to mention you can download them all online for free and the makers ask you to burn copies to give to others. WOW!! they're rollin in cash.
 
Hmmmmmm she said "It brings people in to see the real info" and you of course twisted that to mean "LC has the real info". I believe she said she didn't like LC. Now why do you think that might be??
 
Usual Suspect said:
If 9/11 film makers were oh so worried about making money, they'd sooner do a Girls Gone Wild thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure Alex Jones has no interest in making money.


According to people here there shouldn't be too much money in "truth" videos.
Click to expand...
Not according to me.



Not to mention you can download them all online for free and the makers ask you to burn copies to give to others. WOW!! they're rollin in cash.
Click to expand...

Mass marketing their product, even at no charge, gives them notoriety and popularity. Notoriety and popularity make them money. They know this. Ask Alex Jones to give you an honest appraisal of his earnings before and after 9/11.
 
Last edited:
Usual Suspect said:
Hmmmmmm she said "It brings people in to see the real info" and you of course twisted that to mean "LC has the real info".
Click to expand...
No I didn't but I do find it interesting that YOU think I said so. Freudian slip?

I believe she said she didn't like LC. Now why do you think that might be??
Click to expand...

Because she's pissed that she didn't come up with it first? I don't claim to be a mindreader.
 
Yesterday jessicarabbit recommended Loose Change to me.
 
jessicarabbit said:
I was being sarcastic after you asked what film LTW had made.
Stop lying please gravy, its sad and pathetic.
Click to expand...

Jessica: LTW made a film about 911 and several people produced debunkings of it. Former CIA Steele appears but no one seems keen to publish debunkings of what he says. Just a thought.

Gravy: Which film was that?

Jessica: Loose Change. I would ask you to watch it.


jessicarabbit said:
By the way, why did you ask such a stupid question? Just to further divert the thread?
Click to expand...
I didn't ask a question.
 
Gravy said:
Jessica: LTW made a film about 911 and several people produced debunkings of it. Former CIA Steele appears but no one seems keen to publish debunkings of what he says. Just a thought.

Gravy: Which film was that?

Jessica: Loose Change. I would ask you to watch it.


I didn't ask a question.
Click to expand...

I mean the question about which film. You knew it was loose change and I know you debunked loose change so my recomendation was sarcastic. Why do you lie in virtually every post?
 
jessicarabbit said:
I mean the question about which film. You knew it was loose change and I know you debunked loose change so my recomendation was sarcastic. Why do you lie in virtually every post?
Click to expand...

Evidence?

ETA: After reviewing the posts mentioned by Gravy again, I see no tangible evidence of jessicarabbit being sarcastic.....
 
Last edited:
jessicarabbit said:
I mean the question about which film. You knew it was loose change and I know you debunked loose change so my recomendation was sarcastic. Why do you lie in virtually every post?
Click to expand...

Touched a nerve there, eh? Or was it this post that pissed you off?

You consistently underestimate the intelligence of the board members here. They are perfectly capable of telling who is full of BS and who isn't.

Now, since virtually every post of mine contains a lie, you won't have any trouble pointing one out. Feel free to start another thread for that. Maybe Russell will pipe in with his evidence that 90% of what I say is unsubstantiated.

ETA: by the way, I didn't know which film it was. LTW has had 9 different Google videos that I know of, only one of which I have seen all the way through, and that did not include Steele. Wrong again, jessica.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
ETA: by the way, I didn't know which film it was. LTW has had 9 different Google videos that I know of, only one of which I have seen all the way through, and that did not include Steele. Wrong again, jessica.
Click to expand...
Does that include the earth shattering LTW: Episode I - An Inside Look At How Avery's Schlong Is As Big As A Cardboard Box and the ground-breaking LTW: Episode II - We Sometimes Go To Restaurants And Eat There, and the critically acclaimed LTW: Episode III - My Four Wheeler's Got A Bitchin' Bumper Sticker On It?

'Cause those definitely led me to the real info.
 
jessicarabbit said:
I am totally open to evidence. I read gravys paper and the NIST report. This study just makes me doubt government science publications.
Click to expand...

You won't be taking any prescription medication, then, as the FDA which approves it is a government organization?
 
Or riding any form of mechanical transportation, since the gubmint makes their safety standards
 
Remember the incident of the Republi-droid kid at NASA who was editing the contents of a NASA Web site to suit his political preconceptions (insisting that the word "theory" be added to all mentions of the Big Bang) and who tried to prevent one of NASA's leading climate scientists from talking to the media about his findings?

Here's a little background, courtesy of the Bad Astronomer's blog:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/06/11/nasa-admits-deutsch-muzzled-scientist/
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/02/07/deutsch-resigns-from-nasa/

What were the results? Stories in the New York Times, the Boston Globe and other major world media outlets. Congressional involvement; an internal investigation at NASA; the little pimple being exposed as a completely unqualified hack who had falsified his resume and losing his job.

Sure worked out well for the administration, didn't it?

And, what he, and the adminstration in general, have been trying to monkey with is the communication of scientific findings to the lay public and the use of scientific information in policymaking.

Reading the Union of Concerned Scientists article and the specific examples they cite, I see mostly incidents of politically-motivated suppression of the release of information, policymakers ignoring scientific advice in favor of a political agenda and political interference in the hiring of scientific personnel.I also see that this activity hasn't been taking place unnoticed; the people whose work has been interfered with have been raising a ruckus about it which is visible enough that even CTers are aware of it.

The complex of NIST reports on the WTC haven't been suppressed (or the people who produced them are much more amenable to the political censorship of their work than scientists working in other fields have been). They are also not written for a lay audience.

The NIST reports, especially the sub-reports, go into considerable technical detail about the methods used in the investigation, which practically invites anyone with the appropriate knowledge and experience to scrutinize them and say "Hey, waitaminnit- that's not going to work and here's why". And scrutinized they will be- as someone upstream pointed out, the destruction of the WTC towers will be studied by generations of engineers to come. A simple Google will show that the pocket-protector types are still studying and arguing about the details of what happened to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge over sixty years ago, and even exactly what brought down the Tay bridge in 1879.

Since there isn't any genuinely informed criticism of NIST's work on its merits on offer, and since they themselves aren't capable of making such criticism, the CTers seem to be forced to resort to well-poisoning fallacies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom