Loose Change - Part II

[Gravy]

Would you please provide a link? http://www.loosechange911.com/ seems to be normal. Perhaps I'm not looking in the proper location.

Regnad, when I click that link I get the Loose Change header, then "Happy Memorial Day from the Naudet Brothers." Clicking that phrase brings up the copyright infringement doc. Here's the direct link:
http://www.loosechange911.com/main_naudet.html

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I'm sorry, XXX, but I don't see it. I'm going to feel like a boob if it's right there in front of me.

ETA: Thanks, Gravy!

 

[Manny]

Would you please provide a link? http://www.loosechange911.com/ seems to be normal. Perhaps I'm not looking in the proper location.

Serious? When I go there, the entire screen is blank, except for the following text, centered and in white:

LOOSE CHANGE
2ND EDITION

Happy Memorial Day
From the Naudet Brothers​

Clicking on either text block connects to the letter from the lawyers.

ETA that you bastids type too quickly.


ETA more: Now waitaminute here. Wait just a confounded minute. These guys are willing to take on the entire United States government, people whom they beleive are so ruthless that they'll kill 3,000 people in America's busiest commercial center and at the center of the military but they'll cease and desist on the basis of a letter from a bunch of weenie lawyers? What the hell kind of truth-seekers are these guys, anyway?

 

[Gravy]

Yeah you're right, I shouldn't have said this one. Some times I do get a little hot under the collar.

I meant I don't believe the word "ludicrous."

Well that's what these experts said, so what's your point? For the third time, can you cite demolitions experts who say different?

ETA:

Ludicrous: absurd: incongruous; inviting ridicule; "the absurd excuse that the dog ate his homework"; "that's a cockeyed idea"; "ask a nonsensical question and get a nonsensical answer"; "a contribution so small as to be laughable"; "it is ludicrous to call a cottage a mansion"; "a preposterous attempt to turn back the pages of history"; "her conceited assumption of universal interest in her rather dull children was ridiculous" ?wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

 

[XXX]

What the hell kind of truth-seekers are these guys, anyway?

The usual kind. $$$$$$$$$

 

[Polaris]

Sorry, just a bit more derailing...Just like with the Naudets footage, Lucas has a right to selectively let his footage be used with or without sueing anyone. If he won;t let Jay and Silent Bob use the phrase "lightsabers" I don't see why he would let a large piece of his film reside in a dingbat 9/11 conspiracy video, considering the subject matter and the potental bad publicity. My only conclusion is that he must not know about it (not suprising).

Ok, done derailing.

How about someone giving him the heads up? Which video was it used in? I'll be happy to send the word his way.

How much you want to bet that if Dylan & Co. have to apply for bankruptcy, they'll blame Bush for knowing about it in advance - the evidence is his new bankruptcy reform law.

 

[Gravy]

How about someone giving him the heads up? Which video was it used in? I'll be happy to send the word his way.

How much you want to bet that if Dylan & Co. have to apply for bankruptcy, they'll blame Bush for knowing about it in advance - the evidence is his new bankruptcy reform law.

XXX did that dirty work:http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1666897&postcount=500

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Serious? When I go there, the entire screen is blank, except for the following text, centered and in white:Clicking on either text block connects to the letter from the lawyers.

Yup, I'm serious. It continues to be the normal, fully-operational home page, without any Memorial Day greeting. I can do a screen capture, if you like. (Er, how do you do that again?)

 

[Polaris]

XXX did that dirty work:http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1666897&postcount=500

Oh. Ok. Good.

 

[Gravy]

Yup, I'm serious. It continues to be the normal, fully-operational home page, without any Memorial Day greeting. I can do a screen capture, if you like. (Er, how do you do that again?)

They got to Regnad! One skeptic at a time...

 

[XXX]

Sounds like a cache issue Regnad.

As for the Star Wars thing, I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to have more than one person send them a message. The place I used is http://www.lucasfilm.com/press/contact/
and I sent it to Lucasfilm publicity. Be sure to add that they DID in fact charge people to see the premire of this film, 10 bucks a head! That makes a difference in legal terms. (The name of the film is "Everyboy's gotta learn sometime")

The answer is that there really wasn't any angular momentum to stop. This was not a hinge effect. There were equal and opposite forces on the 'block' that cancelled each other out.

Here, this document has diagrams that explain:

http://www.mae.ncsu.edu/courses/mae543/eischen/docs/BazantWTC.pdf

Another article that has a more "Layman's terms" explination of this same issue (with the same heading) can be found here...http://cee.mit.edu/index.pl?iid=3721&isa=Category

Under the section "Why did they not fall like a tree?"

 

[Mutton-Head]

Well, I guess I have to admit, that no, I can't produce any demolition experts. So, my opinions on this matter are just “gut reactions.” Not really worth a whole lot.

I do feel that the government/NIST conclusions were the result of inadequate work, hasty conclusions, and too many assumptions, many of which I’ve brought up. But, it would be a mistake for me to like-wise make a case based upon assumptions. (A battle of assumptions, or, “my assumptions are better than your assumptions.” Ha ha ha ha.. ) So back to the books.

I have the paper by Bazant and Zhou. Likewise, in my opinion, assumptions that I don’t agree with. And it was finished a whole three weeks after the destruction, with no access to physical evidence.

As I said, back to the books.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Sounds like a cache issue Regnad.

Cleared it all away and tried again. Still, when I visit using my normal browser, I get their regular homepage. However, using a different browser nets me the "Happy Memorial Day" message everyone's been referring to. Odd, no?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Now waitaminute here. Wait just a confounded minute. These guys are willing to take on the entire United States government, people whom they beleive are so ruthless that they'll kill 3,000 people in America's busiest commercial center and at the center of the military but they'll cease and desist on the basis of a letter from a bunch of weenie lawyers? What the hell kind of truth-seekers are these guys, anyway?

I believe the appropriate term is "paper tiger."

 

[Landru]

Cleared it all away and tried again. Still, when I visit using my normal browser, I get their regular homepage. However, using a different browser nets me the "Happy Memorial Day" message everyone's been referring to. Odd, no?

Pop on the tinfoil beanie, Regnad. It's obvious that Microsoft (or Mozilla, or Netscape or...) are part of the plot.

 

[Pardalis]

In relation to this -- and I'm guessing here -- I wonder if there's a prevailing sentiment that considers a building to be some benign object, calmly sitting at rest. If so, that would be wrong. Because of gravity there is a constant, relentless force that a building is, at any moment, dynamically working against in order to stay erect. (Indeed, our physical bodies are engaged in the same process.) Such an event as what initially transpired on 9/11 (extra-violent impact of each airplane) was enough to begin the process whereupon each building could not, due to its design, remain standing.

Wow.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

"Wow" in what way? Good? Bad? Drug-inspired?

 

[Pardalis]

Well, I guess I have to admit, that no, I can't produce any demolition experts. So, my opinions on this matter are just “gut reactions.” Not really worth a whole lot.

I do feel that the government/NIST conclusions were the result of inadequate work, hasty conclusions, and too many assumptions, many of which I’ve brought up. But, it would be a mistake for me to like-wise make a case based upon assumptions. (A battle of assumptions, or, “my assumptions are better than your assumptions.” Ha ha ha ha.. ) So back to the books.

I have the paper by Bazant and Zhou. Likewise, in my opinion, assumptions that I don’t agree with. And it was finished a whole three weeks after the destruction, with no access to physical evidence.

As I said, back to the books.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Pardalis]

"Wow" in what way? Good? Bad? Indeterminate?

Good of course LOL

I'm amased at your verve and clarity. You really nailed it. The entire post was superb.

 

[karim]

I do feel that the government/NIST conclusions were the result of inadequate work, hasty conclusions, and too many assumptions.

Yes, thats what governments do. I'm sure there is real corruption and high level incompetence too. To expose it, cooking up teories that are like movie scripts isn't the way to go and only add to the mess and confusion.