Belz...
Fiend God
... I suspect something is amiss, here. But I'll read on Butcher's posts before making up my mind...
Loose Change - Part III
- Thread starter Darat
- Start date
- Status
... I suspect something is amiss, here. But I'll read on Butcher's posts before making up my mind...
Sal The Butcher
Scholar
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Messages
- 103
in all fairness that may be someone who speaks english as a second language based on the 'schools in the US' comment... if not... then damn
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
tacodaemon
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 571
Hey there, all. I'm another newbie drawn here by the Loose Change discussion, though I've been a Randi fan and CSICOP-style skeptic type for years now, and am interested in any sorts of skeptical goings-on here in the DC area. Anyhow:
I've noticed that too, and it occurred to me that the tons of computer-generated Pretty Pictures in the NIST report might be fun to toss at them. For example, in report NIST NCSTAR 1-6D, pp. 399-404 has a bunch of images of the temperature distribution within 1WTC at the 97th floor, which might be a decent rebuttal to the questions about how Edna Cintron could have stood in the hole in the north face of the tower. (Those page numbers are the PDF file's electronic page numbers, not the different numbering system used for the numbers printed at the bottom of each page.)
wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm
Also, I made an image of my own using Google Earth after seeing Christophera's ongoing claims that his spire_dust-3.jpg image taken from Liberty State Park in New Jersey clearly shows 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Using Google Earth, I lined up the approx. viewing angle of the picture (passing just south of the domed-roofed, 645-foot-tall 2WFC tower and over some Battery Park City apartment buildings) and measured the distance just to the nearest shore in New Jersey and found it to be well in excess of a mile... and that's not even the full distance from the camera! (And also not even including the height *up* to the top of the "spire", which is taller than the 645-foot height of 2WFC.) How could your eyes even see three-inch-wide rebar from a distance of well over a mile, even if it were a more detailed, less compressed image than spire_dust-3.jpg is?
i3.tinypic.com/15chnnl.jpg
Of course I figured it was more than a mile away, having been around there when the towers were still around, but I've been thinking Christophera has been thinking everybody was exaggerating when they said the pic was taken from more than a mile away.
This is the Christophera photo I've been referring to:
home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/spire_dust-3.jpg
I've noticed that too, and it occurred to me that the tons of computer-generated Pretty Pictures in the NIST report might be fun to toss at them. For example, in report NIST NCSTAR 1-6D, pp. 399-404 has a bunch of images of the temperature distribution within 1WTC at the 97th floor, which might be a decent rebuttal to the questions about how Edna Cintron could have stood in the hole in the north face of the tower. (Those page numbers are the PDF file's electronic page numbers, not the different numbering system used for the numbers printed at the bottom of each page.)
wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm
Also, I made an image of my own using Google Earth after seeing Christophera's ongoing claims that his spire_dust-3.jpg image taken from Liberty State Park in New Jersey clearly shows 3" REBAR ON 4' CENTERS. Using Google Earth, I lined up the approx. viewing angle of the picture (passing just south of the domed-roofed, 645-foot-tall 2WFC tower and over some Battery Park City apartment buildings) and measured the distance just to the nearest shore in New Jersey and found it to be well in excess of a mile... and that's not even the full distance from the camera! (And also not even including the height *up* to the top of the "spire", which is taller than the 645-foot height of 2WFC.) How could your eyes even see three-inch-wide rebar from a distance of well over a mile, even if it were a more detailed, less compressed image than spire_dust-3.jpg is?
i3.tinypic.com/15chnnl.jpg
Of course I figured it was more than a mile away, having been around there when the towers were still around, but I've been thinking Christophera has been thinking everybody was exaggerating when they said the pic was taken from more than a mile away.
This is the Christophera photo I've been referring to:
home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/spire_dust-3.jpg
tacodaemon
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 571
Oh, and I would speculate that that big column of dark smoke/dust to the right of the "spire" in that image is the same thing Christophera's been referring to as the "concrete core" in one of the other collapse images.
Welcome Tacodaemon! 
Great post, thanks for the links. Ive reposted them for you as links below:
http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm
http://i3.tinypic.com/15chnnl.jpg
Great post, thanks for the links. Ive reposted them for you as links below:
http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm
http://i3.tinypic.com/15chnnl.jpg
Last edited:
CptColumbo
Just One More Question
As always, "I [had] just one more question."
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
May I ask why? Simply curious.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
On the WTC collapse thing...
Is anyone familiar with the New York Times "Fatal Confusion" series?
They have an interactive here
Unfortunately the article itself requires subscription. The details for the article are:
FATAL CONFUSION
A Troubled Emergency Response; 9/11 Exposed Deadly Flaws In Rescue Plan
Sunday July 7, 2002
REPORTED AND WRITTEN BY JIM DWYER, KEVIN FLYNN AND FORD FESSENDEN. (NYT); Metropolitan Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section 1, Page 1, Column 2, 6089 words
Interestingly, according to their reports, between 1000 and 1009, in North Tower (collapses 1029)
"A firefighter, possibly from ladder 3, reports a collapse on a floor in the 60's over the radio. It is the highest floor reported reached in the building."
This seems to indicate the building's collapse began much earlier than when it was obvious from the outside. And bear in mind the North Tower was hit very high. A floor "in the 60's" is WAY below the impact point. We can only speculate on the condition of floors between there and the impact site.
However if sections of the buildings had collapsed internally well before the moment of visible external collapse, that explains why it came down so "quickly" (not that any of us think it came down quickly anyway...).
Something to ponder.
And by the way... the very first 9/11 conspiracy video I saw was a thing called "In Plane Site". It was utter garbage, infact "Loose Change" seems veritably "factual" by comparison. I'm curious if anyone else had previously seen this nonsense?
-Andrew
Is anyone familiar with the New York Times "Fatal Confusion" series?
They have an interactive here
Unfortunately the article itself requires subscription. The details for the article are:
FATAL CONFUSION
A Troubled Emergency Response; 9/11 Exposed Deadly Flaws In Rescue Plan
Sunday July 7, 2002
REPORTED AND WRITTEN BY JIM DWYER, KEVIN FLYNN AND FORD FESSENDEN. (NYT); Metropolitan Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section 1, Page 1, Column 2, 6089 words
Interestingly, according to their reports, between 1000 and 1009, in North Tower (collapses 1029)
"A firefighter, possibly from ladder 3, reports a collapse on a floor in the 60's over the radio. It is the highest floor reported reached in the building."
This seems to indicate the building's collapse began much earlier than when it was obvious from the outside. And bear in mind the North Tower was hit very high. A floor "in the 60's" is WAY below the impact point. We can only speculate on the condition of floors between there and the impact site.
However if sections of the buildings had collapsed internally well before the moment of visible external collapse, that explains why it came down so "quickly" (not that any of us think it came down quickly anyway...).
Something to ponder.
And by the way... the very first 9/11 conspiracy video I saw was a thing called "In Plane Site". It was utter garbage, infact "Loose Change" seems veritably "factual" by comparison. I'm curious if anyone else had previously seen this nonsense?
-Andrew
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Originally Posted by Sal The Butcher :
I've always been interested in this issue. Punctuation and capitalization were invented to increase the legibility of the written word. They work. No offense intended, Sal, but to me, when a stranger wants me to read something without capitalization and punctuation, it makes me think that they want me to work unnecessarily hard to understand their prose.
Sure, extra-terrestrial life on other planets is possible, and worth researching (NASA's recent discoveries of extra solar planets, the Mars missions, etc.) So I guess "E.T.", "Superman", "Alien", "War of The Worlds", "The Day The Earth Stood Still", "Close Encounters of The Third Kind" make interesting points too.
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
Precisely, Gravy. The use of proper grammar, as well as general rules of language, show consideration for those with whom one is attempting to communicate.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
I dropped in for the last few minutes of a "Loose Change" screening in Staten Island tonight. It was in a great little café/bookshop/performance space that's run by a neo-hippie commune. JREFer Tamarillicent posted about the screening a few days ago, and I discouraged her from attending because the leader of the commune was recently shot six times by a stalker who didn't kill him and hasn't been captured and is still sending threatening messages to the press. It's been in the NYC papers a lot. I had always planned to attend the screening but I didn't want to encourage others to do so, so I apologize, Tamarillicent!
Anyway, only 11 adults were there, plus a few kids. It's been a while since I actually watched any of "Loose Change," and the last 15 minutes, like the rest of the video, made me want to vomit. There's the end of the "flight 93 landed in Cleveland" idiocy, the "phony phone calls," the "living hijackers," the "phony bin Laden video," Larry Silverstein's insurance, the "stolen $167 billion in gold," and the final call to action, to "do anything."
Two people applauded, but on the whole it was a very subdued group, as one might expect on a rainy Saturday night at a downer of a screening at a hippie hangout that may be under observation by a murderous stalker.
I handed out half-page flyers to the attendees. They seemed fairly stunned, but were polite. The café manager, who presented the video, was clearly agitated and wanted to know why I disagreed with a production that was "mostly eyewitness testimony." Oy! I told him why.
This was the content of the flyers.
Many of these claims can be refuted with just a few minutes of internet research. The creators of “Loose Change,” Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas, chose not to do that research. They simply accepted every 9/11 conspiracy theory that came their way, and unquestioningly put them in their movie. All of their errors have been pointed out to them, but these young men continue to promote their movie as the “truth.” It is quite the opposite.
Furthermore, while “Loose Change” is dedicated to the victims of 9/11, its creators repeatedly and publicly disparage those victims and their families. They are hypocrites of the worst kind.
For a detailed, line-by-line refutation of every claim in “Loose Change,” please download my “Loose Change Viewer Guide” at http://tinyurl.com/epp82 or view it online at http://tinyurl.com/jnfp8
To get an idea of the outrageously ignorant and disrespectful things these men say during interviews, please see my document “Loose Change Creators Speak” http://911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf
Thank you for not supporting ignorance! [My Sig.] Mark Roberts email: [email protected]
Dylan Avery, writer and director of “Loose Change,” being interviewed by host Jack Blood on the radio program "Deadline Live.” The interview is promoted on the "Loose Change” website: http://www.loosechange911.com/
Avery: Ha Ha Ha Ha! Have you seen how small those things [box cutters] are? Like, if I was on a flight, with, you know, at least 50 other people – because that's the smallest number I think was on 9/11 – if I was in the cabin, with 50 other people, and five people – I don't care if they're Muslim or not – stand up with box cutters and say they're gonna hijack the plane, I'm gonna laugh in their face!
Blood: (mocking an Arabic accent): It is my preevilege to keel you with thees box cutter!
Avery: Ha ha!
Blood: Didn't Rumsfeld say, right after this happened, that they had actually done this with plastic knives and not box cutters?
Avery: Yeah, he said that in the same interview where he said that a missile hit the Pentagon.
Blood: OH MY GOD! HE'S GOT A PLASTIC KNIFE!
Avery: HAHAHA!
Blood: RUN!
Avery: HE'S GOT A BUTTER KNIFE FROM BREAKFAST! OH, NO!
Blood: Take the plane, sir. We don't want any trouble.
Avery: HE'S GOING TO SCRATCH ME A LITTLE BIT! HUH HUH!
Blood: UN-BELIEVABLE! Well, that's exactly what we're saying. That's an overused term, or underused term, "unbelievable."
Avery: (Still laughing): It's ABSOLUTELY unbelievable!
Blood: (doing accent again): It's un-bee-leevable!
Avery: What's even MORE unbelievable is how people will DEFEND this!
Anyway, only 11 adults were there, plus a few kids. It's been a while since I actually watched any of "Loose Change," and the last 15 minutes, like the rest of the video, made me want to vomit. There's the end of the "flight 93 landed in Cleveland" idiocy, the "phony phone calls," the "living hijackers," the "phony bin Laden video," Larry Silverstein's insurance, the "stolen $167 billion in gold," and the final call to action, to "do anything."
Two people applauded, but on the whole it was a very subdued group, as one might expect on a rainy Saturday night at a downer of a screening at a hippie hangout that may be under observation by a murderous stalker.
I handed out half-page flyers to the attendees. They seemed fairly stunned, but were polite. The café manager, who presented the video, was clearly agitated and wanted to know why I disagreed with a production that was "mostly eyewitness testimony." Oy! I told him why.
This was the content of the flyers.
[Front of half-page flyer]
All of the claims made in the movie “Loose Change” are false.
“Oh, come on. All of them?”
Really. All of them. And they’re not just wrong, they’re egregiously wrong.
All of the claims made in the movie “Loose Change” are false.
“Oh, come on. All of them?”
Really. All of them. And they’re not just wrong, they’re egregiously wrong.
Many of these claims can be refuted with just a few minutes of internet research. The creators of “Loose Change,” Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas, chose not to do that research. They simply accepted every 9/11 conspiracy theory that came their way, and unquestioningly put them in their movie. All of their errors have been pointed out to them, but these young men continue to promote their movie as the “truth.” It is quite the opposite.
Furthermore, while “Loose Change” is dedicated to the victims of 9/11, its creators repeatedly and publicly disparage those victims and their families. They are hypocrites of the worst kind.
For a detailed, line-by-line refutation of every claim in “Loose Change,” please download my “Loose Change Viewer Guide” at http://tinyurl.com/epp82 or view it online at http://tinyurl.com/jnfp8
To get an idea of the outrageously ignorant and disrespectful things these men say during interviews, please see my document “Loose Change Creators Speak” http://911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf
Thank you for not supporting ignorance! [My Sig.] Mark Roberts email: [email protected]
[Reverse of half-page flyer]
Dylan Avery, writer and director of “Loose Change,” being interviewed by host Jack Blood on the radio program "Deadline Live.” The interview is promoted on the "Loose Change” website: http://www.loosechange911.com/
Avery: Ha Ha Ha Ha! Have you seen how small those things [box cutters] are? Like, if I was on a flight, with, you know, at least 50 other people – because that's the smallest number I think was on 9/11 – if I was in the cabin, with 50 other people, and five people – I don't care if they're Muslim or not – stand up with box cutters and say they're gonna hijack the plane, I'm gonna laugh in their face!
Blood: (mocking an Arabic accent): It is my preevilege to keel you with thees box cutter!
Avery: Ha ha!
Blood: Didn't Rumsfeld say, right after this happened, that they had actually done this with plastic knives and not box cutters?
Avery: Yeah, he said that in the same interview where he said that a missile hit the Pentagon.
Blood: OH MY GOD! HE'S GOT A PLASTIC KNIFE!
Avery: HAHAHA!
Blood: RUN!
Avery: HE'S GOT A BUTTER KNIFE FROM BREAKFAST! OH, NO!
Blood: Take the plane, sir. We don't want any trouble.
Avery: HE'S GOING TO SCRATCH ME A LITTLE BIT! HUH HUH!
Blood: UN-BELIEVABLE! Well, that's exactly what we're saying. That's an overused term, or underused term, "unbelievable."
Avery: (Still laughing): It's ABSOLUTELY unbelievable!
Blood: (doing accent again): It's un-bee-leevable!
Avery: What's even MORE unbelievable is how people will DEFEND this!
Last edited:
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Awesome work!
What I think is important is we dont lay out a whole plethora of our own speculation. We just go "well that's not true, and you can find out here, but we also suggest you go look other places to make sure we're being honest"
Nothing about our stance DEMANDS acceptance. Unlike their weird commentry like "are you ready for this?" and "It gets better".
*yawn*
Reminds me of those trashy "real life" style bio-pics that trash dead people because they know they can't hit back.
-Andrew
What I think is important is we dont lay out a whole plethora of our own speculation. We just go "well that's not true, and you can find out here, but we also suggest you go look other places to make sure we're being honest"
Nothing about our stance DEMANDS acceptance. Unlike their weird commentry like "are you ready for this?" and "It gets better".
*yawn*
Reminds me of those trashy "real life" style bio-pics that trash dead people because they know they can't hit back.
-Andrew
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Oh, I forgot to say, welcome, tacodaemon!
I hadn't been to Ground Zero at night recently, so I stopped by after the screening tonight. Lots of activity there, which is encouraging. There was a time last year when I gave tours there every single day for five months and never saw a single worker at Ground Zero. And that's a HUGE area. They're two years behind schedule there.
One disappointment was how WTC 7 looked. It's officially open now. By day it looks okay, except for the lower 75 feet, which is covered with steel blast protection The proposed "Freedom Tower" is to have this protection on its lower 200 feet (61 meters). At night, WTC 7 is tacky, tacky, tacky. Above the steel blast protection is a section that they've chosen to illuminate from inside with blue/purple lights. Very 1989. I think it looks like crap. Well, you be the judge.
I hadn't been to Ground Zero at night recently, so I stopped by after the screening tonight. Lots of activity there, which is encouraging. There was a time last year when I gave tours there every single day for five months and never saw a single worker at Ground Zero. And that's a HUGE area. They're two years behind schedule there.
One disappointment was how WTC 7 looked. It's officially open now. By day it looks okay, except for the lower 75 feet, which is covered with steel blast protection The proposed "Freedom Tower" is to have this protection on its lower 200 feet (61 meters). At night, WTC 7 is tacky, tacky, tacky. Above the steel blast protection is a section that they've chosen to illuminate from inside with blue/purple lights. Very 1989. I think it looks like crap. Well, you be the judge.
Sal The Butcher
Scholar
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Messages
- 103
i type very fast (but not the method where you rest your fingers on teh j and f) and when i use the shift key i tend to make EVEN MORE type-os then i normally do, and i see no need to utilize punctuation as long as what i type can be deciphered without additional effort, forums (at least i believe) are about content, not presentation, so i focus on trying to explain something in a way that people can tell what im talking about, i actually have a decent grasp of grammar and punctuation, and can write quite well, but the more time i spend trying to figure out how to gramatically structure my thoughts the less i manage to relay
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
- Status