• 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.
Gravy said:
Hey, Sultanist, good to see you again! Don't be such a stranger!
Click to expand...

This is a plea for help to you, Gravy, and to all you good folks here at JREF.

I've been arguing all this nonsense on Internet Infidels for over a year. And tonight someone came up with something that's new to me. After this happened I posted over there and said I'm going to request the help of the JREF crowd because they're on top of all this crap far more than anyone else is.

Here's the post which first quotes the claim (it's challenging what happened with the Pentagon light poles) and provides the link which is supposed to back up the claim. And my reply to it follows. I think it will be self explanatory.
If ya'll know anything about that "animation" which was created by "johndoeX" please share it with us.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=3937156#post3937156

Thanks in advance.
 
Sultanist said:
This is a plea for help to you, Gravy, and to all you good folks here at JREF.

I've been arguing all this nonsense on Internet Infidels for over a year. And tonight someone came up with something that's new to me. After this happened I posted over there and said I'm going to request the help of the JREF crowd because they're on top of all this crap far more than anyone else is.

Here's the post which first quotes the claim (it's challenging what happened with the Pentagon light poles) and provides the link which is supposed to back up the claim. And my reply to it follows. I think it will be self explanatory.
If ya'll know anything about that "animation" which was created by "johndoeX" please share it with us.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=3937156#post3937156

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
This is real quick, because I'm headed out and don't have time to look at all the posts, but the animation seems to be the same one that doesn't take into account the deviation between true and magnetic north. That's been discussed elsewhere on this site. Maybe someone else can weigh in. I'll be back later.

Good to hear from you again, and keep fighting the good fight!

–Mark
 
Sultanist said:
This is a plea for help to you, Gravy, and to all you good folks here at JREF.

I've been arguing all this nonsense on Internet Infidels for over a year. And tonight someone came up with something that's new to me. After this happened I posted over there and said I'm going to request the help of the JREF crowd because they're on top of all this crap far more than anyone else is.

Here's the post which first quotes the claim (it's challenging what happened with the Pentagon light poles) and provides the link which is supposed to back up the claim. And my reply to it follows. I think it will be self explanatory.
If ya'll know anything about that "animation" which was created by "johndoeX" please share it with us.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=3937156#post3937156

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
I'm not Gravy, but I once attempted a Robert de Niro impression...

The animation was done by the NTSB, not John Doe X.

John Doe X is a long-time Troother, had a falling out with the Loose Change guys, and started his own board called "Pilots for 9/11 Truth" or some such nonsense. He claims to be (and may be) a pilot, albeit not an active one, and argues from authority with abandon. He also gets easily flustered when confronted by a real pilot, notably Billzilla, for what it's worth.

We have already seen his argument against the animation. He claims, in a nutshell, that the data says Flight 77 was too high to hit those light poles. It turns out that his argument assumes the plane was on a straight line approach, rather than maneuvering right up to the last second, and is thus void. He also did not and has no idea how to compensate for errors in the aircraft's instruments -- which is critical given that the precision required in flightpath reconstruction to make his claim is on the order of five meters.

I dealt with John Doe X through his cheerleader/sockpuppet Skeptic4Sure, who has recently reappeared here, questions asked in this post and answers in this one.

Poster Anti-sophist put together an extremely thorough demolition of his claims, found in this thread. Most recently, he has also found a possible motivation for John Doe X's irresponsible claims.

As usual, these delusions have no basis in reality, and thus are unlikely to be silenced through logical means. Good luck.
 
Thanks to all. You folks never cease to amaze me.
showthread.php
 
A very brief arguement about the FDR if you don't want to get into all the techncical stuff in Anti-Sophist's paper (which JohnDoeX doesn't understand anyway).

The black box was found in the rubble of the Pentagon.

If the the black box data says the plane missed the Pentagon, why was it claimed to have been found in the Pentagon? If the data was faked, why wasn't it faked better?

If the black box data says that the plane did hit the Pentagon, what does it matter if the data suggests that it didn't it in quite the way the report says it did?
 
I am a lurker in these CT threads but want to come out to ask about an assertion that I have not seen discussed here.

I went to a meeting today at which parts of the Loose Change 2 material was shown. Also shown was some guy discussing how the Pentagon could not have been hit by a plane. It was infuriating and I stood up and called it crap (literally) and was pelted by a barrage of woo in return. It was truly amazing.

One argument that was raised in support of the Towers being a CD was that a security guard on the ground floor of the first tower hit testified before the 9/11 Commission that he witnessed people coming up out of the basement, some with severe burns caused by an explosion, BEFORE the first plane hit. Further, the claim was that at least one of these persons survived and also testified before the 9/11 Commission. Finally, the claim was that the Commission ignored such testimony which is why it does not appear in the final report.

I could not refute the claim as I have never seen it discussed here. Has it? If so, can you give me a linky. If not, is there a list of people who testified before the 9/11 Commission and, even more importantly, is all testimony on record somewhere?

Does this claim sound familiar to any of you?

TIA.
 
Well, we know this kind of Pedoherties but you can have
a lot of fun if you ask them this:

The problem i have is this:

I try to be the conspirator right now and i´m planning
to destroy the WTC:

How can i execute my plans the best way? Let´s see:
the 93 bombing is still in peoples mind and people believe
it was Al Qaida.

The best thing would be to blow it with bombs, film the
whole mess by installing a crew at the building making
a documentary and say AQ did it again.

No one would doubt it.

But this is to easy. We need some planes for no
reason to attract the whole world and as much
cameras as possible to hide our secret inside job.

Then we crash no plane into nowhere at shanksville
and we say nevertheless it was a plane.

We blow up the highest buildings at the WTC-site
and make it look like controlled demolitions.

We also crash no plane into the pentagon but to
make it as authentic and believable as possible we
say it was a plane nevertheless.

Then we forget to involve our CIA-Osama and because
we forgot it and because we forgot that he is available
to make some cool footage, we have to fake some lousy,
doubtable video-evidence.

We also forget to start an own investigation that
affirms that the AQ-Gang did it without doubts...

We forget to put Osama on top of the FBI-most
wanted list and we forget the Hijackers that are
well and alive.

We also forget to think about why we are blowing
up the WTC and therefore we need to fake the
WMD evidence to go to war.

Seriously: Who writes this stuff?

Nothing personal at all. I simply don´t get it.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
SezMe said:
Oliver, if that post was in response to my query, it failed. I'm not looking to have fun, I'm looking for evidence.
Click to expand...

I think you are talking about a janitor named Willie Rodriguez. He witnessed people who were badly burned by jet fuel in the area of the(utility?)elevator in the basement following what he thought was an explosion. He's aware of the official story stating that this explosion was merely jet fuel descending down an elevator shaft, accompained by a strong airburst. He also told Gravy that he remembered smelling jet fuel in the basement - so I dont really understand why he believes what he believes.

There has been some speculation about why he thinks he witnessed a blast before the impact. One reason could be the difference of the speed of sound in air and steel. I think someone here did a calculation of this and differece was about 1 second. So it would appear that you'd feel this explosion before you heard it.

CTers generally don't accept that its possible for the fuel to travel down the elevator shafts and explode. But, there is a precedent. Almost the same exact thing happened when a B25 struck the ESB in 1945..
 
Last edited:
FWIW, I've never heard claim that Rodriguez saw the guy with burns before the plane crash.

I always wondered how, if he was in the basement, could Rodriguez tell which explosions were the plane hitting and which were fuel or electrically caused. Notwithstanding the fact that he's a complete nutjob.
 
orphia nay said:
FWIW, I've never heard claim that Rodriguez saw the guy with burns before the plane crash.

I always wondered how, if he was in the basement, could Rodriguez tell which explosions were the plane hitting and which were fuel or electrically caused. Notwithstanding the fact that he's a complete nutjob.
Click to expand...

What, that's not qualification enough?
 
orphia nay said:
FWIW, I've never heard claim that Rodriguez saw the guy with burns before the plane crash.
Click to expand...
I havent heard that either, but we all know how easily these claims can mutate and get distorted by the seekers of Truth. :rolleyes:

I always wondered how, if he was in the basement, could Rodriguez tell which explosions were the plane hitting and which were fuel or electrically caused. Notwithstanding the fact that he's a complete nutjob.
Click to expand...

I dont know that he's a complete nutjob. Its just that he went through a very traumatic experience that literally put him through hell on Earth, and for whatever reason, the guy truly believes that what he witnessed was a bomb.
 
Just did a little investi-googling....

Willies account said:
Arriving at 8:30 on the morning of 9-11 he went to the maintenance office located on the first sublevel, one of six sub-basements beneath ground level. There were a total of fourteen people in the office at this time. As he was talking with others, there was a very loud massive explosion which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3. There were twenty-two people on B2 sub-basement who also felt and heard that first explosion.

At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Company.

Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the 90th floor. Upon hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of the people up in the restaurant. Then there were other explosions just above B1 and individuals started heading for the loading dock to escape the explosion's resulting rampant fire. When asked later about those first explosions he said: "I would know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top of the building." He heard explosions both before and after the plane hit the tower.

A fellow worker Felipe David came into the office. "He had been standing in front of a freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office when fire burst out of the elevator shaft, causing his injuries." The skin on his face had been peeled away by the heat of the blast and he was horribly burned on thirty-three percent of his body. "He was burned so badly from the basement explosion that flesh was hanging from his face and both arms." William asks: "How could a jetliner hit 90 floors above and burn a man's arms and face to a crisp in the basement below within seconds of impact?"
Click to expand...
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=7762
 
Since he appears to be talking about events and sounds seperated by mere seconds, perhaps the first 'explosion' he heard was actually the plane hitting the tower and the second 'explosion' he heard was the jet fuel exploding out of the elevator shaft and all the other 'explosions' he heard were heavy bits of debris hitting the ground?

Certainly the sound of damage to the structure many floors above him would be transmitted down those columns and would sound much closer than it actually was.

I think it's very sad that an individual caught up in such a traumatic event is used by the woowoo's to bolster their godknowswhat theory.
 
Also, if this is a contolled demolition, why would they set a bomb off in the basement before the plane hit? Surely in a controlled demolition the explosives initiate the collapse, which means they have to go off just before the building colapses. What would be the point of blowing up part of the basement levels ahead of time?

I think it wold also be hard to find a controlled demolition that bothered to weaken structures below ground level.

Finally, if you're inm the basement of the WTC you obviously can't see the plane hitting so you have to match your recollection of the sounds you heard to what you later discovered had happened.
 
maccy said:
Also, if this is a contolled demolition, why would they set a bomb off in the basement before the plane hit? Surely in a controlled demolition the explosives initiate the collapse, which means they have to go off just before the building colapses. What would be the point of blowing up part of the basement levels ahead of time?

I think it wold also be hard to find a controlled demolition that bothered to weaken structures below ground level.

Finally, if you're inm the basement of the WTC you obviously can't see the plane hitting so you have to match your recollection of the sounds you heard to what you later discovered had happened.
Click to expand...

These are very good points. His testimony actually flies in the face of a CD scenario, because the building stood for over an hour after the "Basement Explosion", so if this was anything in the way of a CD preplant, then what was its purpose?

As for recollecting what sound made what, he is purely speculating, based on his memory of an enormously traumatic day. He did not see the plane hit, and in the panic of the day, was later told that that explosion may have been the plane. Even the times can only be trusted as approximations. I mean can you imagine how reliable testimony from someone who went through that is? The generals, I would accept, the specifics I would greatly question. EOS.

TAM
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom