Loose Change

[WildCat]

Controlled demotlition...timed demolition...whatever you want to call it...

And the WTC collapse looked nothing like it, no matter what you call it.

 

[pgwenthold]

Is this an admission that the collapse of the WTC towers does not look like a controlled demolition?

This has been my push in the last couple of days.

In fact, it has progressed more or less as would be expected for a disingenious argument. Once again I state that it is clear that geggy is not just someone "who has honest questions."

Consider the line of argument:

CT: The falling of the WTC looked like controlled demolition. Therefore, it was a conspiracy. Here's why it couldn't have fallen on its own. Here's all the evidence for the conspiracy.
JREFers: Most of this evidence doesn't mean what you think it means, in the best case, and, in the worst case, is all-to-often fabricated whole cloth.

[continue for 50 pages]

Pablo (that's me): Um, I have a question. The original claim is that the buildings falling looked like a controlled demolition. I just watched the video the tower falling, and it doesn't look like a controlled demolition at all.

We see pics and video of controlled demolitions that look nothing like the towers falling.

CT: The conspiracy used unorthodox methods to disguise the fact that it was a controlled demolition.

IOW, it doesn't actually look like a controlled demolition.

So we've come full circle:

[from]
It looked like a controlled demolition, therefore it was a conspiracy.

[to]
It was a conspiracy, so it didn't look like a controlled demolition.

It's failsafe. Doesn't matter how it looked, it was a conspiracy either way.

 

[dubfan]

Holograms, duh.

I'm over at the LC forums debating with someone about the "missing" people on Flight 77. After lengthy argument, the Loosers have convinced me. I've come to the conclusion that after leaving the airport, government agents forced Flight 77 to land, the people were taken off of it, and were loaded onto a flying object SHAPED IDENTICALLY to a 757 which was cleverly constructed to have exactly the same mass, energy, and aerodynamic properties as an actual 757.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, skeptics.

Edit: spelling

 

[Hellbound]

I'm over at the LC forums debating with someone about the "missing" people on Flight 77. After lengthy argument, the Loosers have convinced me. I've come to the conclusion that after leaving the airport, government agents forced Flight 77 to land, the people were taken off of it, and were loaded onto a flying object SHAPED IDENTICALLY to a 757 which was cleverly constructed to have exactly the same mass, energy, and aerodynamic properties as an actual 757.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, skeptics.

Edit: spelling

DUDE!!!

That explains something that's been bothering me for a while now.

Last week, I got home, and realized that someone had replaced every single thing in my house with an exact replica!

Spoooooky....I must be getting close.

 

[Ramooone]

I'm over at the LC forums debating with someone about the "missing" people on Flight 77. After lengthy argument, the Loosers have convinced me. I've come to the conclusion that after leaving the airport, government agents forced Flight 77 to land, the people were taken off of it, and were loaded onto a flying object SHAPED IDENTICALLY to a 757 which was cleverly constructed to have exactly the same mass, energy, and aerodynamic properties as an actual 757.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, skeptics.

Edit: spelling

nice, its easier that way

 

[Ramooone]

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror.html

heres a guy who not only saw the plane hit the pentagon, he took photos of the site and has all his phone numbers and e-mail listed. maybe we should contact this guy, since he is an eyewitness and has the photos to prove it.

 

[dubfan]

Jeebus. It's the Judean People's Front vs. the People's Front of Judea over there.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

i wonder if any of the loosers believe in "The montauk project" thats personally my favorite conspiracy theory. it deals with time travel, aliens, nazi's, a bigfoot type creature. oh man, its fantastic. hours of entertainment.

How 'bout The Philadelphia Experiment?

 

[dubfan]

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror.html

heres a guy who not only saw the plane hit the pentagon, he took photos of the site and has all his phone numbers and e-mail listed. maybe we should contact this guy, since he is an eyewitness and has the photos to prove it.

Definitely.

 

[Ramooone]

How 'bout The Philadelphia Experiment?

yeah, they're both connected stories. and man are they entertaining.

 

[chipmunk stew]

This has been my push in the last couple of days.

In fact, it has progressed more or less as would be expected for a disingenious argument. Once again I state that it is clear that geggy is not just someone "who has honest questions."

Consider the line of argument:

CT: The falling of the WTC looked like controlled demolition. Therefore, it was a conspiracy. Here's why it couldn't have fallen on its own. Here's all the evidence for the conspiracy.
JREFers: Most of this evidence doesn't mean what you think it means, in the best case, and, in the worst case, is all-to-often fabricated whole cloth.

[continue for 50 pages]

Pablo (that's me): Um, I have a question. The original claim is that the buildings falling looked like a controlled demolition. I just watched the video the tower falling, and it doesn't look like a controlled demolition at all.

We see pics and video of controlled demolitions that look nothing like the towers falling.

CT: The conspiracy used unorthodox methods to disguise the fact that it was a controlled demolition.

IOW, it doesn't actually look like a controlled demolition.

So we've come full circle:

[from]
It looked like a controlled demolition, therefore it was a conspiracy.

[to]
It was a conspiracy, so it didn't look like a controlled demolition.

It's failsafe. Doesn't matter how it looked, it was a conspiracy either way.

Circular arguments are a favorite and perfectly valid debate tactic in the mind of the CT.

 

[EagleEye]

One of the first claims in the video is that people used their advanced knowledge of the attacks to profit on United. Looks like that claim is false.

One of the first claims in the video is that people used their advanced knowledge of the attacks to profit on United. Looks like that claim is false.

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options — instruments that pay off only when a stock drops in price — surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10 — highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. The SEC and FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.

Uh... sir... the 9/11 commission only proved that the trading wasn't done by anyone tied to al Qaeda. Isn't that the POINT? US-based interests doing the trading only serves to support the conspiracy theory.

 

[Ramooone]

i sent that guy who saw the plane hitting the pentagon an e-mail asking if he can explain what he saw. i also advised him about having his contact info on that webpage as the loosers will harrass him. if i get a response i'll post it.

 

[WildCat]

http://www.criticalthrash.com/terror.html

heres a guy who not only saw the plane hit the pentagon, he took photos of the site and has all his phone numbers and e-mail listed. maybe we should contact this guy, since he is an eyewitness and has the photos to prove it.

This pic, taken almost immediately after impact, shows all you need to know the stupidity of the missile theory. Unless there's a missile that starts fires the wingspan of a 757.

 

[Manny]

This pic, taken almost immediately after impact, shows all you need to know the stupidity of the missile theory. Unless there's a missile that starts fires the wingspan of a 757.

You're ignoring the napalm that the conspirators spread across the wall of the Pentagon at the same time they were sneaking in those pesky aircraft parts.

 

[Shrinker]

Uh... sir... the 9/11 commission only proved that the trading wasn't done by anyone tied to al Qaeda. Isn't that the POINT? US-based interests doing the trading only serves to support the conspiracy theory.

Not so. Not only did the investigators rule out an Al-Qaeda link, they found out enough to show the trades weren't suspicious at all. One bunch of put options was bought by someone who also bought shares in American. So as well as winning big-time, they also lost big-time. Not consistent with somebody in the know...

The second spike in trades was caused by a bunch of individual traders acting on a newletter tip. Unless that newsletter was the Super Secret Conspirators Trading Gazette, it looks pretty innocent.

 

[dubfan]

Not to get us off track here, but has anyone addressed the question of the color of the smoke -- note that in both the WTC and Pentagon attacks you have a large quantity of black smoke, which would be consistent with a lot of burning Jet-A. Would a missile strike necessarily cause so much black smoke?

Not that we need any more nails for the coffin containing the-Pentagon-was-hit-by-a-missile fantasy... just wondering aloud.

 

[Ramooone]

Does anyone else laugh their ass off when someone says that the dust from the WTC was a pyroclastic flow. man, everytime i see that i laugh.

it may have looked like a pyroclastic flow, but it certaintly was not, as people and manhattan were not melted in the extreme heat and gas of a pyroclastic flow. Where else is the dust supposed to go when a building collapses!!!

 

[Pardalis]

I understand completely what you're saying but WTC may have been imploded in a different way to make it look like the structure of the building was failing...

If I understand your logic, the WTC collapses, wich looked like controlled demolitions to you, really were controlled demolitions made to look like structural failings, AKA collapses?

Can't you see how you're distorting everything?

 

[Shrinker]

the video of what I was talking about when the north tower shook before it came down indicating that bombs may have been implanted in the basement of the tower. I'm pretty sure it's legitmate because as the trembling started, you can see the shifting of the smoke.

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/Shaking%20before%20WTC-1%20collapse.mpg

Hey Mr Degree in Imaging Technology, did your tutors teach you about what happens when your camera shakes? In case they didn't: when the camera shakes, it kinda look like the objects you're photographing are shaking. Amazing huh?