• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
brodski said:
hey, I get alll my knowledge of physics from cartoons. I'm working on a theory that WTC7 was brought down by a giant falling anvil, and a big round shrapnel cannon ball with the word "bomb" written on it in white lettering, just to make sure. ;)
Click to expand...

It's also why, when the towers fell, the bottoms fell out first, and the tops just hung in space with a surprised look on their face. Then, after giving a little wave, they fell, passing the falling anvil on the way.

Finally, when they smashed at the bottom, they crinkled up like an accordian, and sounded like one, too.
 
geggy said:
I will come back to debate as soon as the s***storm at work dies down...
Click to expand...

We'll hold you to that, geggy.

ACTUAL debate, without simply referencing whacko websites full of empty claims.

A good start would be a synopsis of how it all fits together. A timeline would be nice. When did the government decide to orchestrate the attack, as you assert they did? If the 19 hijackers weren't really involved, what role did they play in the conspiracy? How was WTC 7 demolished, if it was sturdy enough to survive major damage and fire? What difference does it make whether it was demolished or fell on its own?

You won't convince anyone by mere VOLUME of information, whether real or imaginary. Remember, we need an unbroken chain of reasoning, from beginning to end, that explains all of your claims. We will even allow you to include unnecessary entities (in violation of Occam's razor) just as long as there is evidence that they actually exist, or are at least plausible. If you can't do that, then there's no reason to take the claims seriously.
 
pgwenthold said:
It's also why, when the towers fell, the bottoms fell out first, and the tops just hung in space with a surprised look on their face. Then, after giving a little wave, they fell, passing the falling anvil on the way.

Finally, when they smashed at the bottom, they crinkled up like an accordian, and sounded like one, too.
Click to expand...

I remember a long time ago seeing some artwork in a sci-fi magazine that depicted post-apocalyptic New York. Of course, the artist saw to it that there were recognizable landmarks in the picture, such as the partially skeletonized Statue of Liberty. In the foreground of the picture were the two WTC towers, laying on their sides and crumpled after apparently having toppled over. It seemed like a reasonable approximation of what the ruins would look like.

I thought of this picture when I first saw the videos of the towers collapsing. Common sense tells us (well, it told me anyway) that these towers would topple over if they fell. In this case, as in many others, common sense is wrong. Thinking back on it, the artwork from the magazine was ludicrous because of the humongous forces at work when a large building comes apart. There's no way they would be recognizable when they hit the ground, even if they could have somehow stayed intact as they toppled.

It reminds me of my favorite line from "Titanic", when someone claimed that the ship couldn't sink. The designer said, "She's made of iron. I assure you, she can."

The towers were made of concrete and steel. Nothing mysterious about them falling straight down when they started to come apart.
 
geggy said:
Noooo...

Just...look...

gallerize.com/What_Is_The_Hologram_Theory.htm

I will come back to debate as soon as the s***storm at work dies down...
Click to expand...

From the forementioned site...

"People who are not dumb brainwashed American hoodlums and idiots, i.e. people who can use their senses and their brains..."

Best description ever... I knew I was an American hoodlum, but dumb and brainwashed - that's news to me.
 
You know, I started to do an in-depth reply, spent 15 minutes on it and was only half way through, but then I came across this and I had to stop.
I don't know what happened to flight 93.
Click to expand...
geggy, why don't you know what happened to flight 93?
What in the world is the mystery?
And if there is a mystery, where in the world are you getting your information?
Please explain.
 
geggy said:
For all we know, the august 6th memo was most likely doctored
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: 9/11 Conspiracy reserves the right to conviently dismiss any evidence that may hurt, debunk, or disprove any single point, large part, or the whole of the 9/11 Conspiracy. Any rebroadcast, reproduction, or other use of the pictures and accounts of this conspiracy theory without the express written consent of the 9/11 Conspiracy is stricly prohibited.
 
aggle-rithm said:
If the 19 hijackers weren't really involved, what role did they play in the conspiracy?
Click to expand...

And why'd we hire 15 Saudis and no Iraqis if we wanted a reason to invade Iraq? I haven't seen that one addressed yet.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I remember a long time ago seeing some artwork in a sci-fi magazine that depicted post-apocalyptic New York. Of course, the artist saw to it that there were recognizable landmarks in the picture, such as the partially skeletonized Statue of Liberty. In the foreground of the picture were the two WTC towers, laying on their sides and crumpled after apparently having toppled over. It seemed like a reasonable approximation of what the ruins would look like.
Click to expand...

Has anyone figured out how much force would be required to tip one of the towers over?

Remember, in order to create the torque to make it tip, there has to be force perpendicular to gravity. The buildings withstood the impact of a loaded 767. When it did fall, there was nothing pushing on the side to make it topple. Why should it fall anyway but down?
 
pgwenthold said:
Has anyone figured out how much force would be required to tip one of the towers over?

Remember, in order to create the torque to make it tip, there has to be force perpendicular to gravity. The buildings withstood the impact of a loaded 767. When it did fall, there was nothing pushing on the side to make it topple. Why should it fall anyway but down?
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that the amount of force required to overcome the interia holding it to place would be enough to defeat the joints and other attachment points. In other words, it would be stripped of parts rather than falling over like a wood block.
 
senorpogo said:
Disclaimer: 9/11 Conspiracy reserves the right to conviently dismiss any evidence that may hurt, debunk, or disprove any single point, large part, or the whole of the 9/11 Conspiracy. Any rebroadcast, reproduction, or other use of the pictures and accounts of this conspiracy theory without the express written consent of the 9/11 Conspiracy is stricly prohibited.
Click to expand...


LOL
 
aggle-rithm said:
There you go! Keep introducing those unnecessary entities! You'll make a conspiracy theorist yet. ;)

(And the B2, being overburdened, was held up by a blimp! Witnesses were all silenced.)
Click to expand...
The blimp was remote controlled by laser guided bomb-missile drones.
 
Wow you guys have given me so much attention. I wouldn't know where to start in order to debunk every one of your replies. Sorry to tell some of you using 911myths link but that site has been disproved by many 9/11 truth seekers. Go to 911blogger.com and many will tell you the same in the comment section.

Before I start debunking your replies, I want to post several things regarding 9/11 truth seekers being dismissed as conspiracy theorists, as if the same way sherlock holmes would also be dismissed as being one.

"We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty."
-- George W. Bush, 11/10/01

informationclearinghouse.info/article12195.htm

As we struggle to put the events of and following 9-11-2001 into the most complete perspective, we’re hampered by having to find a way through the minefields of "conspiracy theory" accusations. There are so many parts to consider, it’s almost impossible to argue from any one event. If we argue that the Bush administration was complicit in the attacks of 9-11 - that they intentionally murdered 3,000 Americans in order to further their imperialistic agenda abroad and their transformation of America into a command-and-control plutocracy here at home - a hundred others will pick holes in individual pieces of the 9-11 conspiracy theory, and derail the argument rather than clarifying or advancing it. It’s like trying to pick up Jell-O without the bowl.

Nor can this ever be a merely intellectual game. Suggesting that our own leaders orchestrated the murders of 9-11 - while proposing Arab Muslims as perhaps no more than the fictional enemy toward which they hope to direct American scorn and fury - this idea evokes deep and powerful resentment and resistance, whether it is true or not.

Author David Ray Griffin, whose research I’ll be using for some parts of this essay, quotes from a stunning letter to the Los Angeles Times Magazine from September 18, 2005 from William Yarchin of Huntington Beach, California:

"The number of contradictions in the official version of ... 9/11 is so overwhelming that ... it simply cannot be believed. Yet ... the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a government conspiracy of "X-Files" proportions and insidiousness."

In this essay, I will try picking up the bowl rather than just the Jell-O - the deep story that frames much of our history - to see if I can grasp the overall story that includes 9-11, our imperialism, our invasions of Iraq and Iran, the theft of trillions of dollars from the tax base to transfer to the top tenth of a percent or so of our population, the rise in repressive laws, loss of civil liberties, increase in the state power of Christian fundamentalism, and its accompanying marginalization of women that always accompanies fascisms and fundamentalisms.

There is such a "bowl," such a meta-story. It is not hidden, not obscure, and not hard to grasp. It is even quite easy to defend. In fact, I want to begin by defending that frame story, to get a feel for its raw and deep power and appeal.
 
geggy said:
In this essay, I will try picking up the bowl rather than just the Jell-O - the deep story that frames much of our history - to see if I can grasp the overall story that includes 9-11, our imperialism, our invasions of Iraq and Iran, the theft of trillions of dollars from the tax base to transfer to the top tenth of a percent or so of our population, the rise in repressive laws, loss of civil liberties, increase in the state power of Christian fundamentalism, and its accompanying marginalization of women that always accompanies fascisms and fundamentalisms.

There is such a "bowl," such a meta-story. It is not hidden, not obscure, and not hard to grasp. It is even quite easy to defend. In fact, I want to begin by defending that frame story, to get a feel for its raw and deep power and appeal.
Click to expand...
Please cut the syntatical frills and get on with it, Gegg. You're writing a refutation, not a thesis. Just give us the facts. Straight.
we can take it.
 
Hey geggy, instead of dumping a ton of rhetorical political posturing, why not concentrate on facts and evidence to support your claims.

Here is a clue to help guide you on what is and what isn't a relevant fact or evidence.

While the family relationship between the Chertoff's is a fact, it's relevance must be supported by evidence, without evidence, that "fact" is irrelevant? Okay?
 
Last edited:
geggy said:
Wow you guys have given me so much attention. I wouldn't know where to start in order to debunk every one of your replies.
Click to expand...
Start with one.

Sorry to tell some of you using 911myths link but that site has been disproved by many 9/11 truth seekers. Go to 911blogger.com and many will tell you the same in the comment section.
Click to expand...
Telling me isn't enough. Show me.
 
Are you saying that what you just posted in post #1453 was your "essay," or is that yet to come? 1453 was a tad light on facts, data, evidence.

I think you're saying that you will weave the "big picture" for us, which is great, because that's what we've been asking of the others all along. Frame a big picture explanation that's consistent with the evidence we have. The other conspiracy theorists who have posted here have been anything but theorists - they are simply trying to find ways that the standard model must be false, without proposing their own model of what happened. If you could explain the big picture and show how the facts support it, that would be great.
 
Geggy, I feel compelled to ask you if you have any actual evidence. It appears that you are only able to offer speculations based on further speculation.
 
bob_kark said:
Geggy, I feel compelled to ask you if you have any actual evidence. It appears that you are only able to offer speculations based on further speculation.
Click to expand...


That's unfair. We've also seen conjecture based on clueless guesswork and assumptions based on wildly inaccurate gut feelings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom