• 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.
geggy said:
Wow, cognative disassociation at its best.

So you're dismissing everything that's written in this article just because of his job title? Because of what he does for a living, it means he can't do anything else in his life?

What you're displaying yourself as is one sided, excessively egolistical, pseudo-intellectual.

Congratulations on becoming for who you are, you must be really proud of yourself.
Click to expand...
If you're going to use the big words, geggy, please get them right - it's cognitive dissonance.

Anyway Gravy's point was
He knows better than the experts who wrote the FEMA report? But he can't cite a single source that backs up his claims?
Click to expand...
- rather than Davis' lack of relevant qualifications. The fact that you didn't see this and have descended into insult are obvious symptoms of - wait for it - cognitive dissonance!
 
Gravy said:
Although she agrees that Moussaoui was involved, she doesn't think he should be on trial.
Click to expand...

I went back to reading some posts just to amuse myself. Then I found this post which I've missed. That's a highly contradictory statement in case you don't notice.

"This guy was involved but he should not be on trial"

Heheheh *bangs head on wall*
 
Ah yes, the last resort of the crank ... when all your arguments have failed, start slinging insults. Let me join with Dragon in suggesting that you learn how to spell these words and what they mean.

The fact remains that the opinion, on a matter of engineering, of a professor of sport studies, with no reference to the great mass of literature on engineering, is worth a great deal less than that of engineers, who know about engineering.

You find this attitude "one sided, excessively egolistical, pseudo-intellectual". I call it "stating the bleedin' obvious".
 
Last edited:
I meant to call you a english nazi as in a sense of being a grammar critique.

Welsh ex-socialist actually sounds better.
 
geggy said:
Wow, cognative disassociation at its best.

So you're dismissing everything that's written in this article just because of his job title? Because of what he does for a living, it means he can't do anything else in his life?

What you're displaying yourself as is one sided, excessively egolistical, pseudo-intellectual.

Congratulations on becoming for who you are, you must be really proud of yourself.
Click to expand...

No, geggy, first I looked at each of the article's points and judgments, then I made my judgment that it's a mountain of ignorant horsecrap writen by a fool who can't cite sources for his claims. Sorry, I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to all 22 points he made. If you'd like to pick one point, I'll handle that as a favor to you.

But perhaps you should first read my critique of the Loose Change video, which covers many of those points. You can find it here as a smaller but uglier PDF, or here as a 26 MB torrent file. Since you mentioned the Pentagon a couple of posts ago, you might go to that section first: it's covered on pages 21 to 59.

By the way, I believe you mentioned that you are deaf and haven't seen "Loose change" because it's not subtitled. The entire text of "Loose Change" is transcribed in the document I just mentioned.

I'm not interested in what names you have to call me. I'm interested in what facts and critical thinking skills you bring to the table.

This is my third request for your source that says that many 9/11 victims support Moussaoui, and not just because they oppose the death penalty. You said "trust me" and "that's no BS," so I'm giving you a chance to show that you're trustworthy and not full of it. If I don't hear back from you then we'll all know what to think.
 
Last edited:
geggy said:
I meant to call you a english nazi as in a sense of being a grammar critique.

Welsh ex-socialist actually sounds better.
Click to expand...
Critic - a critique is something that a critic writes. :rolleyes:

Hey, this forum already has a god - is there a vacancy for "Grammar Nazi" ?
 
geggy said:
I went back to reading some posts just to amuse myself. Then I found this post which I've missed. That's a highly contradictory statement in case you don't notice.

"This guy was involved but he should not be on trial"

Heheheh *bangs head on wall*
Click to expand...

That's exactly what the article says. It's not my statement. What's your point? Did you actually read my whole post?
 
geggy said:
All over the world? You mean like US troops planting stories in Iraq? What about the time tony blair threatened to prosecute reporters if they leak the memo showing conversation bewteen bush and blair about bush's desire to bomb the aljareeza media facility? Etc etc etc etc....
Click to expand...
If the Bush regime has a stranglehold on the public media from all the countries of the planet, how were we able to read about this in, er, the public media?
 
geggy said:
I'm really interested in hearing you explain why the falling of WTC7 doesn't look like a controlled demo.
Click to expand...

It's been explained to you, Gigli. Controlled demos are made to look like falling buildings.

Paneteris, you left out the standdown of NORAD and the wargame exercises that were performed on the morning of sept 11 in the list of facts.
Click to expand...

You should teach hockey goalies the art of goalpost-moving.

geggy said:
Under normal circumstances of a conteolled demolition, the bottom of the central cores of the building are blasted first (which explains the penthouse fell down before everything else fell), then the cores on both sides of the builidng are blasted. Why? So the two sides of the building can collapse toward and inward of the center of the building. Why? To prevent the risk of both sides of the building from falling outward that could create larger field of debris that would make clean up less convienance and more difficult for machines and trucks.
Click to expand...

Uhuh. Have you ever considered that, when damage is dealt to a buliding, the central core may be compromised to as to result in precisely this kind of collapse ?
 
geggy said:
First of all, the article states that 911 truthers are provoking the victims by making profits from selling dvds and stuff which is not true. Go back to the first post of this thread and you'll see that you can watch loose change...for FREE. Flight 93 were released today in theaters and people are expected to shell out 10 bux for a tix.

Secondly, more 911 truthers don't support the no-plane at the pentagon theory than you give credit to. They are simply aasking for the release of the videos of the crash.
Click to expand...

How can someone call such a bunch of close-minded individuals "truthers" ?

geggy said:
The official theory is accepted by many citizens because the bush administration has a stranglehold of the media.
Click to expand...

You dodged the question, there.

First off, why do the media AROUND THE WORLD agree with the official theory ? Are they ALL in on it ?

Second, if, to you guys, the collapse of the various WTC buildings is OBVIOUSLY apparent as a controlled demo, why wouldn't more people believe your side of the story, from day one ? Your contention that most people accept the official story is inconsistent with your other assertions.
 
Beleth said:
Does WTC7 look more like a controlled demo, or an uncontrolled demo?
Click to expand...
Geggy, why won't you answer this question?

Is it because you can't, and you know that this entire line of reasoning falls apart if you can't?
 
geggy said:
All over the world? You mean like US troops planting stories in Iraq? What about the time tony blair threatened to prosecute reporters if they leak the memo showing conversation bewteen bush and blair about bush's desire to bomb the aljareeza media facility? Etc etc etc etc....
Click to expand...

Wow. That usually-incompetent government SURE is efficient when it comes to world-wide, complex conspiracies, is it not ?

Pelrhsaios, I can't really say. Some say planes may have been remote controlled and that's not so farfetched.
Click to expand...

Except it doesn't make sense UNLESS you prove that the official story is wrong AND that there's a motive for it.

Before the pentagon was crashed, the plane made a sharp 270 degree bank turn and crashed the west wing where the part was being renovated. It's almost impossible for an amateur pilot to make a 270 degree turn but it's possible with remote control.
Click to expand...

Why isn't it possible for an amateur pilot ? Why would it be more possible from remote ?
 
geggy said:
So you're dismissing everything that's written in this article just because of his job title? Because of what he does for a living, it means he can't do anything else in his life?
Click to expand...

No, but it's somewhat strange that someone with little or no expertise in a field claims, ala Kilik, to know more about the field than all the experts.

What you're displaying yourself as is one sided, excessively egolistical, pseudo-intellectual.
Click to expand...

Right back at you.

Congratulations on becoming for who you are, you must be really proud of yourself.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure you just love the attention you're getting here.
 
So, let's see if I've got this straight.

(1) A building collapsing looks like a building collapsing.

(2) Therefore, all buildings collapse for the same reason.

(3) This includes buildings which have had large aircraft flown into them at high speeds.

(4) Anyone who disagrees with this masterly piece of logic is part of TEH CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are there any little subtleties in the argument that I've overlooked, or is that really all there is?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom