• 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.
Here!

CT-level PROOF that Bush is evil! Truly evil. Very evil. Really evil. Unbearably evil.
bush_kitten.jpg


If he could do that to a kitten, 9/11 conspiracy surely was a piece of cake for him and his evil cow-orkers.

BTW, I would really like to learn more about explosives that can melt steel and keep this heat level for so long after the actual explosion. I've been working in the mining industry for some time, and I'm quite used to explosions, but I never heard about an explosion site that would remain hot for so long...
 
Collection of Fallacies, cont.

geggy said:
You missed the point. Hitler labelled the opposition party and dissents as terrorists just as george bush have been labelling the opposition party and the dissents as terrorists (or saddamists in his own words).
Click to expand...

The Nazis started the Reichstag fire and blamed it on Communists.
The US government blamed 9/11 on Islamic terrorists.
Therefore, the US government...started the Reichstag fire?

I think geggy has topped himself.

geggy, do you even know what the Reichstag is? Do you know the significance of the Reichstag fire, other than that the Nazis set it?
 
Correa Neto said:
Here!


BTW, I would really like to learn more about explosives that can melt steel and keep this heat level for so long after the actual explosion. I've been working in the mining industry for some time, and I'm quite used to explosions, but I never heard about an explosion site that would remain hot for so long...
Click to expand...

I'd be interested to know why he keeps claiming the buildings fell in a "controlled demolition manner", yet displayed characteristics never before seen in a controlled demolition.
 
You know, I never thought the day would come when I'd consider Alek and conspiracybeliever logical and well-reasoned.
 
aggle-rithm said:
The Nazis started the Reichstag fire and blamed it on Communists.
The US government blamed 9/11 on Islamic terrorists.
Therefore, the US government...started the Reichstag fire?
Click to expand...

I think his fallacy was:

The Nazis started the Reichstag fire and blamed it on Communists
The US government blamed 9/11 on Islamic terrorists
Therefore, Grand Pa' Bush started the Reichstag fire.

I dunno, I'm not sure, it's hard to have a clear view of a dillusion.
 
Correa Neto said:
If he could do that to a kitten, 9/11 conspiracy surely was a piece of cake for him and his evil cow-orkers.
Click to expand...

He's just impersonating Kim Jong, I assure you. The kitten was pre-frozen by vegetarian hippies, so no harm done.
 
geggy said:
Hey thanks for providing even more evidence that there were molten steel in WTC. I've never seen that picture before. I'm having hard times debating with people because most of the people here are full of contradictions. You said there was no molten steel in the past now youre showing me a picture of molten steel. How am I supposed to take you seriously? By the way do you really think that look anything like burning fuel? Sure as hell look a lot like thermite liquid pouring over.

By the way how come you havent provided a link as to how WTC7 fire got started?

Kookbreaker, i'll have to get back to you on that. I only provided that link for you to analyze other major building fires that's occured in the past...
Click to expand...

To assume that it's steel is foolish. No engineer, anywhere, has suggested that it's steel. Aluminum melts at about half the temperature of steel. You should know that by now, geggy. I have held peices of cooled molten aluminum from the south tower in my hand. And not from the bottom of the debris pile, either. NO ONE at Ground Zero ever found anything that was positively identified as molten steel, hot or cooled.

Why have I not moved on to WTC 7? Here's why.
You keep avoiding facts by jumping from subject to subject. Let's just focus on this one thing, and get that resolved before moving on, okay? Just focus on this, and when we finish it, we'll move on to the next thing. That way you can learn things.

So, since you brought it up, please tell me what differences you can think of between the 1975 fire and the incidents on 9/11. Making a list might be helpful. How about just limiting it to five items. That's not too hard, right?
Click to expand...
 
60hzxtl said:
geggy said:
Hey thanks for providing even more evidence that there were molten steel in WTC. I've never seen that picture before.


What a hoot - all melting metal is steel?

Could that be the skin of the building - aluminum? Nahh - that's burnin' steel!

I'm reminded of the now old line - arguing on the Internet is like winning the special Olympics - you may win, but. . .
Click to expand...
By the way, that's a still from video. The molten metal is really pouring out of there. For CTers to suggest that there wasn't an inferno in those buildings is absurd.
Click to expand...
 
geggy said:
I only came to that conclusion after discovering many claims made by ground zero crew that they said they saw molten steel, videos/pics that showed molten steel, thermal spot scientific data showing that the temprature of several thermal spot exceeded at over 800 degrees so I figured why deny it?
Click to expand...

But if all the evidence to the contrary is a conspiracy, why are you so certain that your evidence, the accounts and videos of molten steel are not? It would be smaller and easier to fake, requiring far fewer resources and even less cooperation. And this would only require control over a few testimonies, videos, pictures, with far less manipulation than the one the greater conspiracy would require. It wouldn't matter which version you trust, since a conspiracy can happen regardless of whether or not you believe it.
 
geggy said:
You need to understand how hierarchy pyramid of news agencies work. National geographics is one of the outlets that are on top of the pyramid. Others being cnn, fox, popular mechanics, Time, AP, etc who are affilitiated with the US government.
Click to expand...
I haven't finished reading the thread, just had to get in on this. Popular Mechanics is at the top of the "news pyramid!"

Oh, I am loving this. geggy, my fixéd star of foolishness, I changed my mind: please don't leave. My day wouldn't be complete without your mal mots.
 
geggy said:
That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.
Click to expand...
This is getting beter and better. Go, geggy, go!
 
kookbreaker said:
The video can be viewed at this link.

I am not convinced its even metal, let alone steel.
Click to expand...
I agree that that view isn't convincing. There's another video that I think is more convincing, but I can't find the link right now. But I may be incorrectly connecting the video with the cooled aluminum I've held, which had characteristics of cooling while falling through the air.
 
Gravy said:
I agree that that view isn't convincing. There's another video that I think is more convincing, but I can't find the link right now. But I may be incorrectly connecting the video with the cooled aluminum I've held, which had characteristics of cooling while falling through the air.
Click to expand...
Oh, and geggy said the head of CDI (Mark Loiseaux) said he saw molten steel at the site. That's wrong, geggy. Do your homework. He said there were reports of molten steel. But the molten material was never tested, and several people were saying "red-hot" or "glowing orange," which is a long way from molten.

Anyway, geggy, I await your list of how the 1975 WTC 1 fire differed from the incidents on 9/11.

I told you before that you won't get the "truth" by surfing CT sites. Are you beginning to see that, or not? Just go back over this thread and count how many times you've been shown to be wrong. Are you beginning to question your sources of information now?

Or are you sticking with them?

ETA: Mark Loiseaux
 
Last edited:
I just got a random AIM message from the author of this webcomic.

yo
is that post about loose change 9/11 still active?
on your jref forums
sorry for botehering you, but I saw a link on universal studio site
actually I want to show a bit of something you would REALLY like
it totally debunks loose change
and I agree, it's a stupid ass movie
let me get the link for you
its a bit of a read, but it goes by line by line of the movie
Click to expand...
And he linked me to none other than our own Gravy's analysis. Apparently it's really making the rounds!

So the guy that contacted me is being harassed by Loosers from the Universal Pictures website (United 93) because a poster there named jebb is blasting the Loosers. jebb also happens to be a fan of the webcomic, so he has a link to it in his signature on the Universal Pictures forum. Apparently to the Loosers this makes the author of the webcomic complicit in the conspiracy, so they've been sending nasty e-mails. :rolleyes:

Here's a link to a particularly interesting thread on the Universal Forum. Anyone interested in heading over there and helping out? ;)

ETA From that thread:
tiredofidiots said:
That is so awesome. I wasted an hour and a half (or whatever it was) watching loose change. That PDF IS DEAD ON. Made my night
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom