Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
geggy said:
No, they didn't address some of the questions that were asked about the puff of dust ejecting, the sounds of bombs going off, etc.
Click to expand...

Maybe because they never considered them to be relevant. And that may be because the people who made the report are professionals who know what they're talking about and will not interpret inconsequential things as important evidence.

That paragraph was copied and pasted, by me, from the FEMA report. They were trying to trick you into thinking the building in the center of the picture was WTC7.
Click to expand...

Didn't see that picture. The link was broken.
 
shuize said:
When you cling to CT like a religion, it's not hard to dodge and weave.

True Believer: "The WTC was a controlled demolition."
Skeptic: "Look at this photo. Does that look like a controlled demolition to you?"
True Believer: "Watch this video, man."
Skeptic: "Watch the same unedited video."
True Believer: "Freefall, man. The building fell at freefall straight down."
Skeptic: "Look at this photo. Do see all the material falling faster than the main structure?"
True Believer: "Explosions, man. The buildings were blown up. That's what melted the steel beams and blew out all the dust."
Skeptic: "Explosions don't melt steel."
True Believer: "Thermite, man. Thermite melted the steel."
Skeptic: "Thermite is not an explosive."
True Believer: "Nukes, man. Nukes in the basement."
Skeptic: "Survivors from the basement say otherwise."
True Believer: "The Pentagon, man. Small hole. No plane."
Skeptic: "Different pictures. Big hole. Airplane parts. Passenger DNA. Witnesses."
True Believer: Bush sucks, man.

And so on ...
Click to expand...

I do believe this is the best summary to this thread that anyone could have thought of. Nice work.
 
Gravy said:
Congrats. I bet you get a nice gift basket when you appear.
Seriously, though, it's a podcast, and he's said it averages about 50 live listeners and 200 downloads.
Click to expand...

Woooooooooooooooooooooo............

I'm gonna see if I can get him to agree to have you on. Actually, what I'd love to see is a debate between you & Dylan Avery.
 
CurtC said:
Finally geggy says something that I can fully agree with. Only took 130 posts.
Click to expand...


Does this mean you will start listening closely to me now?

I'm going to try and explain my point of view here so bear with my language as I don't speak in physics/engineering technical language. You need to check the beginning of the north tower collapsing. The top portion broke into pieces as it fell into the ring of dust, there couldn't have been enough weight for the top to force down the floors below. If you think the top portion was the reason for forcing the floors below down, then then why didnt the top part pause it's movement even for a millisecond if it was to force the weight down? The top just fell straight down and smoothly that is.
 
geggy said:
No, they didn't address some of the questions that were asked about the puff of dust ejecting, the sounds of bombs going off, etc.
Click to expand...
What should have been seen and heard at the WTC on 9/11?
That's a serious question. I'd like you to tell us what SHOULD have been seen and heard, from a CT point of view.

geggy said:
That paragraph was copied and pasted, by me, from the FEMA report. They were trying to trick you into thinking the building in the center of the picture was WTC7.
Click to expand...
This quote from FEMA?
"The presence of fire and smoke on lower floors is also confirmed by the early television news coverage of WTC 7, which indicated light-colored smoke rising from the lower floors of WTC 7.

Video footage indicated that the majority of the smoke appeared to be coming from the south side of the building at that time as opposed to the other sides of the building. This is corroborated by Figure 5-17, a photograph taken at 3:36 p.m that shows the south face of WTC 7 covered with a thick cloud of smoke, and only small amounts of smoke emanating from the 27th and 28th floors of the west face of WTC 7.

News coverage after 1:30 p.m. showed light-colored smoke flowing out of openings on the upper floors of the south side of the building. Another photograph (Figure 5-18) of the skyline at 3:25 p.m., taken from the southwest, shows a large volume of dark smoke coming from all but the lowest levels of WTC 7, where white smoke is emanating."
Click to expand...
Is it this photo you're talking about? That's WTC 7 on fire in the middle.
8790445b605f2381c.jpg


edited to add FEMA quote
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
No, they didn't fill out the application fully. Because they're paranoid, they didn't put down their correct locations, and probably used fake names as well. Otherwise "they" will come for them, no doubt.
Click to expand...
Considering that their mods have no ethics when it comes to private information, they're probably afraid that the same applies here.

I've seen at least two examples of threats to publish personal information (email addresses and names) and/or snitch to people's employers about posting on internet forums from work. I'll see if I can find some examples.
 
geggy said:
Does this mean you will start listening closely to me now?

I'm going to try and explain my point of view here so bear with my language as I don't speak in physics/engineering technical language. You need to check the beginning of the north tower collapsing. The top portion broke into pieces as it fell into the ring of dust, there couldn't have been enough weight for the top to force down the floors below. If you think the top portion was the reason for forcing the floors below down, then then why didnt the top part pause it's movement even for a millisecond if it was to force the weight down? The top just fell straight down and smoothly that is.
Click to expand...

A hundred million pounds isn't enough weight to collapse a floor?
 
Belz...

Soo what you're saying the FEMA report is based on their own "professional" assumptions and theories? If they're going to write a report, at least they could get their facts straight.
 
dubfan said:
Woooooooooooooooooooooo............

I'm gonna see if I can get him to agree to have you on. Actually, what I'd love to see is a debate between you & Dylan Avery.
Click to expand...
My conversation with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas went like this:
They (Holding one of the flyers I was handing out that used their own words to denounce them):
"What is this? Our names are on this!"
Me: Do you stand behind your work?"
"Damn right!"
"Very well." i walk away.
"Yeah, just walk away!!! How do you sleep at night??? Go collect your government paycheck!!!"

No, I wouldn't want to debate them. They're such hotheaded morons that it wouldn't be interesting.
 
geggy should be applauded for one thing at least, he continues to post here rather than seeking the solace of the debate-free-zone that is the LC forum.

I remain to be convinced about his motives, reasoning ability or even that he believes what he posts (as pointed out by Mercutio).

Now I'm going back to lurking and reading this fascinating thread.
Thank you all.
 
geggy said:
Thanks for linking plaguepuppy. Rarely I would go to that site and i didnt realize how much information it holds...Here 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 archive/Shaking before WTC-1 collapse.mpg
Click to expand...

geggy, DID YOU EVEN READ THIS THREAD BEFORE YOU JOINED IT? WE'VE BEEN THROUGH ALL THIS! gosh

WildCat said:
Yes, I can. It is obviously taken from very far away w/ a very long telephoto lens. This is obvious because the WTC is in focus, as is the building on the left which is much, much closer. This deep depth of field is the result of a long lens. My guess is that someone bumped the tripod (actually, it was probably a TV camera mounted on something much sturdier than a typical tripod, but that's irrelevant for our purposes). W/ this long lens, the slightest bump of the camera support would have the effect shown.

Now IF, as you claim, it shook because of demolition charges going off, then why didn't it shake when 200,000 tons of concrete and steel collapsed and struck the ground w/ many times the force of the alleged demolition charges? This is a huge problem for your theory, isn't it?
Click to expand...
 
geggy said:
Belz...

Soo what you're saying the FEMA report is based on their own "professional" assumptions and theories? If they're going to write a report, at least they could get their facts straight.
Click to expand...
What facts didn't they get straight?
 
Gravy said:
Welcome aboard! Just minutes ago I finished the second version of my "Loose Change" critique, and I'm very pleased with it. It's a big improvement. I'll post a link to it here shortly.

Check my sig to see what I think of Steven Jones. Lord, i would love to debate him.
Click to expand...

Gosh Gravy, you ARE a superhero.:eek:
 
geggy said:
The top portion broke into pieces as it fell into the ring of dust, there couldn't have been enough weight for the top to force down the floors below.
Click to expand...
How much weight was there pushing down. How much weight would have been necessary, show your work.
geggy said:
If you think the top portion was the reason for forcing the floors below down, then why didn't the top part pause it's movement even for a millisecond
Click to expand...
What evidence, other then a video, do you have that that there was no pause and how much of a pause should there have been, please provide, from a structural engineering perspective the analysis which supports your conclusion.
 
shuize said:
When you cling to CT like a religion, it's not hard to dodge and weave.

True Believer: "The WTC was a controlled demolition."

Skeptic: "Look at this photo. Does that look like a controlled demolition to you?"

True Believer: "Watch this video, man."

Skeptic: "Watch the same unedited video."

True Believer: "Freefall, man. The building fell at freefall straight down."

Skeptic: "Look at this photo. Do see all the material falling faster than the main structure?"

True Believer: "Explosions, man. The buildings were blown up. That's what melted the steel beams and blew out all the dust."

Skeptic: "Explosions don't melt steel."

True Believer: "Thermite, man. Thermite melted the steel."

Skeptic: "Thermite is not an explosive."

True Believer: "Nukes, man. Nukes in the basement."

Skeptic: "Survivors from the basement say otherwise."

True Believer: "The Pentagon, man. Small hole. No plane."

Skeptic: "Different pictures. Big hole. Airplane parts. Passenger DNA. Witnesses."

True Believer: Bush sucks, man.

And so on ...
Click to expand...

And it's always ends with some Hitler comparison.:(
 
Gravy said:
My conversation with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas went like this:
They (Holding one of the flyers I was handing out that used their own words to denounce them):
"What is this? Our names are on this!"
Me: Do you stand behind your work?"
"Damn right!"
"Very well." i walk away.
"Yeah, just walk away!!! How do you sleep at night??? Go collect your government paycheck!!!"

No, I wouldn't want to debate them. They're such hotheaded morons that it wouldn't be interesting.
Click to expand...

Wow. Don't blame you.
 
geggy said:
Belz...

Soo what you're saying the FEMA report is based on their own "professional" assumptions and theories? If they're going to write a report, at least they could get their facts straight.
Click to expand...

Man you're one step away from me calling Chuck Norris and make him roundhouse kick you in the face.:mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom