• 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.
Whenever I feel like checking the latest insanity at the Loose Change Forums, and I don't have a link from this thread in front of me, I've always Googled the phrase "loose change forum," and it was the first or second link. But I just did that, and guess what? The LC forum for is not on the entire first page! Nor the second page! I didn't look any farther, but this very thread is the second link, and the ScrewLooseChange blog is the third link. Every link on the first two pages that I checked out is to something where the CTs get slaughtered.

I know that Google can play around with the search results - do you think one of the fine folks over there has taken action to do the right thing?
 
Grrff..it's getting bizzare. I'm in the Philly Suburbs, and the local Sportstalk radio station had callers discussing the 9/11 events. The first caller I heard was a CT'er, and luckily the host wasn't falling for it. Asked the caller to name who was responsible, and he waffled.

They're like roaches. They show up when they think people are in the dark, And they scurry away when a light of reason is shined.

Trif
 
chipmunk stew said:
He cops to it as soon as he opens his mouth.
Click to expand...
Just amazing.

Reminds me of Stan doing cold-readings on South Park:

Stan: "I'm going to do a trick now. What you are about to see is a trick."

Stan: <does trick>

Crowd: "Omigod! He can talk to the dead!"
 
One thing that nice policy review made clear is that what the conspiracy theories do is let Al-Queda off the hook.

Too bad we have, like, integrity and stuff. Otherwise we could start charging them with being dissinformers on the Isamofascist payroll.
 
We'll see where this post leads

QUOTE (DJLegacy2k1 @ May 18 2006, 01:07 AM)
As one of the most open minded people here I have to disagree with some points made here.

First, I got alot more name calling from people that side on the NIST report and against CTs. Most people quote PM, the Commission, and then resort to calling people names after that.

I don't believe alot of the wilder theories out there and most of my theories can be seen here on the board. I will say that JREF and this thread can not seem to keep a cool head in any debate, from either side.

I am in all of this to find the TRUTH. The government's story obviously is BS, and there are some crazy CT claims that are obvious BS as well. Somewhere in the middle though, they have to meet...Period.

If everyone could present their arguements without EITHER side getting mad and immature, then maybe some progress would be made.

I'm cracking down on BS from BOTH sides...So if anyone wishes to debate for either side, make sure you keep it clean and mature...

thumbsup.gif
/QUOTE

I find this post interesting. You state that you are involved in this to find the truth, but immediately follow that statement by saying that the government's story is obviously false. In scientific and criminal investigations, it is vitally important to examine the evidence as it presents itself, and to see where that evidence points. By entering your investigation under the bias that the government's position in in error you introduce confirmational bias into the examination of the evidence.

Coupling the introduction of confirmational bias to the pre-existing human failings of false positives/negatives yields great risk that the conclusions of the investigation will, if not be in error, at least be under suspicion.

Now, I certainly do not know the entire decision making process you went through to come to your current position, and I wish to give you the benefit of the doubt. So, I would like to pose a couple of questions that may help clarify your position to me:

1) On what grounds (pre 9/11 evidence) do you base your decision, that the government's explaination of the events is erroneous, upon?

2) Is there any hypothetical evidence, that could be provided, that would cause you to rethink your position on the events of 9/11?

Thanks,
AW
Click to expand...
 
8886446c0a3dd5126.png


I just couldn't resist :D
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
We'll see where this post leads
Click to expand...

You can search this board for my thoughts, views, theories, opinions on certain "evidence" and such.

I will not sit here and type up all of my thoughts and feelings. The point of a message board is to SAVE convos and data so you dont have to have every convo 999 times.

Search around the board then when you have a feeling on my basic stand points then I will disscuss them with you.
Click to expand...

*dodge* *weave*
 
guys now I have become involved in a forum with the aussie metal scene in a debate on it, though thankfully, not too many people buy it.

Funnily enough I dont think it will take much, im getting an arguement about the 'buldge under the aircraft' (uuuuhhhhh) produced on 9-11 myths.
 
You can search this board for my thoughts, views, theories, opinions on certain "evidence" and such.

I will not sit here and type up all of my thoughts and feelings.
Click to expand...
Good. How 'bout some verifiable supporting evidence then, since "thoughts, views, theories, [and] opinions" are worth exactly nothing.

Why is this seemingly simple concept so difficult for some to grasp?
 
hellaeon said:
guys now I have become involved in a forum with the aussie metal scene in a debate on it, though thankfully, not too many people buy it.
Click to expand...

It's all over the place. It's on the Movie & TV and Aviation/Space sub-forums of a very large automotive board I frequent, too, as well as a community board, where a new thread on LC pops up once or twice a week.

I think it's a conspiracy "perfect storm":

A bold & unlikely act of war with global implications, lots of eyewitnesses with sometimes contradictory testimony, unique & difficult forensic engineering problems, a secretive and unpopular government engaged in an unpopular war initially opposed to an independent investigation, and easily accessible and searchable info on the Internet...

Throw the conspiracy kooks in there to stir the pot and you've got a helluva mess.

ETA: I forgot another part of the perfect storm: Google video.
 
dubfan said:
Throw the conspiracy kooks in there to stir the pot and you've got a helluva mess.
Click to expand...

Especially with an important and potential dangerous issue like terrorism. UFO'S and the moon landing conspiracies are at least "entertaining", it's fun sometimes to mess with our brains. But with 9/11, we're not talking about little green men anymore, the "mess" these CTs are creating actually has serious repercutions.
 
Ramooone said:
heres a video of dylan on the cbc

http://resurrectingthelede.blogspot.com/2006/05/loose-change-author-on-canadian.html

is it just me or is he growing a small hitler moustache
Click to expand...
If people have the time and the inclination, post a comment whenever you see something like this. Here's a standard comment that I post:

"Loose Change" – 426 errors, including 81 errors of fact, in an 80-minute video. It would be very, very hard to do worse than that.

Considering the seriousness of the subject, it would have been nice if Dylan Avery (who also believes that the Apollo moon landings didn't happen) had bothered to do some fact-checking.

For a hard look at the facts behind the claims in "Loose Change," go to http://tinyurl.com/jnfp8 (to view as HTML) or download the .doc file at http://tinyurl.com/epp82
 
Polaris said:
I'm going to try to head this off at the pass - before geggy uses this quote to prove all the Pentagon and Shanksville witnesses were mistaken.

Witnesses are unreliable in a "Witness mistook an Arab guy in a white Chevy for a Hispanic guy in a white GMC" way, not a "witness mistook a Bell helicopter on a tarmac for a pair of gay platypuses humping on a coffee table" way.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. Thanks for clearing that up...
 
milesalpha said:
On the submarine, I agree the Americans devastated the Japanese merchant marine but I'm not so sure it was due to techological developments. The Japanese record is just atrocious. They rejected convoy tactics for all merchant ships until late in the war. Their ASW tactics were terrible, badly underestimating the dive depths of US subs. They did not develop an advanced radar, the number one weapon against submarine attack, Their sonar development was awful. Cooperation between merchant marine, regular navy and the air force was non-existent.
Click to expand...

AND they ignored the submarine bases when they bombed Pearl Harbor.

Idiots.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom