If the response you're expecting is:Originally Posted by Mizuchi
"FBI knocks down your door and all records of your existence dissappear"
I'd be sorry to dissappoint, but the more likely outcome would be:
"The girl in the 3rd row starts to cry"
If the response you're expecting is:
"FBI knocks down your door and all records of your existence dissappear"
I'd be sorry to dissappoint, but the more likely outcome would be:
"The girl in the 3rd row starts to cry"
10/4/04 - 8/20/07
Fools!!!
It wasn't bush who knocked down the towers; it was Zionists operating out of Area 51 to distract us all from the second Bay of Pigs invasion in the Gulf of Tonkin!
Err...something like that.
"Samsonlonghair - The Defender of the Oppressed And Shunned!" -Kraco
I suppose I can come closest to answering that in saying it was scary shit (I live on Long Island, that tiny strip of land right under New York. Our school sent everyone home within 20minutes of that happening. The details were foggy (to the students at least at the time) but we had cops accompany our buses so everyone knew something was going down. When I got home, about an hour later my parents arrived. My dad used to work at the building across the street from it and when someone with a window view told him what happened, they thought he was joking, until they saw the place going up in flames. Now I've seen Loose Change and I did a conspiracy report (in my senior year of high school). I'm not sure what the first video in the thread says but the fall of the twin towers was due to planes. The pentagon is another story. A cruise missle would make more sense to the damage caused in the pentagon.
LaZie made this...a long time ago.
"It was a very depressing time in my life, since I had no money I was unable to screw the rules" -Kaiba
When the plane hit the south tower, the top of it fell off. After the top fell off, there was no pressure being placed on the enourmously strong building, yet it still collapsed, and all the floors collapes at the same rate, not at a rate which should've decreased with each floor. The fall of the twin towars was not due to planes.
Loose Change is the biggest crock of shit ever made, and here's why.
Their "evidence" is largely zoomed in screenshots of 9/11 footage an anecdotes from people on or shortly after 9/11/2001. Now, these people would be freaked out and panicked, like most Americans were for a week or two. Anyone who has a law degree, is in law enforcement, or psychology will tell you witness accounts are one of the least reliable sources, especially in a traumatic experience.
Not once to the two who made the film actually find an expert to correlate the data with, or they reply that they "couldn't reach them" because no experts in specific fields take them seriously. They take one photo and make huge assumptions, rather than looking at the 50+ photographs that show the exact opposite of what they've said, or the 20 reports that show how the people who died were identified.
As a Mechanical Enginnering major, the WTC "demolition" disgusts me. I've taken an entire course on fatigue and failure. There's no need for demolition, steel loses nearly all of its engineering strength at about 600 degrees F. It's called Creep. Creep (wiki)
Would you honestly believe a millions of pounds of building could be held up on what becomes equivalent to a series of toothpicks? And if anything, more weight on each consecutive floor means they should have collapsed faster if anything, not slower. Stress equals force over cross sectional area. The area never changes, but the weight does. The stress would grow greater, and the building would fall faster. This is chapter 1 Statics and Dynamics stuff.
Instead of facts, they use impressions. Instead of experts, they use anecdotes. Instead of analysis, they use conjecture.
If you really believe in the facts of Loose Change, I urge you to read The Loose Change Guide. It goes nearly point for point in the film, countering nearly every statement made in the entire film with actual facts. It's a multipart guide, and a very long read, but well worth it.
After that, watch their debate against the Popular Mechanics editors who debunked them. Part 1 of 5 (rest are on the Youtube sidebar). Their attitude and blatant lack of manners infuriates me. They are on a very liberal channel, so they get to act like children, who interrupt, heckle, laugh and shake their heads when the PM guys talk. The narrator of the film has the demeanor of a 5 year old. At one point, Dylan Avery (the creator of LC) actually tells him to chill out because he realizes that his friend is making them look like assholes. Credibility is not instilled by acting with the behavior of young playground children. "No, I'm calling you a liar!" (direct quote from the debate).
Trust in science and facts, not conspiracy theory.
Last edited by Ryllharu; Sun, 10-22-2006 at 07:30 AM.
@Ryllharu
Explain the pentagon then.
You gotta be kidding me. You didn't even read the link that counters every point those two idiots made.
Once again: Loose Change Guide Section II: AA Flight 77 and the Pentagon
Read that first.
I know people are lazy, so I'll try to summarize. They claim there is no debris and that it becomes an unlikely story that the jet fuel vaporized the 757. The only problem is they looked at only footage from newcasts, and not any pictures. The site provides this link. Hmm, looks like wreckage to me. They get various facts wrong (engine manufacturer, Skywarriors don't use JT8D engines, USAF A3's are all accounted for, wrong engine parts, etc). Their "experts" during that clip wrote an article that according to the Guide:Moving on, The Hole:Are you referring to this [article] (written by Tom Flocco and featuring Schwarz) in which a 12-foot exit hole made by the landing gear on the INSIDE of the Pentagon is described as the ENTRY hole on the OUTSIDE that the ENTIRE PLANE made?
LC loves to claim the entry hole is a 16 foot hole. They use this picture of the building with a red overlay of a 757, (you must know what I'm talking about). The only problem, is that there's a ton of smoke in the image they choose to use, so not only can you hardly see the hole they are talking about, half of the building is obscured. There is a 90 foot hole in the outer ring, not 16 ft. LC is shocked that the plane could go through several rings of reinforced concrete. The problem with that claim? The ground floor of the Pentagon is an "open" floor plan, with no extra reinforced walls to penetrate. LC mentions that large wire spools are still in place. What makes them idiots here? They do not show a single image of those same spools beforehand. The truth? They have no idea what the spools looked like! The exit hole was made by the landing gear, there are tons of picutres of it. The nose doesn't have anything to do with it.
Seriously, read the whole link. It's a great debunker of all of the pentagon garbage.
Lastly, a bit of knowledge from my college education. Let's assume that a plane slammed into a side of a reinforced concrete building. Concrete is used to make to make bridges and such because of it's material property. Concrete is highly resistant to compression. When we reinforce concrete, we add metal rebar to it to increase it's capacity for tension, because concrete is weak to tension. To recap, concrete is good on compression and metal is good for tension.
Plane slams into building, the forces are way more complicated than that, but we'll call it mostly compression. Building = strong against forces. Plane = weak against forces. Which one do you think will be shredded more?
I believe that has already been done many times, e.g. The 911 report and The Pentagon Building Performance Report; conclude Flight 77 a 757 impacted the Pentagon. See the truth isn't as entertaining but based in facts, and they wonder why more children aren't interested in science, uneducated conspiracies are far more entertaining. Here are some more sources that through actual investigations and scientific practices conclude that you are ridicules.
Popular Mechanics: Debunking the 9/11 Myths
An exhaustive list of eyewitness who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. (includes sources)
Really before you believe other people's selective opinions actually read the material they are trying to disprove as often it has already made them look foolish and/or consult another opinion as basing your belief on the selective arguments of one side is rather silly.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
