Loose Change, never thought Id say this...

slosucks · 09-14-2006, 02:42 PM

So i just watched loose change, and i hate to say it, he brings up good points.

i still think this guy is a kook because in this day and age of technology it's quite easy to fabricate pictures, facts, and even fake interviews........so I want to know what people have been using to disprove his arguments?

7960 · 09-14-2006, 02:46 PM

pick any 3 issues that he had "good points" for .... let's talk about those three.

go.

Ardentfrost · 09-14-2006, 02:46 PM

Popular Mechanics - Debunking The 9/11 Myths - Mar. 2005 Cover Story

slosucks · 09-14-2006, 02:57 PM

1) The no plane debris at site of pentagon, damage inconsistant with a plane hitting, explosion happening at the site that was just renovated to withstand explosion, video footage being confiscated immediately and not released

2) Examples of other skyscrapers that burned for 18-24 hours that did not collapse, yet twin towers burn for under an hour and both collapse within minutes of each other in the exact same fashion

lets just start with those 2, now trust me i realize some of the facts might have been altered and i could do the google research, but its more fun to discuss

7960 · 09-14-2006, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by slosucks

1) The no plane debris at site of pentagon,

pentagon debris

pentagon debris - Google Image Search

damage inconsistant with a plane hitting,

it wasn't?

explosion happening at the site that was just renovated to withstand explosion,

a very good analysis of why the plane hit where it did... yes its' speculation, but it makes more sense than the alternative

Analysis of Flight 77

video footage being confiscated immediately and not released

it was a crime scene. it was evidence. show me any time the feds released evidence before a trial.

2) Examples of other skyscrapers that burned for 18-24 hours that did not collapse, yet twin towers burn for under an hour and both collapse within minutes of each other in the exact same fashion

The examples are flawed. If it was just burning I'd agree, but it was also hit by something that weight 200,000 pounds going 400mph.

Publius · 09-14-2006, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by slosucks

1) The no plane debris at site of pentagon, damage inconsistant with a plane hitting, explosion happening at the site that was just renovated to withstand explosion, video footage being confiscated immediately and not released

There was plenty of debris at the Pentagon site, and it has been proven through models that the damage is consistent with an aircraft striking the building.

2) Examples of other skyscrapers that burned for 18-24 hours that did not collapse, yet twin towers burn for under an hour and both collapse within minutes of each other in the exact same fashion

a) no other skyscraper was hit by an airplane travelling at several hundred miles per hour.
b) no other skyscraper was built in the same fashion as the World Trade Center towers.
c) no other skyscraper had thousands of gallons of jet fuel burning inside them.

motivez · 09-14-2006, 03:19 PM

Some trazillionaire should make some new WTC buildings out in the middle of no where, fly planes into them via remote, and see what happens.

beez · 09-14-2006, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Some trazillionaire should make some new WTC buildings out in the middle of no where, fly planes into them via remote, and see what happens.

George Soros has the loot

There are some very thorough debunkings of Loose Change out there if you look for them. Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer Guide is a good start. Kind of emotional in nature but still good.

Publius · 09-14-2006, 03:52 PM

Wasn't it 6Speed that was going to go through and do a minute-by-minute rebuttal of Loose Change, back when we were on

???

motivez · 09-14-2006, 03:54 PM

No, it was Pro Street.

He's registered here, someone should send him a PM

Publius · 09-14-2006, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

No, it was Pro Street.

He's registered here, someone should send him a PM

Oh yea... I knew it was someone with a P in their username.

edit: PM sent to him.

slosucks · 09-14-2006, 03:57 PM

marvelous, i know im a bit late on the issue, but i was bored at work and decided to finally watch it

lew · 09-14-2006, 06:01 PM

The 9/11 Conspiracy
There is no 9/11 conspiracy you morons.

Two great sites debunking Loose Change.

DosEquis · 09-14-2006, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Some trazillionaire should make some new WTC buildings out in the middle of no where, fly planes into them via remote, and see what happens.

Thats an excellent concept for a season finale of Myth Busters

Nonphixion · 09-14-2006, 09:52 PM

Conspiracy doesn't happen in America; because conspiracy doesn't happen in America.

End of story.

7960 · 09-14-2006, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

Conspiracy doesn't happen in America; because conspiracy doesn't happen in America.

End of story.

I'm beginning to think you type the opposite of whatever seems to be the consensus in a thread.......do you have an actual opinion? Do you have one that doesn't involve a conspiracy?

DosEquis · 09-14-2006, 11:44 PM

There is one question i'd ask to those who say 'there was no debris' .... where did the plane go? We are obviously missing one airplane with x number of passengers. Where are they? Landed at a secret site and executed? Sworn to secrets? Maybe they were not even on the plane... but that still doesn't account for the missing plane.

7960 · 09-14-2006, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

There is one question i'd ask to those who say 'there was no debris' .... where did the plane go? We are obviously missing one airplane with x number of passengers. Where are they? Landed at a secret site and executed? Sworn to secrets? Maybe they were not even on the plane... but that still doesn't account for the missing plane.

THIS IS NOT WHAT I THINK.

they say the plane landed (near philly, I believe) and the plane was offloaded and either

a) the people were killed and put back on the plane and then it took back off, or
b) the people were offloaded and DNA was taken and planted at the pentagon for searchers to find.

then, the plane was either

a) flown by remote control to the pentagon, or
b) was flown back to united and was repainted and given a new tail number and it back in service.

Scrum · 09-15-2006, 12:32 AM

I always thought the Pentagon crash looked kind of strange, but I think that's because the buildings scale looks weird to me and I would have thought an airliner would have done more damage.
Those doubts were easily quelled just by reading what happened and looking at the pictures.

Nonphixion · 09-15-2006, 04:53 AM

I believe the plane that was steered into to the Pentagon -- outmanuevered it's flight control computer's G limits by a factor of 400%. There is an impassable mathematical standard that restricts certain maneuvers on every passenger plane, which ensures actions aren't taken that will jar the passengers out of their seats or cause any myriad of excess-gravity related health problems.

The hijacker made an "expert" 180 degree descent-helix maneuver that exceeded both the capabilities of any passenger jet. But more importantly exceeded the limits of skill from any amateur "pilot" trained in private cessenas.