quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} There are so many 'what the fucks' in the Official Story, like the omission of WTC7, or the absolution of the FBI's role in investigating Able Danger to its potential. Not to mention

I agree. If I didn't I wouldn't bother reading this shit.

But until the far out, plain wrong crap gets removed and people start argueing without the wild speculation the movement is going no where.

quote:

brings 'horseshit' to mind. The man who flew the plane, of course, was not qualified in skills to fly a .

I seem to remember they had worked on flying commercial jets but I don't have a hard source so I'm inclined to beleive you here. I don't think it's a huge stretch to fly a jumbo, but that's irrelevent considering the picture.

If that image hasn't been doctored (the one with the jumbo) then it's one of the better things that the truth movement has. There should be a lot more wreckage.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut It is from a credible site, I listed the link a few posts later. Here you go.... http://www.fireengineering.com/sear...l?keywords=ASCE

Thanks, I'll take a look at these guys a bit later. I've been putting off lunch and work far to long already today!

quote:

If that image hasn't been doctored (the one with the jumbo) then it's one of the better things that the truth movement has. There should be a lot more wreckage.

That image was properly scaled by someone from pilots for truth I believe.

There absolutely would have been more plane parts, what gets me is how intact the lawn still was. You could play golf on it but a 757 supposedly skid across it?




If you want more damming pictures you can get tons more here, they have been archived from the original military source.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/...?showtopic=4464

The more I study it the fewer doubts that I have in regards to the title of this thread.

Check out this article regarding the Pentagon's Information Operations Roadmap which now
seems to be targeting American civilians in defiance of The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. ' 1461).

To be quite frank, I often do wonder if they have people on this board who work for private firms such as The Rendon Group.

I thought that this was interesting.

quote:

Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 05-0390) Judicial Watch filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with the Department of Defense in March 2004 to obtain documents concerning the Empower Peace website and the Rendon Group. It has been reported that the Pentagon has made use of the Rendon Group to influence public opinion. The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. ' 1461), forbids the domestic dissemination of U.S. government-authored or developed propaganda or “official news” deliberately designed to influence public opinion or policy. Case Status Summary Judgment Motions fully briefed as of 10/31/05; awaiting ruling. Court Documents * Original Complaint - After nearly a year, the Department of Defense failed to fully respond to Judicial Watch's FOIA request. Documents Uncovered * U.S. Navy Contract Documents - Details government payments to a public relations firm for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a public referendum. Press Releases * U.S. Navy Paid $1.69 Million to the Rendon Group (Jul. 25, 2005) * Pentagon Sued For Records on Propaganda (Mar. 4, 2005) http://www.judicialwatch.org/dod-rendon.shtml

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z The people who generally respond, especially to "conspiracy" threads, are those who are driven; they're either driven by principle or out of fear. People who're insecure about their opinions or world view need constant validation, especially from an "authoritative" source. They also vehemently lash out against anyone who says anything contrary to it. Those who are driven by principle feel a need to raise awareness or draw attention to the truth of a matter. The irony though is, that both extremes ends of the spectrum here can make an individual obsessive and the likely hood of people taking one seriously decreases significantly, depending on the individual of course. The internet can be a great medium for communication and information, but it is also the most anonymous place one can be. Which means you'll run in to a lot of assholes inevitably, or people who at least turn in to ones depending on the subject or issue at hand. You can't reason with assholes or be civil. People generally don't act anywhere near as inconsiderate or uncivil in person, as they're not at a safe distance... which also means you can't beat the fuck out them either if they really cross the line and are disrespectful to you as person... which I have found to be the case, the more marginalized the perspective is or 'intellectually' unfashionable, which the truth usually is. The only way to deal with them is to ignore them; don't feed the trolls, and there's certainly no reason to let them effect your emotional state... you're only giving them power over you by doing so and they bring out the worst in you, in turn making you look bad for the shit slinging they started with their constant antagonistic nonsense. They'll give you all sorts of reasons, or excuses rather, defensively. They even believe their own excuses, disingenuity and dishonesty are natural consequences if one can't or refuses to deal with reality. Seriously dude, fuck em. There's no reason for you to ruin your day or waste your time with condescending and uncivil people who have no interest in actual discussion or debate. While I do think over the years you've posted some great information and things that seriously opened my eyes to certain issues, I think you should have learned by now that most people really don't give a fuck about anything other than their checkbook. Trust me, I learned the hard way... before I only touched issues I could definitively prove, usually regarding our foreign policy. As a minority, and a person growing up in multiple countries and cultures, I don't suffer from a nationalistic bias or it's milder much more civil form, patriotism. I could always see things from an outsiders perspective and they're plenty of inhumane, unjust, barbaric and morally bankrupt elements that dominants features of American foreign policy post WW2. I first thought people's denial and / or apathy stemmed form the fact that they weren't directly affected by any of these atrocities or injustices. Only after 9-11, when I dared to touch things I knew I would have a hard time supporting leaving the framework of academia, is when I truly found out just how weak, selfish and / or pathetic so many people are and how denial of elementary truths are sort of one of the unspoken defining characteristics. To sum up, you can't really do much. The problem isn't simply ignorance, or just plain ignorance and apathy. The neurosis is more severe than that. It's intense indoctrination and a comfort zone people are unwilling to leave. There's nothing you can do about that. You can't make someone care or eager to be informed. That's only a choice that can be made by individuals on a personal level. The sooner you realize this the less of your time you will waste, and the less negative reactions you'll get from people. EDIT: And before someone takes this personally, keep in mind I mentioned no one in particular.

Hey Shaolin, thank you again for posting this. I agree with the majority of what you said here and have since put the trolls on ignore.

And I know it's kind of off topic but I was wondering if you've ever read Ray Nelson's Eight O'Clock in the Morning? It was the short story that John Carpenter used as the basis for his movie They Live.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Hey Shaolin, thank you again for posting this. I agree with the majority of what you said here and have since put the trolls on ignore. And I know it's kind of off topic but I was wondering if you've ever read Ray Nelson's Eight O'Clock in the Morning? It was the short story that John Carpenter used as the basis for his movie They Live.

You're welcome. No, I haven't read it but I guess I could check it out once I'm done with Marx and a few other things I have lined up.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by atbell It happens all the time. Many people I know of would derive what they needed on exams from first principles (such as limits) if they didn't happen to remember the right formula. That's what's really useful about calculus, if you don't know the relationship between two things you can model it. Calculus is the alternative to memorizing massive amounts of formula.

Apparently you lack comprehension skills, because using equations to derive other equations is not the same as using "calculus" to derive theory. Either that, or I don't believe you've ever taken a science class of any type in your life, certainly not physics... or did extremely poorly in those and got by with a D. Or perhaps you feel compelled to give a non-sequitur tangential irrelevant response to save face. If the last one is the case, seriously... get a life. No one cares about your internet persona reputation other than yourself... and if you care about it, you really need to get a life.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by atbell You didn't do the experiment did you?

Why would I waste my time?

quote:

Do the experiment and I'll get back to you about how presurized fluid columns react when they encounter a flat surface.

How in Hell did they fill with liquid? Are you referring to the failed sprinkler system?

quote:

btw, the kinetic energy was not the point of this demonstration. Your earlier post questioned how material could be jettisoned horrizontally by a vertical force.

No. I asked how -if all kinetic energy was being used to collapse the building in on itself- could steel be ejected hundreds of feet, and concrete pulverised into a liquid smoke?

We aren't talking about pressurised 'fluid' are we? We're talking about pulverised concrete and steel beams. I must say, at this point I'm questioning whether you're 12 or 8.

quote:

To address your new concern. The friction between air and a falling boddy is negligable in comparison to the forces that arrise from turbulent fluid flow. The most significant of which would probably be the bernouli effect, the sucking 'drag' that you'd be familiar with as it is talked about in a car.

You're invoking the vacuum effect on WTC? What, the elevators acted as a channel and bellowed the steel outward? lofl

quote:

Your argument about the fall time of the tower is also flawed as you make no mention of margins of error.

I had been taking the collapse times from NIST, actually, and from seismic records, but you're right, there are reports that it took the South Tower closer to 15-16 seconds, and the North about 13 seconds to fully collapse. Strange how NIST underestimates.

This analyses the collapse far better than I could do on the fly.
From http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/ana...s/freefall.html
The South Tower

The following analysis is based on the NBC video taken from the east of the Towers.

For the South Tower we define the onset of collapse as the moment downward movement of the highest point of the roof starts. Unfortunately, this time is difficult to determine since the roof-line is obscured by smoke when the fall begins. The fall is preceded by a leaning movement that starts at about the beginning of the video clip, and accelerates for about three seconds. At somewhere between two and three seconds, the top starts to fall. Once the top starts to lean, the highest point of the roof is the northwest edge. At about 2.5 seconds, the top starts to fall. A good marker for this is a small white squib that emerges from the level of the impact zone about three-quarters of the way back on the right face. That immediately precedes the first large ejections from the southeast face.

Using that marker it is possible to time the fall of the South Tower's top up to the moment it gets swallowed up by the dust cloud. At that point the dust cloud rises only slightly above the level of the 78th-floor sky lobby visible as a two-story band on the adjacent North Tower. A small extrapolation gives a good estimate of the time of fall of the South Tower's roof to the level of the 78th floor of five seconds. That distance is about 384 feet (12 feet per story times 32 stories).

The North Tower
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evid...d_afterglow.mpg
The top of the North Tower began to suddenly telescope about a fourth of a second after the radio Tower started to fall. In views from the north the top is swallowed up in about two seconds. The CNN live video clip shows the mushrooming dust cloud reaching the ground at about 13 seconds. As the descending pyroclastic dust cloud drops below Building 7, the rising smoke plume shifts to the east revealing the empty space except for the short-lived spire. The first glimpse of empty space where the building stood is at about 13 seconds.

quote:

You haven't source one credible site. (note: sites dedicated to 'Truth' are not credible) Don't beleive everything you read.

Well, if only the ASCE wasn't under scrutiny for fudging reports and general corrupt behaviour, I'd give you a link. How's the teat of authority taste?


5. Inability to employ or understand logic. Aided by the principle in above, self proclaimed skeptics never notice that the small ambiguities [or unknown variables] in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any "official" accounts; a very common example would be the appeal to authority fallacy with respect to arguments regarding the cause of the WTC collapse.

quote:

Go back, do the expriment, then learn calculus if you can still see.

Refer to my first statement.

___________________
Wave is to particle as zero is to one as bagpipes are to modem noises.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z In formal debate, the burden of proof is on the proposition and the only thing the opposition is required to do is demonstrate their arguments are flawed or at least not strong enough to support the proposition laid forth. The more interesting thing though is that either stance being the 'proposition' is entirely dependent on the syntactic phrasing of the topic. Logic has nothing to do with it. Logic is neutral.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden...ogical_fallacy)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

anyone else find it hilarious that 'ignorance' obviously comes from 'ignore', which is what trancer has half the PDD on?

there's no more obvious example of willful ignorance than refusing to listen to those that don't agree with you. makes someone lead an extraordinarily narrow life.