|
Democracy Now! televised debate: Loose Change vs Popular Mechanics (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LazFX |
I was waiting for the Loose Change guy to start saying,, "Well My Dog can beat your Dog up," ha ha ha
what an idiot. at least show up knowing what the hell you are talking about, Idiots... |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
The PM guys were there to refute physical evidence and they kept telling them that from the very beginning.
But everytime PM would shoot something down, the LC guys would came back with open ended, pycho-babble arguements that the PM really couldn't address because it didn't include any physical evidence for them to refute; the whole reason they were there!
I mean what the hell does PM know about government protocols? :rolleyes:
PM was right on everything they hit, including the fact that most CTs are contrived by evidence within the first few days of heresy and shoddy information.
LC would probably have been much better had some more time passed and utilized some of the actual university and engineering studies in their video.
It was the most highly studied stuctural failure in the world and in their haste to be the 1st ones out, only look like loonies in the end.
They leave their film with no answers, arguing with open-ended questions that lead no where but insinuation and convince me of nothing.
Might as well be watching a JFK flick... |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| i don't know about you guys, but that Amy Goodman gets me all hot and rrrrrandy! |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i don't know about you guys, but that Amy Goodman gets me all hot and rrrrrandy! |
Me too! She looks pretty! |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
Me too! She looks pretty! |
dude, i was so kidding |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
dude, i was so kidding |
no you weren't, you know you want to stick your pee pee in her
ha ha ha ha
:crazy: |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
dude, i was so kidding |
Well. View someone from the right angle on a snapshot and anyone can be turned into someone pretty. When you see them in motion, you just hate that you thought she once looked pretty at that instant... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
dude, i was so kidding |
:haha: |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
you were obviously watching something different to the rest of us :haha: |
Actually, I just thought about it again. And I realized it really wasn't a debate. Firstly, both sides didn't really agree on many of the 'facts' they were basing their questions/analysis on, for example, a hole 16 feet in diameter v.s. 90 meters.
Secondly, calling your oppostion 'liars' or 'conspiracy theorists' doesn't earn you any point. I mean seriously, with such a premise, there simply is no debate to begin with. There's no point in debating a 'liar' or a 'conpiracy theroist' since you can't expect a 'liar' to base their arguments on facts and the association with the phrase 'conspiracy theory' isn't one of credibility eigther.
Thirdly, there really is no debate about a conspiracy here. Both sides are based on the premise of some group of people conspiring to carry out the 9-11 attacks, whether it's Al-Quaeda, elements of the establishment, or a combination of the two.
EDIT: One more thing, I don't think this debate changed anyone's opinion really. |
|
|
| Temperate |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
EDIT: One more thing, I don't think this debate changed anyone's opinion really. |
Agreed. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
EDIT: One more thing, I don't think this debate changed anyone's opinion really. |
Depends on whether you a practical evidence type guy or like theories I guess.
It wasn't much of a 'debate' anyways; sort of like swatting a fly with a buick when it came to the physical evidence. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Actually, I just thought about it again. And I realized it really wasn't a debate. Firstly, both sides didn't really agree on many of the 'facts' they were basing their questions/analysis on, for example, a hole 16 feet in diameter v.s. 90 meters. |
yeah, but i dont see how two kids from the internet can just dismiss the findings from PM on this particular issue of contention. the loose change video ignores the massive hole obscured by smoke when making their "measurements". theres been ample study that is easy to find on the net (i know, ive found some!) and the loose change guys just ignore it. its ridiculous to hold a position when you can see the size of damage in numerous photographs, models and diagrams that contradict it.
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
The PM guys were there to refute physical evidence and they kept telling them that from the very beginning.
But everytime PM would shoot something down, the LC guys would came back with open ended, pycho-babble arguements that the PM really couldn't address because it didn't include any physical evidence for them to refute; the whole reason they were there! |
what he said. this is why there wasnt much of a debate. |
|
|
|
|
