<TABLE class=tborder style="BORDER-TOP-WIDTH: 0px" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR title="Post 5531235" vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 align=middle width=125>random1323</TD><TD class=alt2>you really r retarded. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
When I was 12 I told my 10 year old cousin there was no Santa Claus -which caused her to start crying uncontrollably. My aunt went ballistic and sent me home before I could add there was no Tooth Fairy either.
Truth is a hard pill to swallow when you havent grown up yet.
We still have a few of those types left here at the RX.
When I was 12 I told my 10 year old cousin there was no Santa Claus -which caused her to start crying uncontrollably. My aunt went ballistic and sent me home before I could add there was no Tooth Fairy either.
Truth is a hard pill to swallow when you havent grown up yet.
We still have a few of those types left here at the RX.
“Loose Change” Debunked
Amateurish video on 9/11 full of errors, faulty reasoning
<!--startphoto-->
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript><!-- tmpPhoto1=new Image(); function switchPhoto1 () { document.LargePhoto1.src=tmpPhoto1.src; document.getElementById('p1large').style.visibility = 'visible'; } function loadLargePhoto1 () { tmpPhoto1.src ='http://photos.state.gov/libraries/usinfo-photo/39/week_4_0307/033007-Pentagon-500.jpg'; tmpPhoto1.onload = switchPhoto1; } //--> </SCRIPT>
An artist’s drawing depicts the aircraft approaching the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. (© The Pentagon Building Performance Report)
<!--endphoto-->
Loose Change is perhaps the most popular September 11 conspiracy-theory video, with its various editions reportedly logging more than 10 million web views. The most recent version, Loose Change Second Edition Recut, had more than 5 million web views as of March 2007.
Despite the video’s extraordinary popularity, its claims are so absurd that they are considered an embarrassment by other conspiracy theorists, some of whom have written lengthy critiques of the video’s most outlandish claims.
Loose Change makes very sloppy mistakes in support of its false claim that a missile, not a plane, hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The video mistakes two different sections of the large hole caused by the airliner for the entire hole and, ironically, features photographs that actually disprove its “small hole” theory.
The plane that hit the Pentagon created an area of severe damage that was approximately 36.6 meters (120 feet) wide, according to The Pentagon Building Performance Report, published by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Structural Engineering Institute in January 2003 (p. 35).
As shown in a photo gallery on the attack, the plane’s fuselage and wings caused extensive damage mostly to the Pentagon’s ground floor while the plane’s tail fin and vertical stabilizer created a smaller impact hole on the second floor.
Loose Change mistakenly identifies the portion of the hole on the second floor as the entire hole, and then argues from this mistaken premise that because such a large airliner could not have created such a small hole, the damage must have been caused by a missile.
Then, in a different but equally mistaken analysis, Loose Change identifies the portion of the hole on the far left of the ground floor as the entire hole, even though this “hole” is obviously on the ground floor while the initial “hole” it showed was clearly on the second floor. A person watching the video would be unlikely to spot these inconsistencies because the images are displayed only briefly, but they are obvious if one pauses the video and compares the different images.
Loose Change also includes a photograph that shows extensive damage to the ground floor of the Pentagon, but fails to note this fact, which would undermine its theory. See the photo gallery to view the photographs displayed in Loose Change and other images of the Pentagon attack.
The arguments in other sections of Loose Change suffer from similarly sloppy analysis.
For example, Loose Change claims that the “official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane” that struck the Pentagon, and argues that because this is impossible, the official story can not be trusted. Again, the video is proceeding from a mistaken premise. The plane disintegrated due to its impact with the Pentagon at 853 kilometers per hour (530 miles per hour), but it did not “vaporize.” Emergency response personnel reported seeing hundreds of pieces of the aircraft on the lawn outside the Pentagon. Parts of the plane, including engine parts and landing gear, were photographed inside the building.
As supposed evidence for its missile theory, Loose Change also claims that the aircraft debris in the Pentagon attack would have had to “pass through nine feet [three meters] of steel-reinforced concrete” – an unlikely occurrence. It obtained this figure by counting two outer walls each for the Pentagon’s E Ring, D Ring and C Ring.
But, as acknowledged even by other conspiracy theorists, no outer walls separate the C, D and E rings on the Pentagon’s lower two levels. The plane penetrated only two outside walls – the Pentagon’s exterior wall and the inner wall of the C Ring.
In its section examining the attack on the World Trade Center, Loose Change includes several statements by people who say they heard secondary explosions in the buildings, which the video interprets as evidence that the buildings were destroyed in a controlled demolition. But this ignores the commonsense explanation that secondary explosions could have been caused by vaporized fuel or electrical short-circuits in the severely damaged buildings. Demolition professionals say controlled demolition of the towers that day would have been impossible.
Loose Change also contains a great deal of footage from the initial live broadcasts of the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, when there was enormous confusion about exactly what had happened. It treats statements made at this time as if they represent reasoned judgments, not impromptu, often poorly thought-through misimpressions and uninformed speculation.
With regard to United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, Loose Change claims that it is impossible that passengers on the flight made cell phone calls. It repeats a claim that cell phones supposedly have less than a 1 percent chance of succeeding at 9,750 meters (32,000 feet), the normal cruising altitude for commercial airliners.
But communications experts state that cell phone conversations at such altitudes are quite possible. Rick Kemper, director of technology and security at CTIA-The Wireless Association, said, “cell sites have a range of several miles, even at 35,000 feet [10,670 meters].” Paul Guckian, vice president of engineering for cell phone maker Qualcomm, stated, “at the altitude for commercial airliners, around 30,000 or 35,000 feet [9,145 to 10,670 meters], [some] phones would still get a signal.” (Debunking 9/11 Myths, Popular Mechanics, pp. 83-84.)
In fact, one cell phone conversation from Flight 93 was introduced into evidence at the trial of Zaccarias Moussaoui. Listen to the 45-second message left by flight attendant CeeCee Lyles on her home answering machine. Click on the “Lyles” file icon on the far left of the bottom row in the link.
In sum, Loose Change is researched very shoddily, making numerous mistakes of fact and judgment. Nevertheless, this has not prevented it from becoming extraordinarily popular.
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
<!-- END DATA BUFFER --><!-- stopprint -->
<SCRIPT src="http://www.america.gov/articles/js/external.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> document.write('
Tell us what you think about this article.
');</SCRIPT>
Amateurish video on 9/11 full of errors, faulty reasoning
<!--startphoto-->
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript><!-- tmpPhoto1=new Image(); function switchPhoto1 () { document.LargePhoto1.src=tmpPhoto1.src; document.getElementById('p1large').style.visibility = 'visible'; } function loadLargePhoto1 () { tmpPhoto1.src ='http://photos.state.gov/libraries/usinfo-photo/39/week_4_0307/033007-Pentagon-500.jpg'; tmpPhoto1.onload = switchPhoto1; } //--> </SCRIPT>
An artist’s drawing depicts the aircraft approaching the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. (© The Pentagon Building Performance Report) <!--endphoto-->
Loose Change is perhaps the most popular September 11 conspiracy-theory video, with its various editions reportedly logging more than 10 million web views. The most recent version, Loose Change Second Edition Recut, had more than 5 million web views as of March 2007.
Despite the video’s extraordinary popularity, its claims are so absurd that they are considered an embarrassment by other conspiracy theorists, some of whom have written lengthy critiques of the video’s most outlandish claims.
Loose Change makes very sloppy mistakes in support of its false claim that a missile, not a plane, hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The video mistakes two different sections of the large hole caused by the airliner for the entire hole and, ironically, features photographs that actually disprove its “small hole” theory.
The plane that hit the Pentagon created an area of severe damage that was approximately 36.6 meters (120 feet) wide, according to The Pentagon Building Performance Report, published by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Structural Engineering Institute in January 2003 (p. 35).
As shown in a photo gallery on the attack, the plane’s fuselage and wings caused extensive damage mostly to the Pentagon’s ground floor while the plane’s tail fin and vertical stabilizer created a smaller impact hole on the second floor.
Loose Change mistakenly identifies the portion of the hole on the second floor as the entire hole, and then argues from this mistaken premise that because such a large airliner could not have created such a small hole, the damage must have been caused by a missile.
Then, in a different but equally mistaken analysis, Loose Change identifies the portion of the hole on the far left of the ground floor as the entire hole, even though this “hole” is obviously on the ground floor while the initial “hole” it showed was clearly on the second floor. A person watching the video would be unlikely to spot these inconsistencies because the images are displayed only briefly, but they are obvious if one pauses the video and compares the different images.
Loose Change also includes a photograph that shows extensive damage to the ground floor of the Pentagon, but fails to note this fact, which would undermine its theory. See the photo gallery to view the photographs displayed in Loose Change and other images of the Pentagon attack.
The arguments in other sections of Loose Change suffer from similarly sloppy analysis.
For example, Loose Change claims that the “official explanation is that the intense heat from the jet fuel vaporized the entire plane” that struck the Pentagon, and argues that because this is impossible, the official story can not be trusted. Again, the video is proceeding from a mistaken premise. The plane disintegrated due to its impact with the Pentagon at 853 kilometers per hour (530 miles per hour), but it did not “vaporize.” Emergency response personnel reported seeing hundreds of pieces of the aircraft on the lawn outside the Pentagon. Parts of the plane, including engine parts and landing gear, were photographed inside the building.
As supposed evidence for its missile theory, Loose Change also claims that the aircraft debris in the Pentagon attack would have had to “pass through nine feet [three meters] of steel-reinforced concrete” – an unlikely occurrence. It obtained this figure by counting two outer walls each for the Pentagon’s E Ring, D Ring and C Ring.
But, as acknowledged even by other conspiracy theorists, no outer walls separate the C, D and E rings on the Pentagon’s lower two levels. The plane penetrated only two outside walls – the Pentagon’s exterior wall and the inner wall of the C Ring.
In its section examining the attack on the World Trade Center, Loose Change includes several statements by people who say they heard secondary explosions in the buildings, which the video interprets as evidence that the buildings were destroyed in a controlled demolition. But this ignores the commonsense explanation that secondary explosions could have been caused by vaporized fuel or electrical short-circuits in the severely damaged buildings. Demolition professionals say controlled demolition of the towers that day would have been impossible.
Loose Change also contains a great deal of footage from the initial live broadcasts of the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, when there was enormous confusion about exactly what had happened. It treats statements made at this time as if they represent reasoned judgments, not impromptu, often poorly thought-through misimpressions and uninformed speculation.
With regard to United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, Loose Change claims that it is impossible that passengers on the flight made cell phone calls. It repeats a claim that cell phones supposedly have less than a 1 percent chance of succeeding at 9,750 meters (32,000 feet), the normal cruising altitude for commercial airliners.
But communications experts state that cell phone conversations at such altitudes are quite possible. Rick Kemper, director of technology and security at CTIA-The Wireless Association, said, “cell sites have a range of several miles, even at 35,000 feet [10,670 meters].” Paul Guckian, vice president of engineering for cell phone maker Qualcomm, stated, “at the altitude for commercial airliners, around 30,000 or 35,000 feet [9,145 to 10,670 meters], [some] phones would still get a signal.” (Debunking 9/11 Myths, Popular Mechanics, pp. 83-84.)
In fact, one cell phone conversation from Flight 93 was introduced into evidence at the trial of Zaccarias Moussaoui. Listen to the 45-second message left by flight attendant CeeCee Lyles on her home answering machine. Click on the “Lyles” file icon on the far left of the bottom row in the link.
In sum, Loose Change is researched very shoddily, making numerous mistakes of fact and judgment. Nevertheless, this has not prevented it from becoming extraordinarily popular.
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
<!-- END DATA BUFFER --><!-- stopprint -->
<SCRIPT src="http://www.america.gov/articles/js/external.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> document.write('
');</SCRIPT>
<table class="tborder" style="border-top-width: 0px;" width="100%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="1"><tbody><tr title="Post 5531235" valign="top"><td class="alt1" width="125" align="middle">random1323</td><td class="alt2">you really r retarded. </td></tr></tbody></table>
When I was 12 I told my 10 year old cousin there was no Santa Claus -which caused her to start crying uncontrollably. My aunt went ballistic and sent me home before I could add there was no Tooth Fairy either.
Truth is a hard pill to swallow when you havent grown up yet.
We still have a few of those types left here at the RX.
First of all, there is a Santa Claus, who do you think buys the gifts? It's about presentation.
Second, the fact that there is not a Santa Claus that rides around the earth in a sleigh does not prove 9/11 was an inside job. Nor does it prove there is any connection in the thinking process. A silly analogy.
I would say that kids believing in Santa Claus are smarter than the 9/11 is an inside job crowd, they at least have an excuse. They're also innocent and happy, unlike any truther I've heard seen post something.
Scott, Random doesn't like to use words, it's much more difficult.
It's easier to throw massive amounts of chit against the wall and see what sticks. That way, you don't even need to understand the argument you're making, somebody with a video recorder becomes some implied expert.
It's easier to throw massive amounts of chit against the wall and see what sticks. That way, you don't even need to understand the argument you're making, somebody with a video recorder becomes some implied expert.
Well actually....39,000+ have viewed the KookVideo on YouTube, leaving at least 299,961,000 Americans (presuming no non-Americans were in the viewing pool) who have NOT watched the KookVideo on YouTube
======
SCOTTY...you MUST watch at least 300+ HOURS of KookVideos before you are qualified to comment on their KookLevel.
GET TO WORK and report back later this fall with your Apology and to receive your KookKlub decoder ring.
Millions Download Most Popular Video on the Internet--Loose Change 2--Dealing with What Really Happened on 9/11
* Click Here for Conspiracy
By Nancy Jo Sales
Vanity Fair, August 2006
Straight to the Source
With $6,000 and a laptop computer, three kids from upstate New York made a documentary about 9/11 that spread across the Internet and threw millions for a loop. Nine-eleven conspiracy theories have been circulating for years, producing millions of Web links, scores of books, and a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement.
In 2005 the State Department responded by posting some "clues" to "identifying misinformation" on their Web site. "Does the story claim that vast, powerful, evil forces are secretly manipulating events?" it asks. "If so, this fits the profile of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are rarely true, even though they have great appeal and are often widely believed. In reality, events usually have much less exciting explanations."
One of the first American officials to publicly acknowledge conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11 was President George Bush, who on November 10, 2001, in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, said, "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11."
Yet according to a May 2006 Zogby poll, 42 percent of Americans now believe that the U.S. government and the 9/11 commission "concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks," and that "there has been a cover-up."
For those who can't find information about the alleged cover-up on the nightly news, there is Loose Change, a documentary about 9/11 conspiracy theories which just might be the first Internet blockbuster. Since it appeared on the Web in April 2005, the 80-minute film has been climbing up and down Google Video's "Top 100," rising to No. 1 this May, with at least 10 million viewings.
* Click Here for Conspiracy
By Nancy Jo Sales
Vanity Fair, August 2006
Straight to the Source
With $6,000 and a laptop computer, three kids from upstate New York made a documentary about 9/11 that spread across the Internet and threw millions for a loop. Nine-eleven conspiracy theories have been circulating for years, producing millions of Web links, scores of books, and a nationwide collection of doubters known as the "9/11 Truth" movement.
In 2005 the State Department responded by posting some "clues" to "identifying misinformation" on their Web site. "Does the story claim that vast, powerful, evil forces are secretly manipulating events?" it asks. "If so, this fits the profile of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are rarely true, even though they have great appeal and are often widely believed. In reality, events usually have much less exciting explanations."
One of the first American officials to publicly acknowledge conspiracy theories in connection with 9/11 was President George Bush, who on November 10, 2001, in a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, said, "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11."
Yet according to a May 2006 Zogby poll, 42 percent of Americans now believe that the U.S. government and the 9/11 commission "concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks," and that "there has been a cover-up."
For those who can't find information about the alleged cover-up on the nightly news, there is Loose Change, a documentary about 9/11 conspiracy theories which just might be the first Internet blockbuster. Since it appeared on the Web in April 2005, the 80-minute film has been climbing up and down Google Video's "Top 100," rising to No. 1 this May, with at least 10 million viewings.
