Avery and Bermas Don't believe their own theories.

[Quad4_72]

I am starting to think that maybe these two don't actually believe the lies that they are spewing out. It seems like it is a good possibility that maybe these guys are just in it for the money. Thoughts?

[The Doc]

I think they believed it at first. Not sure about now after seeing them debating Gravy.

[MarkyX]

I think they believed it at first. Not sure about now after seeing them debating Gravy.

Or the numerous 9/11 debunking sites, or my "video" exposing their ignorance (lol, left hand islam)

[Coritani]

I generally give people the benefit of the doubt - I think Avery and Bermas are stupid, but honestly believe they're right.

So, they're either nutters or tossers.

[Quad4_72]

It can be hard to tell. Its just that some of the lies and deceptions in Loose Change are so blatantly incorrect that you KNOW they put them in there just for the sake of propelling the conspiracy. Like the 160 billion in gold in the towers "rumor". Where did he even get that from? He probably just made it up. It leads me to believe that he doesn't believe a lot of other things as well...

[The Doc]

Or the numerous 9/11 debunking sites, or my "video" exposing their ignorance (lol, left hand islam)

Of course.

I didn't phrase my sentence properly :( lol. I meant "Their reactions in the debate against Gravy would indicate to me that they no longer believe it."

[beachnut]

It could be dumb or fraud. Or some of both.

[ConspiRaider]

It's why their next movie is taking so long. They don't know what to do. Instead of the movement getting stronger, it's fragmenting. Embarrassing itself.

Expect Avery to become more like Griffin. Avery is watching how the adults do it, and he'll pattern himself accordingly. He's learning that when you do woo, vagueness is your ally. Don't get specific. Don't personally accuse anyone (lawsuit territory). The problem is that he doesn't have the education or the title or the other agendas to push that Griffin has. Avery's notoriety is based on the point-blank accusations made in Loose Change. Now he's on video, trashing his own work. He really does not know what to do now. What kind of a film can he make?

Bermas is in it strictly for the fame and the notoriety - he has much less of a conscience about what he is claiming. Publicly it doesn't bother him. If he has any part of a conscience left, it should bother him privately.

[Quad4_72]

It's why their next movie is taking so long. They don't know what to do. Instead of the movement getting stronger, it's fragmenting. Embarrassing itself.

Expect Avery to become more like Griffin. Avery is watching how the adults do it, and he'll pattern himself accordingly. He's learning that when you do woo, vagueness is your ally. Don't get specific. Don't personally accuse anyone (lawsuit territory). The problem is that he doesn't have the education or the title or the other agendas to push that Griffin has. Avery's notoriety is based on the point-blank accusations made in Loose Change. Now he's on video, trashing his own work. He really does not know what to do now. What kind of a film can he make?

Bermas is in it strictly for the fame and the notoriety - he has much less of a conscience about what he is claiming. Publicly it doesn't bother him. If he has any part of a conscience left, it should bother him privately.

Bermas: Avery, whats a conscience?
Avery: Oh thats that thing you ignore so you don't feel bad lying to people in order to make money.
Bermas:OH. Ok so I don't have to worry about it then?
Avery: No. Just ignore it.

[orphia nay]

In my opinion, Avery (& to a lesser extent, Bermas) isn't purposely lying about 9/11. He just doesn't have the critical thinking skills to dismiss each and every claim all the twoofers have made. To twoofers such as he, quantity is quality. Take, for example, Killtown's 250+ "smoking guns".
I believe he's heading for a fall - he's blinded by being bukkaked with stupid, like many.

[Disinfo Agent]

Believing in conspiracy and unintendedly spread misinformation is one thing, but realizing that one was wrong and still continuing to make money out of it would be just disgusting.

Maybe the big surprise is LC:FC in which they expose their lifes as truther and debunk all of their previously made claims with the help of scientists and express an Apology to all people they have fooled into their believes and to all people they acused of beeing mass murders, disinfo agents or anything else. And this will make it to the cinemas...

Well, this probably won't be the case...

[orphia nay]

Believing in conspiracy and unintendedly spread misinformation is one thing, but realizing that one was wrong and still continuing to make money out of it would be just disgusting.

Maybe the big surprise is LC:FC in which they expose their lifes as truther and debunk all of their previously made claims with the help of scientists and express an Apology to all people they have fooled into their believes and to all people they acused of beeing mass murders, disinfo agents or anything else. And this will make it to the cinemas...

Well, this probably won't be the case...


Nice post. I agree. :)

That sounds a bit like what I proposed in my thread How Dylan Avery could become a decent film-maker (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=69883). That he would adopt my suggestions seems unlikely, but no-one can predict the future completely accurately.

Though I do notice Dylan has veered towards 9/11 fantasy lite (referencing Press for Truth) lately.

[JAStewart]

Dylan's too caught up in his own BS to actually admit he's wrong. He's showing signs of weakness, like during the Hardfire debate. It became solely obvious to me that he's too deep in when he said "nothing" to the 'what would falsify your beliefs' question posed by our own Ronald. Why did he say nothing? Because anything he says we could probably produce and he would either have to accept it, give up etc, or deny that it is counter evidence.

Other things to think - all his mates are CT'ers - does we want to lose all his mates? no.

My thoughts on this that I posted in another thread.

[sleahead]

Believing in conspiracy and unintendedly spread misinformation is one thing, but realizing that one was wrong and still continuing to make money out of it would be just disgusting.

I think this is exactly how it all happened. When making their first film, Avery and Bermas trawled the conspiracy websites for their information. They believed it all, the missile pod, Karl Schwarz's A3 Skywarrior, no phone calls from the planes. They sucked it all in. Their film was an internet success, they gained an adoring fanbase and, most of all, the money rolled in. Eventually, they are hit by a wall of debunking and now they know they are wrong. They do not have the moral fibre to admit they are wrong and, most of all, they're enjoying the celebrity and money too much to stop.

Of course, LC:FC will not be an apology but, as Orphia stated, it will be 9/11 conspiracy lite. Much of the rubbish in the previous version will be removed.

[The Silver Shadow]

I feel they're in it for the money. If I mention money on the JREF forum, or in the confrontational e-mails I sent him after getting banned, nothing seemed more offensive to him than me saying that he was in it for the money. He seemed very determined to 'defend' the fact that he isn't in it for the money. Just look at my signature to understand!

[JAStewart]

I feel they're in it for the money. If I mention money on the JREF forum, or in the confrontational e-mails I sent him after getting banned, nothing seemed more offensive to him than me saying that he was in it for the money. He seemed very determined to 'defend' the fact that he isn't in it for the money. Just look at my signature to understand!

Yeah it seems to be a touchy issue. "ITS MY FILM. U R MAKE ME BIG FIRE MAD".

Someone should go and post "Hey Dylan, didn't you mean a B-25?" :D

[VespaGuy]

The way I see it, Bermas still believes everything because he wants to believe. He loves to spout off all kind of little tidbits and give the impression that he knows more than his peers. Doesn't Bermas believe in a litany of other conspircies, too? I think there is no hope for Bermas, he's a young Alex Jones.

Dylan on the other hand appears to know exactly what's going on. Although I believe he was a troother originally, I think he is now looking more at the business end of things. The money's coming in. The potential for a real film. The constant debunking of his ridiculous claims. The microscope he is now under.

And that's where he is becomming frustrated. He can't have Bermas running around accusing firefighters (and outright lying) and he can't have Rowe making ridiculous statements (such as the "errors intentionally left in" statement).

So Dylan acts as a wrangler. He keeps Bermas and Rowe on a short leash, even stepping into the Gravy debate instead of Rowe - saying very little except correcting Bermas and admitting that his little video has flaws.

I think that if Dylan was given the opportunity to direct a real (non 9/11 movie), he would be the first person to cut all ties to the movment to work on a real career. Bermas, on the other hand, will still be screaming "inside job" and telling experts "you're wrong" for years to come.

[Brainster]

It's my opinion that they still believe in their basic conclusion, that 9-11 was an inside job, although they seem to realize that a lot of the evidence they thought they had is illusory. Even if they get to the point where they recognize that it really was 19 pissed-off Muslim hijackers, they'll switch over to the CIA/ISI thing. The goalposts can always move.

Remember, they did not reach their conclusion by starting with the evidence and seeing where it led. They started with the conclusion and looked for the evidence that fit. If some evidence has to be thrown out, the conclusion does not change.

[LeFevre]

I believe he's heading for a fall - he's blinded by being bukkaked with stupid, like many.

Don't put those images in my head!!!! :boggled: :boggled:

[A W Smith]

They are in it for the money and that is all. Avery wants to throw his film school rejections in the schools face. Bermas the compulsive lier he is will be the fall guy for Avery. Avery hides in the background and cleans up anything that may impinge box office sales which is why he hates Gravy. Dylan by his own admission started out planning to make a fictional movie. when his "researchers" thought they were getting evidence of a real conspiracy he let them off their leash. It would only make them work harder for him (for free). He wasn't about to dispel their beliefs. anyone who would help his project he would use. I came to this realization during the hard fire debate. Dylan wanted to deflect the focus off of him and his film and on to projects by others. If you line up all the CTers you will find that most if not all have a book, a radio show, a film, or an Agenda to promote. it is nothing more than that. Only the peons of their movement are true believers in CT.

[Triterope]

It's clear to me that Dylan Avery's sole interest at this point is advancing his film career. If some Hollywood mogul came up to him tomorrow and said "I'll give you a job as third assistant camerman on a Wayans Brothers movie if you abandon Loose Change", he'd do it in a second.

I think he showed his true colors when cancelled on that conference in Arizona, the one with the Holocaust deniers. Even after he said "we've made too many promises not to go", or something to that effect. Now that he wants to enter the mainstream, Holocaust deniers are no longer cool to be around, so he's throwing them under the bus.

The problem, of course, is that Loose Change's entire fan base is largely comprised of Holocaust deniers. He's painted into a corner: actions that will help him win mainstream acceptance will turn off his existing fan base, and vice versa. The more he tries to appease the mainstream in hopes of advancing his film career, the more his existing supporters -- the ones who've advanced his film career to this point -- will turn on him. You watch. It won't be long until "Loose Change=disinfo" accusations permeate the Twoofer community.

[T.A.M.]

It's my opinion that they still believe in their basic conclusion, that 9-11 was an inside job, although they seem to realize that a lot of the evidence they thought they had is illusory. Even if they get to the point where they recognize that it really was 19 pissed-off Muslim hijackers, they'll switch over to the CIA/ISI thing. The goalposts can always move.

Remember, they did not reach their conclusion by starting with the evidence and seeing where it led. They started with the conclusion and looked for the evidence that fit. If some evidence has to be thrown out, the conclusion does not change.

I agree. I think they both believe 9/11 was not as it seems, and that the USG had a role. Beyond that, I think they are desperately clinging to whatever evidence they can, in hopes their careers take off before the bogusness of their claims is seen.

It's clear to me that Dylan Avery's sole interest at this point is advancing his film career. If some Hollywood mogul came up to him tomorrow and said "I'll give you a job as third assistant camerman on a Wayans Brothers movie if you abandon Loose Change", he'd do it in a second.


I think, if a big Hollywood Producer offered him a position as production assistant on the new "Debunking 9/11 Myths" movie, he'd be "In like Flynn".

TAM

[Brainache]

I think they have an unshakable faith in their own intelligence. Like a lot of people in their early twenties(how well I remember), they think they know it all.

The money helps of course: "Hey we must be on to something, or else people wouldn't be buying our movie."

I think they also see themselves as real heroes. Standing up to "The Man" is dark and dangerous business that takes a lot of courage and determination. The problem with that is that all they have is incredulity and willful ignorance.

I think they believe in their BS, but belief doesn't rely on facts. When beliefs are held onto despite evidence to the contrary it becomes useless to argue against them.

I predict that the day LC stops making money will be the day that their beliefs will change. The money is the basis of their faith. While ever the money is real, so is their belief.

[Disinfo Agent]

Since there are different opinions here, I think it could be interesting to start a poll to see how the JREFer see Dylan etc. Do you think he believes it, or do you think he knows that LC is BS and he is only doing it for the money and fame? I am not sure about this...

[StoneWT]

The problem, of course, is that Loose Change's entire fan base is largely comprised of Holocaust deniers.

Entire fan base? Largely comprised? Come on now, that is a bit of an exaggeration. :)

You can judge by Dylan's quote that he is in it for the fame and money. Bermas talks just like the average CTer that has known the 'troof' for a couple of years. Bermas believes most of the BS.

[dc123]

It's why their next movie is taking so long. They don't know what to do.



You don't know wht their movie is taking "so long".

why not ask them?

I'm 6 months behind schedule on my own Graphic Design project at the moment. The reasons are varied. For others to speculate why i'm behind without actually asking me is a bit unfair.

[dc123]

I feel they're in it for the money. If I mention money on the JREF forum, or in the confrontational e-mails I sent him after getting banned, nothing seemed more offensive to him than me saying that he was in it for the money. He seemed very determined to 'defend' the fact that he isn't in it for the money. Just look at my signature to understand!

you "feel" they are in it for the money?

Do you have any evidence?

He got mad with you when you wouldn't take his word. The reaction of a typical young male, no?

They might be in it for the money. They might not. Only they know.

[dc123]

Yeah it seems to be a touchy issue. "ITS MY FILM. U R MAKE ME BIG FIRE MAD".

Someone should go and post "Hey Dylan, didn't you mean a B-25?" :D

How touchy is he though? No one knows apart from him.

People accuse him for being in it for the money. He repeatedly denies this.
Then gets "touchy"

This could be guilt at work.

Or maybe he's totally innocent and gets irritated. The innocent tend to get irritated when they are falesly accused of something.

And has he ever said: "U R MAKE ME BIG FIRE MAD" ?

[dc123]

Bermas: Avery, whats a conscience?
Avery: Oh thats that thing you ignore so you don't feel bad lying to people in order to make money.
Bermas:OH. Ok so I don't have to worry about it then?
Avery: No. Just ignore it.


You have no evidence that they've ever said anything like this to each other.

As an impartial observer of both conspiracy sites and debunking sites, I find it quite funny how both sides adopt similar tactics.

what should we class this as?

sly humour?
childish banter?
wild speculation?
conjecture?
attacking of integrity?
Hinting at lack of morals?
Accusations without evidence?
Imaginary conversations attributed to the "enemy"?
A little charcter assasination?

For all I know, they say this to each other every day - but I have zero evidence.

[dc123]

You can judge by Dylan's quote that he is in it for the fame and money.


No you can't actually.

You can no more judge "by his quote" than you can judge "by his choice of clothes" or fave pizza topping what his motives are.

[dc123]

It's clear to me that Dylan Avery's sole interest at this point is advancing his film career. If some Hollywood mogul came up to him tomorrow and said "I'll give you a job as third assistant camerman on a Wayans Brothers movie if you abandon Loose Change", he'd do it in a second.


This might be clear to you...but that's not enough.

No matter how clear it is to you, you have no evidence he'd abandon Loose Change in a "second". for a job as third assistant cameramn (I realise you picked a role for comedy effect and to make your point).


a good question might go: For what/how much would he abandon Loose Change? and would taht make him a bad person if he did?

For 50 bucks?

For 3 trillion dollars?

For seats at the Superbowl?

Unless we develop mind reading powers, we are guessing what he'd do when offered a bribe to abandon the film.

[beachnut]

No you can't actually.

You can no more judge "by his quote" than you can judge "by his choice of clothes" or fave pizza topping what his motives are.

He did. Guess he can.

I think he can judge it! Dylan is a liar. I can judge that due to the lies he tells based on watching is videos. That may be a better way to judge or is it?

[beachnut]

you "feel" they are in it for the money?

Do you have any evidence?

He got mad with you when you wouldn't take his word. The reaction of a typical young male, no?

They might be in it for the money. They might not. Only they know.

Dylan is in it for the money. He wrote a fiction video to make money. He even tells you so.

Unless he is telling lies, which he does in his videos. But since he knows he is telling lies, as in fiction, he is just making money.

Simple. Dylan said it was fiction, but now he says it is what? He is just asking questions so he has no points about much. Just making money, picking up some loose change from the lemmings who believe CTs.

Simple. Are you one of the lemmings, or in on the money and free beer on the old expense account?

[dc123]

He did. Guess he can.

I think he can judge it! Dylan is a liar. I can judge that due to the lies he tells based on watching is videos. That may be a better way to judge or is it?

Even then we are on shaky ground.

If a Priest believes in life after death he may be mistaken. But when he preaches about life after death he isn't necessarily a liar. Even if he is mistaken.

If he KNOWS that there is no life after death but preaches anyway, then he's lying.

What does Dylan know to be a lie but he keeps saying it anyway?

Only he can answer that question.

[dc123]

Dylan is in it for the money. He wrote a fiction video to make money. He even tells you so.

Unless he is telling lies, which he does in his videos. But since he knows he is telling lies, as in fiction, he is just making money.

Simple. Dylan said it was fiction, but now he says it is what? He is just asking questions so he has no points about much. Just making money, picking up some loose change from the dumb lemmings who believe CTs.

Simple. Are you one of the lemmings, or in on the money and free beer on the old expense account?


One of the dumb lemmings? see what I mean about both sides adopting the same tactics?
"In on the money"?
No sentance I can possibly type here can tell you if i'm "in on the money" or not. I'd ask you to trust me when I say I'm not.

[beachnut]

Even then we are on shaky ground.

If a Priest believes in life after death he may be mistaken. But when he preaches about life after death he isn't necessarily a liar. Even if he is mistaken.

If he KNOWS that there is no life after death but preaches anyway, then he's lying.

What does Dylan know to be a lie but he keeps saying it anyway?

Only he can answer that question.

No. Dylan is a liar because he has lies in his video. Dylan misleads others; the definition of telling lies is met.

The Priest stuff is cute but only works on faith based junk. This is fact based junk.

Dylan's videos have lies in them; Dylan is a liar.

If you want to treat nut case in the truth movement as a faith, have at it.

But facts will do.

[beachnut]

One of the dumb lemmings? see what I mean about both sides adopting the same tactics?
"In on the money"?
No sentance I can possibly type here can tell you if i'm "in on the money" or not. I'd ask you to trust me when I say I'm not.

Simple.

If you believe the lies of the 9/11 truth movement you could be a lemming becasue you have no facts to back you up.

Or if you think there are facts to be had from the 9/11 truth movement you would be a lemming if you can not back it up. Got some facts?

You are right if you are a faith guy, and just believe 9/11 truthers cause you want to, then you are a lemming who can not answer a simple question with your own answer; make up a new choice.

I have tried to find facts in LC but I have failed. Have you found some facts?

Show me one fact on the 9/11 truth movement side.

No both sides do not use the same tactic. Show me a fact to prove me wrong on 9/11. Show me a mistake in the NIST report. Show me errors in Greenings work. Show me hundreds of engineers who agree with the 9/11 truth movement.

Show me why I have to be so nice to people who without facts tell lies and blame by brothers in the military for 9/11. Or the ones who blame some un-named people in the government. Show me one single fact in the truth movement that proves they are not telling lies.

Just one, and then we can get started on why Dylan is just a plain old liar, who misleads others with his shoddy research and fictional account of 9/11.

[dc123]

I

The problem, of course, is that Loose Change's entire fan base is largely comprised of Holocaust deniers.

Is there some kind of scientific evidence to back this up?

Detailed polls? indepth studies of the loose Change "fan base"

I watched the movie twice. Do I count as the "fan base". I visited the orignal forum on a regular basis. Do I count as "fan base".?

I think the film is seriously flawed.

However, I have no evidence that the "fans" are largely comprised of holocaust deniers.

I remember on the Loose change forums a long, tedious debate about "moon landing hoaxes".

Similar debates can be found on a thousand and one other forums.There's nothing uniquely "Loose change fan base madness" about it.

I can't remember any mass postings by holocaust deniers.

Logically, some fans of Loose Change will be Holocaust Deniers. Some of them wil be rapists, thieves, possibly even murderers. Junkies, trannies, nurses,students,Christians,atheists.

Logically, some fans of 24 will be holocaust deniers.

(I like 24 - I'm not a holocaust denier).

[StoneWT]

dc,

Compose your thoughts and make 1 post instead of 6 rapid-fire posts within 23 minutes. When you repeatedly post (6 times?) without other people responding, it makes you look unstable. Also, please drop the act of being impartial. ;)

You may not be familiar with basic psychology. When you are debating someone and he responds by saying that he is better than you along with a dash of swear words...well, there isn't much to tell you if you don't understand what that means.

Please stop trying to sidetrack the topic. List some 'facts' from LC that you think Dylan believes. Again, please drop the impartial act.

[Unsecured Coins]

I'd ask him what his purpose is, but he'd ban me. again.

[dc123]

Simple.

If you believe the lies of the 9/11 truth movement you could be a lemming becasue you have no facts to back you up.

Or if you think there are facts to be had from the 9/11 truth movement you would be a lemming if you can not back it up. Got some facts?

You are right if you are a faith guy, and just believe 9/11 truthers cause you want to, then you are a lemming who can not answer a simple question with your own answer; make up a new choice.

I have tried to find facts in LC but I have failed. Have you found some facts?

Show me one fact on the 9/11 truth movement side.

No both sides do not use the same tactic. Show me a fact to prove me wrong on 9/11. Show me a mistake in the NIST report. Show me errors in Greenings work. Show me hundreds of engineers who agree with the 9/11 truth movement.

Show me why I have to be so nice to people who without facts tell lies and blame by brothers in the military for 9/11. Or the ones who blame some un-named people in the government. Show me one single fact in the truth movement that proves they are not telling lies.

Just one, and then we can get started on why Dylan is just a plain old liar, who misleads others with his shoddy research and fictional account of 9/11.

From my posts you might have guessed i'm some kind of Loose Change fan or Dylan supporter but actually I'm not.


I have a - very -mild interest in this debate. I'll occasionaly pop into websites such as this for something to do/read.

Consider me an uncaring, impartial observer.

Scanning through the postings on tens of websites I see both sides engaging in the same activities:

Presenting theories and speculation as "proof"*
Selectively quoting.
Glossing over stuff that doesn't quite fit the theory presented.
Name calling.
Macho posturing.
Peer approval/bonding.
Snidey comments, personal attacks.
Claiming X is the final nail in the coffin when it isn't
Claiming picture Y OBVIOUSLY shows Z when it might but might not.
etc etc etc.

It's human nature, I guess.

*I actually "side" with the sceptics. But the sceptics can't get away with just typing anything - such as wild speculation - and not being called to account on anything because they're amongst friends.

In a court of law, Dylan would be able to defend himself against charges of lying.

Attacks on him are actually irrelevent. Most members of the public don't bother reading either sides debates.

What do we - those of us who are fairly rational and reasonable human beings - want? sceptics and "CTers" alike?

We want the truth - The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I see the sceptics role as providing unbiased truth. HARD Facts. This is done often and in most cases.

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.

[stateofgrace]

Even then we are on shaky ground.

If a Priest believes in life after death he may be mistaken. But when he preaches about life after death he isn't necessarily a liar. Even if he is mistaken.

If he KNOWS that there is no life after death but preaches anyway, then he's lying.

What does Dylan know to be a lie but he keeps saying it anyway?

Only he can answer that question.

So you think they base their beliefs on faith then?

Faith or fact? Which one?

[babazaroni]

We want the truth - The whole truth and nothing but the truth.


What do you think needs further explaining?

[DavidJames]

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.Are you satisfied with the JFK account? How about the moon landing? How about Oklahoma City?

[dc123]

dc,

Compose your thoughts and make 1 post instead of 6 rapid-fire posts within 23 minutes. When you repeatedly post (6 times?) without other people responding, it makes you look unstable. Also, please drop the act of being impartial. ;)

You may not be familiar with basic psychology. When you are debating someone and he responds by saying that he is better than you along with a dash of swear words...well, there isn't much to tell you if you don't understand what that means.

Please stop trying to sidetrack the topic. List some 'facts' from LC that you think Dylan believes. Again, please drop the impartial act.

Hi StoneWT,

Thank you for your advice.
It makes me look unstable?

What if I am unstable?

This style of posting suits me, It suits my lifestyle. I wanted to post rapidly then leave as I've got stuff to do (such as sleep!).

I can read Dylan's quote perfectly well. I can induldge in cod-psychology as much as the next man. For 3 bucks I'll give you a 3000 word analysis of him and predict his future.

I myself have resorted to swear words when "attacked". In certain circumstances I've even told certain people I'm better than them at certain things. Human nature.

Imagine if every woman on earth posted a quote from her ex-fella. something dumb he once said. "Proof" to other women that the guy is not to be trusted/dated/touched with a barge pole.

(As for the codpschology I can do the same for Bush and Rumsfeld if you provide a couple of quotes!.)

[ConspiRaider]

You don't know wht their movie is taking "so long".

why not ask them?

I'm 6 months behind schedule on my own Graphic Design project at the moment. The reasons are varied. For others to speculate why i'm behind without actually asking me is a bit unfair.
Nobody cares about your Graphic Design project.

People who go to the LC forum have inquired about their next lie-filled (presumably) film. Many are banned for "daring" to ask the pathetic twentysomething demigod.

Since you've appointed yourself as an "impartial" go-between, you ask them and get back here with the answer. We don't have all day. Get on it.

Avery, Bermas and Rowe have used the power of the Internet to spread a huge number of horrific lies about 9/11. They have hurt a lot of people. They have accused many people of horrendous crimes, with no trial, no evidence, no nothing. They've gained infamy because of it. And therefore it is perfectly acceptable for us critical thinking adults to speculate on their intentions in this endeavor.

[babazaroni]

This style of posting suits me, It suits my lifestyle. I wanted to post rapidly then leave as I've got stuff to do (such as sleep!).


Do you think people will take you seriously when you strafe and run?

Do you care?

[dc123]

Are you satisfied with the JFK account? How about the moon landing? How about Oklahoma City?

Moon landings, yes. JFK and OC - don't know much about either. Not interested (i'm British).

My views on all 3 are irrelevent to Dylan, Loose Change, 911 etc.

All CTs are mutally exclusive (unless you are someone looking to "connect the dots" ) and it's unjust for anyone to claim that X believes Y so he must be one of those "moonbats" who believe Z.

At least you asked me though, rather than assuming or accusing!

[dc123]

Do you think people will take you seriously when you strafe and run?

Do you care?

I don't care. "Strafe and run" it's a term like "trolling", I guess.

Not everyone on earth is into internet forum "rules" and protcol and etiquette, yet.We are not all internet savvy.

Should I not post like this? I'm too old to care.

People will accept my valid points and reject my unvalid points as they see fit.

I'm not their Doctor or spouse. They have no need to take me seriously.

[DavidJames]

All CTs are mutally exclusive (unless you are someone looking to "connect the dots" ) and it's unjust for anyone to claim that X believes Y so he must be one of those "moonbats" who believe Z.

At least you asked me though, rather than assuming or accusing!
I asked because I'm trying to understand this comment of yours:But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.You've set the bar pretty high, definitive, flawless, watertight! Few major crimes achieve such levels of certainty. I'm trying to understand your thinking by understanding how you think about other CT's.

All CTs are mutally exclusive (unless you are someone looking to "connect the dots" ) and it's unjust for anyone to claim that X believes Y so he must be one of those "moonbats" who believe Z.Purely anecdotal, but my experience shows that people who believe one type of CT, tend to believe others. Spend some time at LC and you've find a large number believe the CT of each of those I mentioned. I disagree CTs are mutually exclusive. In fact, the logic used to arrive at the CTs are nearly identical.

I would like to meet someone who felt OKC was a CT but not 9/11 and vice versa, I'll add in the first WTC bombing as well.

[ConspiRaider]

All CTs are mutally exclusive (unless you are someone looking to "connect the dots" ) and it's unjust for anyone to claim that X believes Y so he must be one of those "moonbats" who believe Z.

Incorrect.

Conspiracy Theorism is a mindset, and therefore belief in the CT explanation for one event is likely to predispose an individual to believe in a CT explanation for another. And another. And so forth.

For example: Every single conspiracy theorist who believes that 9/11 was an "inside job" by the U.S. Government also believes that JFK was killed by a U.S. government conspiracy. There are no exceptions. The only requirement is that the 9/11 inside job CT is sufficiently aware of the "correct" JFK theories.

Study more. You need it.

[DavidJames]

I asked because I'm trying to understand this comment of yours:You've set the bar pretty high, definitive, flawless, watertight! Few major crimes achieve such levels of certainty. I'm trying to understand your thinking by understanding how you think about other CT's.

Purely anecdotal, but my experience shows that people who believe one type of CT, tend to believe others. Spend some time at LC and you've find a large number believe the CT of each of those I mentioned. I disagree CTs are mutually exclusive. In fact, the "logic" used to arrive at the CTs are nearly identical.

I would like to meet someone who felt OKC was a CT but not 9/11 and vice versa, I'll add in the first WTC bombing as well.

edit to put logic in quotes as their thinking is anything but logical. Having read what I just wrote, using the term thinking may be a stretch as well.

[ConspiRaider]

edit to put logic in quotes as their thinking is anything but logical. Having read what I just wrote, using the term thinking may be a stretch as well.
Thank Ed you caught it, I was just about to jump down your throat! Nice catch! :)

[stateofgrace]

Emmmm lets look at the clues.

I wanted to post rapidly


i'm British


I've got stuff to do (such as sleep!).


I'm too old to care


it's a term like "trolling", I guess
Live anywhere near Manchester dc123?

[StoneWT]

dc is a Troofer pretending to be neutral. He is here to take up space. Notice that he hasn't actually addressed the subject of Avery and Bermas believing their own theories. Instead, he rambles on about himself and tries to sidetrack the topic.

I have a - very -mild interest in this debate.

This 'very mild interest' :rolleyes: is why he spends his free time creating posts that don't address the subject of the topic.

Consider me an uncaring, impartial observer.

Notice that he invites you to assume this and doesn't actually say that he is.

*I actually "side" with the sceptics.

There is no "side" to this. dc is displaying CT logic.

In a court of law, Dylan would be able to defend himself against charges of lying.


He can defend himself right now in his forum, e-mails, and interviews.

Attacks on him are actually irrelevent. Most members of the public don't bother reading either sides debates.

This is a favorite CT tactic. Don't use documented facts and logical analysis to criticize LC or its creators' words/actions because no one cares. This is rubbish as the CT nuts are adopting this topic because it is exposing Dylan/Bermas/Rowe's lies and negatively affecting their number of CT fans along with the $ from the suckers.

What do we - those of us who are fairly rational and reasonable human beings - want? sceptics and "CTers" alike?

We want the truth - The whole truth and nothing but the truth.


CT nuts are not rational or reasonable. They repeatedly reject answers to their questions because they want to believe in a CT. They want Troof instead of the truth.

I see the sceptics role as providing unbiased truth. HARD Facts. This is done often and in most cases.

Are the "CTers" supposed to provide 'biased truth' and 'SOFT Facts'? Noticed the use of quotation marks around CTers. This is done because the camouflaged Troofer doesn't like the term.

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.


He is asking for what is technically impossible. 100% 'proof' does not exist in the real world as there will always be a CT nut with a bizarre theory questioning 'anomalies' in the 'official story'. This is why criminal trials use "beyond a reasonable doubt" instead of "beyond any doubt."

He is also moving the goal posts (http://www.anomalist.com/commentaries/claim.html). Showing what happened on and leading up to 9/11 has already been taken care of by the 9/11 Commission Report. The building collapses have been thoroughly explained. The liars like Dylan have had their videos exposed by Gravy and Mark. Now unnamed 'global events' that happened AFTER 9/11 have to be 'explained' with 100% 'proof'.

I myself have resorted to swear words when "attacked". In certain circumstances I've even told certain people I'm better than them at certain things. Human nature.

*SIGH* :rolleyes: Context matters.


I've accomplished more without film school than most people, such as yourself, will EVER accomplish. Period. Jealousy is a bitch, and I'm sorry you're experiencing it, but don't spew ******** like that and expect to not be corrected. This is why you were banned from my forums in the first place.
- Dylan Avery on the budget of his film.


Dylan brought up 'accomplishments' and 'jealousy' on his own when the two things had nothing to do with the e-mail exchange. CT nuts like Dylan are in this for the fame and money. They view debunkers as equally shallow because their minds cannot conceive of doing this for the victims or simple historical truth. When you use insults that are unrelated to the exchange after being on the losing end of it, you are actually talking about what matters to you. dc, you might want to enroll in a local community college and take a course on basic psychology to help you understand this.

Taking a basic psychology course would help you to better disguise being a Troofer.

(As for the codpschology I can do the same for Bush and Rumsfeld if you provide a couple of quotes!.)

This is basic Troofer 101. Why on Earth were President Bush and Rumsfeld mentioned? This was done because the Troofer equates debunking LC with support of President Bush and Rumsfeld. This goes along with wanting 100% 'explanations' of 'global events' (he means the Afghanistan/Iraq wars) that happened AFTER 9/11.

Now, please list some 'facts' from LC that Dylan and/or Bermas believe. You claim to have watched LC twice. Try posting on the actual subject of this topic. :idea:

[Triterope]

Unless we develop mind reading powers, we are guessing what he'd do when offered a bribe to abandon the film.

Why don't you people read? I explained this very clearly in my previous post. Dylan Avery was in a situation where he had to choose between his conspiracy believers and his film career. He chose his film career. It is therefore likely that any future choices will be made the same way.

[The Silver Shadow]

Dear Dylan,
I have chosen you to direct the next Star Wars trilogy.
Sincerely,
George Lucas

PS. Please abandon Loose Change and any incarnations of it so you can direct my film.





I apologize for degrading Star Wars into this...

[Kiwiwriter]

I think he created this monster for the same noble purpose that a lot of people create vast idiocies: to gain attention and money, and become the object of respect, fear, and sex.

He may have believed his stuff at the start, and through a lot of the production and middle. Now that he's been caught out in so many errors, lies, and misbehaviors, he can't maintain the same story. But at the same time, he can't back away from what he did, because that's the only reason he has any small measure of fame and hope of gaining more of it.

If he says, "Jeez, I did a stupid thing, I'm wrong, sorry about all this, I'm going back to film school to learn how to do a sequel to Showgirls," he alienates his supporters, and earns their wrath, which is pretty considerable. And he draws the ridicule of folks like us, and the greater fury of all the people he offended. I'm sure there are a lot of cops, firefighters, EMS workers, relatives of 9/11 victims, and so on, who would like to have their fist make acquaintance with his jaw.

So he's caught in a disaster of his own creation. He can't leave it, and he can't really go on with it. So Loose Change: The Sequel, and Son of Loose Change, and Revenge of Loose Change will always be "in production," always in danger of not being produced, and always, always, always, needing more money.

[The Silver Shadow]

I think he created this monster for the same noble purpose that a lot of people create vast idiocies: to gain attention and money, and become the object of respect, fear, and sex.

He may have believed his stuff at the start, and through a lot of the production and middle. Now that he's been caught out in so many errors, lies, and misbehaviors, he can't maintain the same story. But at the same time, he can't back away from what he did, because that's the only reason he has any small measure of fame and hope of gaining more of it.

If he says, "Jeez, I did a stupid thing, I'm wrong, sorry about all this, I'm going back to film school to learn how to do a sequel to Showgirls," he alienates his supporters, and earns their wrath, which is pretty considerable. And he draws the ridicule of folks like us, and the greater fury of all the people he offended. I'm sure there are a lot of cops, firefighters, EMS workers, relatives of 9/11 victims, and so on, who would like to have their fist make acquaintance with his jaw.

So he's caught in a disaster of his own creation. He can't leave it, and he can't really go on with it. So Loose Change: The Sequel, and Son of Loose Change, and Revenge of Loose Change will always be "in production," always in danger of not being produced, and always, always, always, needing more money.
and always, always in "negotiations" and "conference calls" with film companies...

[Kiwiwriter]

and always, always in "negotiations" and "conference calls" with film companies...

That way, they can seem to be very, very active, while not actually doing anything.

Nice work if you can get it! :D

[Panoply_Prefect]

The reason they do it, is printed at the end of 9/11 Mysteries (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003):


You will make new friends. You are not a conspiracy theorist, but part of a whole


Man's need to be part of a community is strong in these ones...

Btw, why do people give them money? Their movie is freely available for download on the net, what do they pay for?

Cheers,
SLOB

[beachnut]

From my posts you might have guessed i'm some kind of Loose Change fan or Dylan supporter but actually I'm not.


I have a - very -mild interest in this debate. I'll occasionaly pop into websites such as this for something to do/read.

Consider me an uncaring, impartial observer.

Scanning through the postings on tens of websites I see both sides engaging in the same activities:

Presenting theories and speculation as "proof"*
Selectively quoting.
Glossing over stuff that doesn't quite fit the theory presented.
Name calling.
Macho posturing.
Peer approval/bonding.
Snidey comments, personal attacks.
Claiming X is the final nail in the coffin when it isn't
Claiming picture Y OBVIOUSLY shows Z when it might but might not.
etc etc etc.

It's human nature, I guess.

*I actually "side" with the sceptics. But the sceptics can't get away with just typing anything - such as wild speculation - and not being called to account on anything because they're amongst friends.

In a court of law, Dylan would be able to defend himself against charges of lying.

Attacks on him are actually irrelevent. Most members of the public don't bother reading either sides debates.

What do we - those of us who are fairly rational and reasonable human beings - want? sceptics and "CTers" alike?

We want the truth - The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I see the sceptics role as providing unbiased truth. HARD Facts. This is done often and in most cases.

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.

I forgot. Did you say Dylan and Bermas believe their own lies made on the LC videos or not? And why or why not?

What sceptic's do you side with, who are they?

Yes, I call Dylan a liar. If you want a retraction post one fact from his video and then we can discuss why or why not his misleading video is a lie. If you watched his video and think it has merit you are not very knowlegable or able to research 9/11 very well. Simple.

But to say both sides are the same is crap. Yes I took a short cut because the whole story is what you are too lazy to read and then decide who can call who a liar.

Start with this list and then I can give you 10 times more. Dylan is a liar when it comes to his LC videos.

http://forums.randi.org/local_links.php?catid=18

Here are links to help you understand why LC video and the whole truth movement are full of lies and misleading information.

http://forums.randi.org/local_links.php?catid=18

You could find more on your own. Before you decide were the facts reside.

Do not forget the satirical properties of this thread.

I think you missed the possible satire of this thread and protest too much. That make you appear to be a CTer with no facts.

[chipmunk stew]

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.
Find me an omniscient entity and I'll ask it. Barring that, you'll have to live with pretty damn close.

[PhantomWolf]

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.

Find me one for any Historical event, period.

[westprog]

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.

That will not be forthcoming. As with any other historical event.

We know some things about 911. We know that explosives weren't planted in the WTC. We know that four planes were hijacked and crashed. We know that space lasers weren't used. But there is plenty of other stuff we don't know, and there's lots of stuff we won't ever know.

[negativ]

But i'm still waiting for the definitive, watertight, flawless account of 911, the events leading up to it and global events after it. An account that covers all the bases.

As others have said, this will never, ever happen. Historians and archaeologists still don't have a "watertight, flawless account" of the construction of the pyramids in Egypt, and they've had over 4500 years to figure it out.

[orphia nay]

I have an impulse to play Devil's Advocate for the newbie.

dc is a Troofer pretending to be neutral. He is here to take up space. Notice that he hasn't actually addressed the subject of Avery and Bermas believing their own theories. Instead, he rambles on about himself and tries to sidetrack the topic.

I believe dc did address that subject:

Even then we are on shaky ground.

If a Priest believes in life after death he may be mistaken. But when he preaches about life after death he isn't necessarily a liar. Even if he is mistaken.

If he KNOWS that there is no life after death but preaches anyway, then he's lying.

What does Dylan know to be a lie but he keeps saying it anyway?

Only he can answer that question.


That approximates my position on Avery, stated earlier. I don't think he is purposely lying, but that's just my opinion.

I think that there's some mechanism in his twoofer brain that won't allow him to admit he's wrong because he's waiting on one final solution, one piece of super-evidence that proves whether it was an inside job or not.

We all know that is not going to happen, but he, like other twoofers, uses that fact as an impulse to cement all the claims and counter-claims together and create a castle-in-his-mind from where he battles with the Sword of Twoof.

The fact that he does not want to admit he's wrong is the stone of which the castle is made.

Only Dylan might know if he believes his theories, or if he just wants to believe his theories.

The fact that he's admitted that LC2E contained errors proves that he is willing to change his mind, so I do have some small hope for him.

[Brainster]

That approximates my position on Avery, stated earlier. I don't think he is purposely lying, but that's just my opinion.

I think that there's some mechanism in his twoofer brain that won't allow him to admit he's wrong because he's waiting on one final solution, one piece of super-evidence that proves whether it was an inside job or not.

Yes. In my opinion with all the Truthers it's that they start with the conclusion (Bush/Cheney/NWO did it) and work backwards. Being logical skeptics we work forward and demolish their arguments without ever demolishing the conclusion. They even convince themselves that using obvious BS evidence like Wally Miller is okay because it's in service to a noble cause.

[Mince]

Isn't it at least a little amusing that, in the beginning, those who claimed there was a plane that hit the Pentagon were not welcome at Loose Change; and now those who do not believe there was a plane that hit the Pentagon are not welcome.