Stardust Hotel Imploded in Las Vegas

[Hutch]

The old Stardust Hotel was imploded this morning in Las Vegas. Chief among the structures demolished was the 32-floor main hotel tower.

I mention this because (1) I stayed there twice during The Amazing Meeting (TAM) and was rather fond of the old place, (2) I am sure there are good videos out there, but work does not permit me to find them, (3) A 32-story building is about as close as we'll come to the 50-Story WTC7 or 110-Story WTC1 and 2 for controlled demolition examples.

FWIW, I saw the Stardust in January 2007 when I was in Vegas for TAM5. They were stripping the frontage off of it and you could see the welders' torches both day and night as they prepped the building. It was hardly something that would not be noticed, IMHO.

[gumboot]

The old Stardust Hotel was imploded this morning in Las Vegas. Chief among the structures demolished was the 32-floor main hotel tower.

I mention this because (1) I stayed there twice during The Amazing Meeting (TAM) and was rather fond of the old place, (2) I am sure there are good videos out there, but work does not permit me to find them, (3) A 32-story building is about as close as we'll come to the 50-Story WTC7 or 110-Story WTC1 and 2 for controlled demolition examples.

FWIW, I saw the Stardust in January 2007 when I was in Vegas for TAM5. They were stripping the frontage off of it and you could see the welders' torches both day and night as they prepped the building. It was hardly something that would not be noticed, IMHO.



Isn't it obvious? Demolition crews are simply making their work seem obvious and labour intensive to fool the populous into thinking it was impossible to CD the WTC. In reality it took five guys a couple of hours to rig the Stardust Hotel. The other obvious work you witnessed was all for show, using dummy explosives and fake powertools. The workers you saw were hired actors.

And yes, incase you're wondering, everyone involved in this operation WAS part of the 9/11 conspiracy. What's so hard to believe about that, huh?

-Gumboot

[eddyk]

As you may or may not be aware, the legendary Stardust Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada will be imploded at approximately 2:30 AM on Tuesday, March 13th. The nearby main road is being closed off between midnight and 4:00 A.M, and all signs nail the demolition at 2:30 AM.

The more steady, descriptive shots the better. We'll do whatever we can to compensate those that shoot footage. If you happen to get some coverage of it, please let us know.

Call our secretary Kristy at 607-267-4456 and square things away with her if you can send us a copy. We'd be there ourselves but we have simply way too much to do. ...

[CFLarsen]

That has to be an inside job...

[Juustin]

I got this same bulletin reposted from Guy With GED for 9/11 Truth:

As you may or may not be aware, the legendary Stardust Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada will be imploded at approximately 2:30 AM on Tuesday, March 13th. The nearby main road is being closed off between midnight and 4:00 A.M, and all signs nail the demolition at 2:30 AM.

The more steady, descriptive shots the better. We'll do whatever we can to compensate those that shoot footage, although we are not made of money. Oh wait, yes we are. If you happen to get some coverage of it, please let us know.

Call our secretary Kristy at 607-267-4456 and square things away with her if you can send us a copy. We'd be there ourselves but we have simply way too much to do.

It's very important that we keep an eye our for any unmanned planes that either fly into the building or shoot missiles and/or star wars beams into it.

[CHF]

Sure hope it wasn't "pulled" by an evil Jew. :rolleyes:

[WildCat]

Wow, I wonder how much thermite/ate was used?

[Calcas]

No video up anywhere yet but I'm betting there will be within a few hours...

[Arus808]

they've been showing it all morning on the news...too bad i dont have a vcr.

[CptColumbo]

I thought "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas?"

[jsiv]

Video links on http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6219268

[WildCat]

Video links on http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6219268
That video was obviously faked, real CD's don't have all those ear-shatteringly loud booms just prior to the collapse!

[CptColumbo]

That video was obviously faked, real CD's don't have all those ear-shatteringly loud booms just prior to the collapse!

That could be why Dylan wants photos.

[Calcas]

Typical black-ops.

Done at night to hide all the sekret stuff...

[negativ]

I'm pretty sure this has been posted before, but here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7883839035399786485) and here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6979955002470780153) and here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5446838557512388694) are three different views of the 30-story Landmark Tower in Fort Worth, TX. I wanted to go see it myself, but I completely forgot about it. Too bad, because I only lived about 5 miles away at the time.

Notice that you hear two sets of obviously deliberately timed sequential explosions -- and they are effin' LOUD. Of all the footage I've seen on Ground Zero collapses, including some that were filmed by people Way Too Close, never have I heard anything that sounds even close to that... and the WTC buildings were orders of magnitude more massive and probably much stronger than the Landmark Tower.

[pvt1863]

As you may or may not be aware, the legendary Stardust Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada will be imploded at approximately 2:30 AM on Tuesday, March 13th. The nearby main road is being closed off between midnight and 4:00 A.M, and all signs nail the demolition at 2:30 AM.

The more steady, descriptive shots the better. We'll do whatever we can to compensate those that shoot footage, although we are not made of money. Oh wait, yes we are. If you happen to get some coverage of it, please let us know.

Call our secretary Kristy at 607-267-4456 and square things away with her if you can send us a copy. We'd be there ourselves but we have simply way too much to do.

Compensation? Knowing Avery, he'll probably just give people a bunch of LC DVDs.

Let's see. You spent $800 flying to Las Vegas to record the implosion. As compensation, we'll send you 40 Loose Change DVDs (valued at $20 each).

[tacodaemon]

I thought "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas?"


How far is the Stardust from that part of McCarran Airport where the JANET planes take off to ferry workers to Area 51? :tinfoil

[steve s]

I wonder how much debris got thrown 600 yards from the site.

Steve S.

[tacodaemon]

I wonder how much debris got thrown 600 yards from the site.



Of course it must have fallen faster than freefall since that's what demolition charges make debris do.

[jsiv]

Debris? surely you mean pyroclastic flow.

[60hzxtl]

I'd like to call Kristy at 607-267-4456, and tell her I shot it at 500 frames per second with 3 Photo-Sonics cameras in 35MM from three different angles, and they can buy it for $2. per foot, but they have to front me the lab costs.

[Hokulele]

Debris? surely you mean pyroclastic flow.

Good grief, I should never have made the mistake of posting anything in CT. :p

[Unfit4Command]

Did anyone else notice that mushroom cloud as the building collapsed? Clearly mini-nukes were involved.

It's going to be a pain to clean up because of those pools of molten steel left over...since that's usually a problem in most controlled demolitions.

[CHF]

Notice how Dylan is trying to gather pictures and dust....but makes no effort to speak to the demoltion crews to ask then how it's done! :rolleyes:

He could ask them about the pre-weakening process, how many charges are needed and how loud they are, whether thermite is a good demolition tool, etc etc.

But he doesn't for some reason.

[Unfit4Command]

Notice how Dylan is trying to gather pictures and dust....but makes no effort to speak to the demoltion crews to ask then how it's done! :rolleyes:

He could ask them about the pre-weakening process, how many charges are needed and how loud they are, whether thermite is a good demolition tool, etc etc.

But he doesn't for some reason.

Probably wouldn't like the answers he would get. Loose Change is a big part of his life at this point, it would be a bad idea to actually look at the facts for the Final Cut.

[ConspiRaider]

Did you notice Judy Wood's face in the smoke? Nice teeth!

[CFLarsen]

Notice how Dylan is trying to gather pictures and dust....but makes no effort to speak to the demoltion crews to ask then how it's done! :rolleyes:

He could ask them about the pre-weakening process, how many charges are needed and how loud they are, whether thermite is a good demolition tool, etc etc.

But he doesn't for some reason.

http://skepticreport.com/download/tam5/images/0017.jpg

Stardust, being demolished, step by step.

The photo is taken Monday January 15th, 2007. During that week, there were more than 12 stories stripped. Those guys work fast!

[60hzxtl]

He wants dust????

Is dust from the Stardust- - - - STARDUST???

Quick where is Hoagy Carmichael when ya need him!

[PhantomWolf]

Well the footage I saw was hard to tell (they did it in the dark to hide it I'm sure) but it looked like it collapsed in the middle and the sides folded in, totally unlike WTC 7.

[Zep]

Was that HUSH-A-BOOM??

[Dr. Lao]

The whole "Demolition" was fake, it was a hologram.

The building is still there, but cloaked by the David Icke lizard men.

They are preparing the invisible building to be used as a FEMA detention camp.

Come on, its on teh intrawebs!!!!!!

[gnome]

You're all missing the obvious here.

It was not a controlled demolition. It was destroyed by the impact of an airplane. The government is covering it up to make them seem more competent in the war on terror. Or, it was a good way to get rid of the missing plane from 9-11 (you know, the one that was swapped for a missile).

[gumboot]

I'd like to call Kristy at 607-267-4456, and tell her I shot it at 500 frames per second with 3 Photo-Sonics cameras in 35MM from three different angles, and they can buy it for $2. per foot, but they have to front me the lab costs.


Wow. If you shot only 10 seconds of footage, that's a thousand feet worth, $2000.00. Don't hold your breath... ;)

-Gumboot

[kookbreaker]

Hmmm.

The so-called 'JREF' attends its so called Amazing Meeting for a few years up until 2006. A few months later, this black-op supercabal ends up in almost direct conflict with Dylan and the Loosers.

A few months later, the Stardust is destroyed under mysterious circumstances!!!!

JREF is covering its TRACKS!! They blew it up to destroy the couple of documents showing their master plan to use shills to mess up Dylan's happy cult-land!!!

Its true!!

[JimBenArm]

Hmmm.

The so-called 'JREF' attends its so called Amazing Meeting for a few years up until 2006. A few months later, this black-op supercabal ends up in almost direct conflict with Dylan and the Loosers.

A few months later, the Stardust is destroyed under mysterious circumstances!!!!

JREF is covering its TRACKS!! They blew it up to destroy the couple of documents showing their master plan to use shills to mess up Dylan's happy cult-land!!!

Its true!!

The Black Helicopters are coming for you...

[Horatius]

JREF is covering its TRACKS!! They blew it up to destroy the couple of documents showing their master plan to use shills to mess up Dylan's happy cult-land!!!

Its true!!



And now we'll have to get the Riv too, since that's where we moved hte command post that controlled the Stardust demo. Just wait for it!

[LashL]

And now we'll have to get the Riv too, since that's where we moved hte command post that controlled the Stardust demo. Just wait for it!

Perhaps not. I probably shouldn't be repeating this here but I happened upon a "sooper top sekrit" memo which suggests that the NWO has recently discovered the existence of a new invention called a "paper shredder", and this discovery might preclude the necessity of imploding the Riv. But shhh. It's a secret.

[JimBenArm]

Perhaps not. I probably shouldn't be repeating this here but I happened upon a "sooper top sekrit" memo which suggests that the NWO has recently discovered the existence of a new invention called a "paper shredder", and this discovery might preclude the necessity of imploding the Riv. But shhh. It's a secret.
But they have to get rid of the evidence of the paper shreds.
And the shredder itself!
And any trace of the room that held the shredder!
And any trace of the building that held the room that held the shredder that shredded the memo that Jack wrote!

[kookbreaker]

The Black Helicopters are coming for you...

Well of course they are: I'M SPECIAL!!!!

[Alareth]

The Black Helicopters are coming for you...

That's it! I know how the demolitions were placed in the WTC without anyone noticing! It's all so simple now...

Given the facts contained here: http://www.zapatopi.net/blackhelicopters/

It's so blatantly obvious that NWO controlled black nano-helecopters have been flying microscopic amounts of thermite into the buildings continuously and layering them on the structural members much like a paper wasp builds a nest. Then, when the proper signal was sent they self destructed to ignite the charges.

This epiphany has changed everything. It's like I'm waking up from a dream.

[scooby]

The old Stardust Hotel was imploded this morning in Las Vegas. Chief among the structures demolished was the 32-floor main hotel tower.

I mention this because (1) I stayed there twice during The Amazing Meeting (TAM) and was rather fond of the old place, (2) I am sure there are good videos out there, but work does not permit me to find them, (3) A 32-story building is about as close as we'll come to the 50-Story WTC7 or 110-Story WTC1 and 2 for controlled demolition examples.

FWIW, I saw the Stardust in January 2007 when I was in Vegas for TAM5. They were stripping the frontage off of it and you could see the welders' torches both day and night as they prepped the building. It was hardly something that would not be noticed, IMHO.

Funny you should say that, the most sensible analysis that I've read is that the thermite in the WTC served the same purpose, to remove redundant support and prep the building for an instantaneous drop - and then explosive charges did the rest.

You've got to admire it's elegance, in fact you can - a couple of clips from the day caught some of it cooking off just before the collapse, here's one a skeptic prepared earlier ...

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1035128522922802395

[PhantomWolf]

Funny you should say that, the most sensible analysis that I've read is that the thermite in the WTC served the same purpose, to remove redundant support and prep the building for an instantaneous drop - and then explosive charges did the rest.

Those would be the silent explosive charges that not only removed the redundant support, but instantly pulverised all the concrete floors as well, right?

[scooby]

Those would be the silent explosive charges that not only removed the redundant support, but instantly pulverised all the concrete floors as well, right?

I'm not with you, explosives normally aren't very quiet, it's to do with air pressure, it creates a shock wave - like a sonic boom, this vibrates the ear drum etc etc - the rest is a little dry, there's probably a thread here somewhere where one of your friends has explained the subject in depth. Go look.

[PhantomWolf]

I'm not with you, explosives normally aren't very quiet, it's to do with air pressure, it creates a shock wave - like a sonic boom, this vibrates the ear drum etc etc - the rest is a little dry, there's probably a thread here somewhere where one of your friends has explained the subject in depth. Go look.


Oh excellent. Please provide any close video or recordings of the phone conversations occuring at the time of the towers collapse which features these explosions.

[beachnut]

Funny you should say that, the most sensible analysis that I've read is that the thermite in the WTC served the same purpose, to remove redundant support and prep the building for an instantaneous drop - and then explosive charges did the rest.

You've got to admire it's elegance, in fact you can - a couple of clips from the day caught some of it cooking off just before the collapse, here's one a skeptic prepared earlier ...

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1035128522922802395
That is amazing, you have actually proved you have zero research capablity to find truth on 9/11 anywhere, anytime, anyplace.

Guess how many of these were on the planes on 9/11? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i_l_ux3R-4

You need some help on this stuff?

[scooby]

Oh excellent. Please provide any close video or recordings of the phone conversations occuring at the time of the towers collapse which features these explosions.

OK, but I'm fussy who I deal with on matters like this.
Please provide your full name, address, occupation and a nice photo too please, and I will consider your application.

[PhantomWolf]

OK, but I'm fussy who I deal with on matters like this.
Please provide your full name, address, occupation and a nice photo too please, and I will consider your application.

So you're going with cornered CT option #1, wave hands in the air, ignore the question, and quickly change the subject. Why? Surely if the WTC 1, 2, & 7 were all demo'ed then all the recordings should have nice big sharp *cracks* as the explosives are all set off, just like all the videos of CD's that are so readily findable on the net. Why can't you link to one? Come on, I'm waiting, and so I am sure everyone else on the board. If you're right, one video or recording shouldn't be that hard to find, there were plenty of cameras filming the towers and WTC 7, a number right up close to the bases of the buildings, and I know of two phones calls that were being recorded at the time of a collapse. It should be a synch for you to find those big kabooms.

Where's the Kaboom? I was expecting an Earth Shattering Kaboom!

[scooby]

So you're going with cornered CT option #1 ...

No I'm going with the age old maxim - "Who's talking to you?"

[PhantomWolf]

Still dodging the question, get those tap dancing shoes out, scooby, I'm not going away, and all you're doing is making yourself look stupid. You've already admited that you beleive explosives were used, and that those explosives weren't silent, so now you should be able to prove it. Come on it's easy. Post a video with the explosions audible in it, why can't you do it? If you're right should be easy as. I can post dozens of CD videos with the explosions audible, all you have to do is post one. Heck you post a WTC one that has explosives going off like those CD videos in it I'd become a 9/11 CT believer instantly, so why haven't you done it yet?

[scooby]

Still dodging the question, get those tap dancing shoes out, scooby, I'm not going away, and all you're doing is making yourself look stupid. You've already admited that you beleive explosives were used, and that those explosives weren't silent, so now you should be able to prove it. Come on it's easy. Post a video with the explosions audible in it, why can't you do it? If you're right should be easy as. I can post dozens of CD videos with the explosions audible, all you have to do is post one. Heck you post a WTC one that has explosives going off like those CD videos in it I'd become a 9/11 CT believer instantly, so why haven't you done it yet?

Do you honestly think people are going to read this thread and conclude that you are anything else other than an *******?

[beachnut]

Do you honestly think people are going to read this thread and conclude that you are anything else other than an *******?
come on prove it! present some facts! show some backbone!

You can do it!

[Arus808]

still dodging the question. Phantom asked you a perfectly logical question, yet you're posturing, stalling and now name calling.

[PhantomWolf]

Oooo, personal insults now, I'm soooo scared. That's what, #4 in of the CT Tactics Handbook on what to do when cornered? Come on, time to call me a Paid Government Stooge. You're a joke scooby, I've been insulted by professionals. I thought you might have actually had the guts to link to the video in which you can hear the low thuds of the floors hitting each other and tried to claim that was explosives, but you couldn't even do that.

You showing here is pathetic, you're not even a worthwhile chewtoy. Good grief, Killclown does better then you. The only COINTELPRO around here in all likelihood is you because you're singlehandly going out of your way to make the 9/11 "Truth"TM movement look even dumber that it normally looks.

You can't even post a simple video or recording, something that if you're right you should have ready at hand and be waving about. What a waste of space, the rest of the Twofers out there must be ashamed of you.

[Arus808]

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/2896/itlookslikeyouarerepeatjn0.png

[R.Mackey]

Now that's comedy. Make that yourself, or find it?

[PhantomWolf]

Now that's comedy. Make that yourself, or find it?

I thought Beachnut's was pretty good. scooby is showing that he wouldn't know what proof, facts or a backbone is if he fell over them.

Though I have to admit, Arus808, you make me laugh so hard if I'd being drinking a coffee, I'd have a clean monitor. :)

Oh, by the way, scooby we're stiiiiill waiting. You need Shaggy to come and help you find something?

[scooby]

still dodging the question. Phantom asked you a perfectly logical question, yet you're posturing, stalling and now name calling.

How so?

This is my contribution to this thread.

Funny you should say that, the most sensible analysis that I've read is that the thermite in the WTC served the same purpose, to remove redundant support and prep the building for an instantaneous drop - and then explosive charges did the rest.

You've got to admire it's elegance, in fact you can - a couple of clips from the day caught some of it cooking off just before the collapse, here's one a skeptic prepared earlier ...

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=1035128522922802395

Maybe you've got some questions about it - you could contact the news organisation that filmed it, or maybe try and track down the person who stabilised the video?

[scooby]

Oooo, personal insults now, I'm soooo scared. That's what, #4 in of the CT Tactics Handbook on what to do when cornered? Come on, time to call me a Paid Government Stooge. You're a joke scooby, I've been insulted by professionals. I thought you might have actually had the guts to link to the video in which you can hear the low thuds of the floors hitting each other and tried to claim that was explosives, but you couldn't even do that.

You showing here is pathetic, you're not even a worthwhile chewtoy. Good grief, Killclown does better then you. The only COINTELPRO around here in all likelihood is you because you're singlehandly going out of your way to make the 9/11 "Truth"TM movement look even dumber that it normally looks.

You can't even post a simple video or recording, something that if you're right you should have ready at hand and be waving about. What a waste of space, the rest of the Twofers out there must be ashamed of you.

I'm telling you they need to get shot of you, the ********ters on here are having a bad enough time as it is pretending to be James Randi, but an asshat like you in the mix is just dead weight I'm serious.

[DavidJames]

How so?

This is my contribution to this thread.



Maybe you've got some questions about it - you could contact the news organisation that filmed it, or maybe try and track down the person who stabilised the video?There is as much evidence that the towers were weakened by gnawing hamsters as there is evidence of thermite.

[PhantomWolf]

Keep working on those insults scooby one day you might actually pass the level of annoying gnat.

I'm less than impressed you haven't bother trying to call me a government agent yet, I guess I'll have to just try harder for my points on that.

Still waiting for your demolision sounds on video. What's the matter, can't find one? Why not go and beg Dylan to find you one, cause so far you're proven yourself to have nothing of consquence except handwaving and piss poor insults a 3-year old could better.

[WildCat]

Maybe you've got some questions about it - you could contact the news organisation that filmed it, or maybe try and track down the person who stabilised the video?
Not necessary. It was explained by NIST several years ago, and it isn't thermite. Do you know what's interesting about that floor?

[scooby]

Keep working on those insults scooby one day you might actually pass the level of annoying gnat.

I'm less than impressed you haven't bother trying to call me a government agent yet, I guess I'll have to just try harder for my points on that.

Still waiting for your demolision sounds on video. What's the matter, can't find one? Why not go and beg Dylan to find you one, cause so far you're proven yourself to have nothing of consquence except handwaving and piss poor insults a 3-year old could better.

You sound like a 3 year old - why don't you give it a go 'twoofer'? :D

[PhantomWolf]

Still waiting for that video scooby having trouble finding it? How come, this is your big shot, just think, you could show this entire board that the WTC was demolished with one tiny link. Why are you stalling, posturing and throwing insults? How hard is it to find and post one little video with big booms in it? Surely you can find one, after all you have said that explosives were used, so it should be simple to show it.

Where the Kaboom?

Or are you just a dud?

[kookbreaker]

Do you honestly think people are going to read this thread and conclude that you are anything else other than an *******?

I've concluded that you are a coward. As for Phantomwolf, he is merely pressing home a point and you are crying like a baby about it.

[sleahead]

Sorry, Scooby, but like Phantom Wolf, I have to request a video as well. You have posted a video of what is claimed to be a thermite reaction at one corner of one tower. I wish to see a video of more thermite reactions on both towers, as I believe a considerable amount of thermite was supposed to be used. Television cameras must have picked up more than one thermite reaction, surely?

[CHF]

Scooby,

I've been waiting a long time to see a WTC video with clear explosives going off.

Boom-boom-boom-boom! The noise of a demolition is unmistakable.

Surely you should have no trouble finding one. If there was a demolition on 9/11 that is...

[Dr. Lao]

You know you can never pin a kook CT.

He knows that we will eventually tire of asking him for some proof, then he will be back with a new conspiracy.

Or, he won't answer and instead say that we are all part of the conspiracy.

Old, tired schtick.

[scooby]

Scooby,

I've been waiting a long time to see a WTC video with clear explosives going off.

Boom-boom-boom-boom! The noise of a demolition is unmistakable.

Surely you should have no trouble finding one. If there was a demolition on 9/11 that is...

I shouldn't have to be posting stuff like this, you really should be ashamed ...

The logical fallacy of false dilemma — also known as false choice, false dichotomy, falsified dilemma, fallacy of the excluded middle, black and white thinking, false correlative, either/or fallacy and bifurcation—involves a situation in which two alternative statements are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more other options which have not been considered. The two alternatives presented are often, though not always, the two extreme points on some spectrum. Instead of such extreme simplification and wishful thinking, considering the whole spectrum, as in fuzzy logic, may be more appropriate. A typical false dilemma is the assertion "You are either for us or you are against us." The fallacy of this type of argument is that it tries to eliminate the middle ground.

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

[scooby]

Scooby,

I've been waiting a long time to see a WTC video with clear explosives going off.

Boom-boom-boom-boom! The noise of a demolition is unmistakable.

Surely you should have no trouble finding one. If there was a demolition on 9/11 that is...

Or maybe it's one of these ... I'm not an expert in all the categories of woo, though of course this forum would be the place to learn more it seems ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Logical_fallacies

[gumboot]

I shouldn't have to be posting stuff like this, you really should be ashamed ...


It's not really a false dilemma fallacy...

You claim explosives were used. Explosives make noise. Videos exist of the buildings prior to, during, and after collapse, that captured sound. Therefore, for your claim to be true, some of these videos must have captured the explosions.

-Gumboot

[volatile]

I'm gonna be polite here, Scoob, and ask an honest question. I really want to know the answer. I want to know the Truth.

You say there were explosives. You also admit that explosives aren't silent. Every video of a real CD has loud bang sounds prior to the collapse initiation.

No videos of the WTC collapses do.

Why is that?

[Horatius]

Do you honestly think people are going to read this thread and conclude that you are anything else other than an *******?



We could ask you the same thing.

[Dr. Lao]

Hey Scooby, quit trying to spin out of the question put to you.

Answer it.

Then you can spin another 10 more asinine conspiracies.

But, you gotta answer the question first.

(oh, and you can't answer with another question, that is so kook like)


Notice the CT response? Change the subject, bring up logical fallacies, its all a way to dodge the question.

[WildCat]

Maybe you've got some questions about it - you could contact the news organisation that filmed it, or maybe try and track down the person who stabilised the video?
Scooby, you seem to have missed my last reply to this. You do know that NIST addressed this nearly 3 years ago, don't you? Do you know what the nature of the NIST explanation even was? Have you done any research at all on this, or was that video and Jone's thermite/ate explanation the first and only thing you ever heard or cared to hear about the matter?

[beachnut]

I'm telling you they need to get shot of you, the ********ters on here are having a bad enough time as it is pretending to be James Randi, but an asshat like you in the mix is just dead weight I'm serious.
Does this mean any second now we can expect a flow of facts, the likes we have never seen before, to blow the case sky high. Like Charlie Sheen you will challenge anyone to debate on the facts.

I am ready for you to set caps lock and bold, scooby! Please fill the forum with your intelligence!

...

What no facts! Darn we have been waiting, but everything you post has been debunked as lies well before you even posted it. Five years late, did they hold you back in K, or 1.

You may want to call your mother and tell her your education was a failure and there is serious doubt about you ever becoming a researcher.

[Arus808]

Now that's comedy. Make that yourself, or find it?


http://www.imagegenerator.net "Clippy" is my favorite ^_^

[Juustin]

Just a suggestoin, but maybe we should start a donation drive so we can offer a free pair of really tall boots to anyone who enters a thread that Scooby is posting in. Who's in?

[MG1962]

There is as much evidence that the towers were weakened by gnawing hamsters as there is evidence of thermite.

That may not be as silly as you think ;)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5d/Kitten-Kong.jpg/250px-Kitten-Kong.jpg

[scooby]

It's not really a false dilemma fallacy...

You claim explosives were used. Explosives make noise. Videos exist of the buildings prior to, during, and after collapse, that captured sound. Therefore, for your claim to be true, some of these videos must have captured the explosions.

-Gumboot

What isn't, this post?
Or the other one you just posted describing a different false dilemma fallacy?

[WildCat]

What isn't, this post?
Or the other one you just posted describing a different false dilemma fallacy?
Scooby, are you aware that NIST addressed what you call "thermite" nearly 3 years ago? Are you aware of what their conclusions were?

[beachnut]

Just a suggestoin, but maybe we should start a donation drive so we can offer a free pair of really tall boots to anyone who enters a thread that Scooby is posting in. Who's in?You mean some waders?

http://tackledirect.com/hodgman-w303-neoprene-waders.html

89.99 US dollars

[Dr. Lao]

What isn't, this post?
Or the other one you just posted describing a different false dilemma fallacy?


Scooby, you are trying to spin out of the question by bringing something else up, cut it out.

Answer the question put to you.


What is the one phrase CT's hate the most?

Prove it

[The Silver Shadow]

what is the reply they return?

"You prove it"

[HeyLeroy]

Guy with GED for 9/11 Truth sez on his myspace blog that 3/13 was an inside job! Could **** be true???!!!1!!?

[CHF]

Scooby,

are you 12?

Seriously kid: of all the stupid things I've seen posted on-line in the past 10 years, what you just posted was surely in the top 5.

You claim explosives downed the WTC and you admit they are loud.

How is it any sort of logical fallacy to ask you for a video showing what should be obvious charges going off?

What horrifically absurd logical thought process allowed you to reach that conclusion?

[PhantomWolf]

Ahhhh, how refreshing to return and see scooby still tap dancing through the tulips, especially when I was sure he'd have abandoned this thread and fled by now.

scooby, you have made two distinct claims here. That the WTC towers were demolished with explosives, and that those explosives were not quiet. Video after video after video of known CD's show that explosive demolish charges are very audible over large distances. I can links to dozens of them, or better yet just send you to implosionworld.com where they have a stockpile of hundreds. Why can't you link to one video or recorded phone conversation that includes explosions?

You're claiming it's a false dilemma, it's not. This isn't a case where there are multiple options. It is fact that close recording devices would record the sounds of demolition charges; we've seen it in dozens of CD videos. In fact I'd go as far as to say that there probably isn't a video taken using sound and within a kilometre of a CD that doesn't have the sound of the charges going off. Yet you can't provide one from the WTC. Why not? There are videos that were taken near the foot of the towers at the time of the collapse, I know, I've seen at least 3 of them, if not more. There are recordings of phone calls from the towers still in progress at the time they collapsed, I know, I've heard at least two of them (one's from the south and I think the other was from the north) They are incredibly haunting, but guess what, no Kaboom.

You claim that explosives went off, you claim that were noisy. You have the chance to prove it, but instead all you do is act like a toddler who's had his biscuit taken away and throw a temper tantrum, shout abuse, wave your hands in the air, and kick your feet on the ground and cry "I don't wanna!"

Why is that? Hmmm? Why can't you prove what you claim? Why do you act like a 3 year old when the heat is put onto you? Surely if you case was so strong you could provide the evidence instantly because you'd know the evidence. I can. I know exactly where to locate video and phone conversations that show no explosions. That's because I looked at the evidence to formula my point of view, so I had to go and find the evidence. I didn't formulate my view and then go to CT sites and plug in their claims.

It's quite obvious to everyone here that you don't have any evidence, that you have been pulling your claims out of thin air and now that you have been stapled to the mat on a claim, you are simply lost on how to respond with evidence so instead you have started waving your hands in the breeze. You know, at least Dylan has one thing down pat better than you, when he realises he's in over his head, he shuts up and acts like a coma victim. You just wallow in your ignorance and try and bluster your way out of it. Well sorry, but that simply doesn't work here. We want evidence and it's totally apparent you don't have any.

You are quite literally a waste of time and space. I think you need to go back to basic CT training, you can't hack it with the big dogs. Try going back to the sandpit called LCF and learn a bit more, and then come back when you're ready to play this seriously.

Until then, do yourself a favour and either put up, or shut up.

[volatile]

What isn't, this post?
Or the other one you just posted describing a different false dilemma fallacy?

Why don't any videos of the WTC collapses have any sound of explosions?

[kookbreaker]

I shouldn't have to be posting stuff like this, you really should be ashamed ...



You're not very good at this, are you?

[scooby]

Scooby, you are trying to spin out of the question by bringing something else up, cut it out.

Answer the question put to you.


What is the one phrase CT's hate the most?

Prove it

No I'm pointing out quite successfully the disingenuous nature of the posts that gumboot is making, first he creates a false dilemma, and then when that is pointed out, he denies it, pretends to restate it, but actually creates another, separate, false dilemma.

This is *********, as any sensible person would realise and I have no intention of taking it seriously.

That you and many others here leap to it's defence, under the banner of 'critical thinking' - well, isn't that strange.

Mr Randi better order a revolving coffin, because he's going to have a fair bit of turning in his grave to do when he casts his skeptical eye over what's been going on here, and a heart attack if he looks now. Has he dealt with 911 'conspiracy theories' by any chance, including the offical story? I've had a look and failed to find any of his pronouncements on the issue. Any links to analysis from the man himself? Because Uri Geller must be laughing his head off, what with the number of spoon benders on this forum. This is after all, the essence of the 'official story' - the transmutation of solids on a grand scale. Does he post here?

And you seem to have mixed up the responsibilities - I see a lot of this. It's not for anyone to prove anything prior to a criminal investigation. The proof comes afterwards. The responsibility sits with the US Govt, to adequately explain the events of 911, and this has still not been done.

[R.Mackey]

It's not really a false dilemma fallacy...

You claim explosives were used. Explosives make noise. Videos exist of the buildings prior to, during, and after collapse, that captured sound. Therefore, for your claim to be true, some of these videos must have captured the explosions.

No I'm pointing out quite successfully the disingenuous nature of the posts that gumboot is making, first he creates a false dilemma, and then when that is pointed out, he denies it, pretends to restate it, but actually creates another, separate, false dilemma.
"Quite successfully?" Dream on.

It's only a "false dilemma" if he presents you two extreme choices and doesn't allow you to p'doh pick anything else. He hasn't done that. He's asking YOU to explain why, since you think there were explosives, nobody heard them.

Since he's giving you the freedom to make your own explanation, it's not a false dilemma. So come off your high horse, and answer the question already.

And you seem to have mixed up the responsibilities - I see a lot of this. It's not for anyone to prove anything prior to a criminal investigation. The proof comes afterwards. The responsibility sits with the US Govt, to adequately explain the events of 911, and this has still not been done.

The US Govt is not required to explain why you think there were explosives. This is your gig, scooby. Hop to it.

[LashL]

blah blah blah BS by a tinhatter


Oh, come on, "scooby", drop the sock already. It is obvious that you haven't a clue what you're talking about; your sockpuppets are becoming legion; you simply spout the same mindless drivel that your prior incarnations and your fellow conspiracy theory believers spew; and it is obvious that you are incapable of responding meaningfully to the questions posed to you. It is equally obvious that you think you're fooling people here, but here's a hint - you are not.

[scooby]

How is it any sort of logical fallacy to ask you for a video showing what should be obvious charges going off?


On the third re-write eh?

This bears no relation to your original statement ...

1. "I've been waiting a long time to see a WTC video with clear explosives going off.Surely you should have no trouble finding one. If there was a demolition on 9/11 that is..."

If there was a demolition on 911, video will have captured it, and I will have the video. A triple I believe? Probably a fishing expedition to get me to post links to video with explosions that can be heard, again, I've already posted one somewhere I think, and lets face it, you were there. Probably aware that about 9000 confiscated video clips are still being withheld by the US Govt. To do: nothing - who cares?

2. "You claim explosives were used. Explosives make noise. Videos exist of the buildings prior to, during, and after collapse, that captured sound. Therefore, for your claim to be true, some of these videos must have captured the explosions."

A reduction of the previous, video's exist showing the collapse. If it was a controlled demolition, some video's will definitely show this. Ignoring other variables - like oh for instance - distance? And the fact they do exist? To do: nothing - who cares?

3. How is it any sort of logical fallacy to ask you for a video showing what should be obvious charges going off.

Fiction. And bold at that considering your previous posts are just sitting there.

Now again, I really can't be arsed to go through this kind of thing time and time again.

I agree to disagree, and reserve the right to make my own judgement, as you have done - no amount of 'critical thinking' preached at me by someone else has any place challenging that as I am sure you should agree.

Unlike the majority of what I see here, and in the spirit of critical thinking (I would say its at the heart of it) - I would urge people to do the same, and they have done.

[Pardalis]

Pd'oh's new incarnation as a pseudo-skeptic is hillarious.

[PhantomWolf]

Still dodging and weaving I see.

If there was a demolition on 911, video will have captured it, and I will have the video.

Perhaps you need to learn to read again too. The statement was "Surely you should have no trouble finding one" not "and you will have the video". Have you even bothered looking? No? Didn't think so.

Probably a fishing expedition to get me to post links to video with explosions that can be heard, again, I've already posted one somewhere I think, and lets face it, you were there.

If you have posted one previously, post it again, let's see it instead of all your dancing and handwaving. All you have to do to shut us up is post the link to a video or phone conversation recording that shows audible explosions.

Ignoring other variables - like oh for instance - distance? And the fact they do exist?

Again ignoring half the postings. Videos exist that were taken at the foot of the towers, I have pointed out this to you many times and I have pointed out that phone conversations from INSIDE the towers was being recorded at the time they fell. You're claiming distance is a total red herring and attempt to weave your way out of the tight spot you got yourself into, it's not going to work, but hey, I'm sure you'll enjoy the dance.

I agree to disagree, and reserve the right to make my own judgement, as you have done - no amount of 'critical thinking' preached at me by someone else has any place challenging that as I am sure you should agree.

So you're admitting that you hsave no evidence for your viewpoint, nor can you provide any evidence of your view point but because that's what you want to believe, you're going to continue to believe it anyway.

Now really that doesn't worry me. If you want to believe something on pure faith, well that's up to you, but its time to start admitting that you have no evidence of your claims and beliefs, know of no evidence of them and that your position is based entirely on faith. You do that, we might even leave you alone as long as you don't start claiming your position is more then faith based.

[Unfit4Command]

On the third re-write eh?

This bears no relation to your original statement ...

1. "I've been waiting a long time to see a WTC video with clear explosives going off.Surely you should have no trouble finding one. If there was a demolition on 9/11 that is..."

If there was a demolition on 911, video will have captured it, and I will have the video. A triple I believe? Probably a fishing expedition to get me to post links to video with explosions that can be heard, again, I've already posted one somewhere I think, and lets face it, you were there. Probably aware that about 9000 confiscated video clips are still being withheld by the US Govt. To do: nothing - who cares?

I must have missed when you posted those videos where explosions can be heard. So if you wouldn't mind, post them again.

2. "You claim explosives were used. Explosives make noise. Videos exist of the buildings prior to, during, and after collapse, that captured sound. Therefore, for your claim to be true, some of these videos must have captured the explosions."

A reduction of the previous, video's exist showing the collapse. If it was a controlled demolition, some video's will definitely show this. Ignoring other variables - like oh for instance - distance? And the fact they do exist? To do: nothing - who cares?

Distance doesn't matter when it comes to 9/11 Eyewitnesses. It's strange how a video that was shot so far away can pick up more sounds than those shot from say...inside the towers and at the foot of the buildings.

Like this one (http://www.911myths.com/South_Tower_Collapse.avi) in the case of the South Tower collapse, and this one (http://www.911myths.com/North_Tower_Collapse.avi) in the case of the North.

3. How is it any sort of logical fallacy to ask you for a video showing what should be obvious charges going off.

Fiction. And bold at that considering your previous posts are just sitting there.

Now again, I really can't be arsed to go through this kind of thing time and time again.

I agree to disagree, and reserve the right to make my own judgement, as you have done - no amount of 'critical thinking' preached at me by someone else has any place challenging that as I am sure you should agree.

Unlike the majority of what I see here, and in the spirit of critical thinking (I would say its at the heart of it) - I would urge people to do the same, and they have done.

Very well, I respect your choice.:)

[westprog]

And you seem to have mixed up the responsibilities - I see a lot of this. It's not for anyone to prove anything prior to a criminal investigation. The proof comes afterwards. The responsibility sits with the US Govt, to adequately explain the events of 911, and this has still not been done.

All right, here's the explanation. The reason that there was no sound of explosives was that there were no explosives. I can't see a flaw in that reasoning.

[volatile]

If there was a demolition on 911, video will have captured it, and I will have the video. A triple I believe? Probably a fishing expedition to get me to post links to video with explosions that can be heard, again, I've already posted one somewhere I think, and lets face it, you were there. Probably aware that about 9000 confiscated video clips are still being withheld by the US Govt. To do: nothing - who cares?

Sound isn't like light, Scooby. There's no such thing as a "listening angle" as there is with a "viewing angle". If there were explosives, they would be on every single video taken within a very large area that recorded sound. How would these "confiscated videos" prove your point?

Look, this is typical CT behaviour. When presented with a rebuttal, you posit that the proof that the rebuttal is spurious must be hidden, buried, concelaed by dark forces, rather than simply acknowledging that said proof just doesn't exist. There is no way you can be wrong, because you believe all the evidence that disproves your assertion is faked and all the evidence backing up your claim is buried or censored before you even start examining the case as it stands.


A reduction of the previous, video's exist showing the collapse. If it was a controlled demolition, some video's will definitely show this. Ignoring other variables - like oh for instance - distance? And the fact they do exist? To do: nothing - who cares?

Where are those videos? And, as above, why don't all the other videos have sound. No such thing as a listening angle. You know that, if you think about it for more than a millisecond and without a predetermined political agenda. If I film something with a camcorder and you're screaming from the top of your lungs behind me, that screaming will be on the tape.

Simple point of fact that you have yet to address: if the towers, or WTC7, were brought down with explosives, there would be a series of loud explosions on every single video taken. Explosives aren't silent, you've already admitted as much. Why, then, aren't there recorded explosions on ALL the collapse videos?

Fiction. And bold at that considering your previous posts are just sitting there.

Now again, I really can't be arsed to go through this kind of thing time and time again.

Going through it once would be nice.

From your turn of phrase, I note you're British. Your name wouldn't be Paul, would it?

I agree to disagree, and reserve the right to make my own judgement, as you have done - no amount of 'critical thinking' preached at me by someone else has any place challenging that as I am sure you should agree.

Unlike the majority of what I see here, and in the spirit of critical thinking (I would say its at the heart of it) - I would urge people to do the same, and they have done.


Problem is, Paul, you're not using any kind of "judgement" whatsoever. You have a preconceived conclusion and are inventing "evidence" which supports it and ignoring evidence which contradicts in. Flatly ignoring. You're not even attempting to engage in any kind of meaningful debate.

Imagine what kind of world we'd live in if everyone, and all debates, were approached in the same way as you're approaching this one. If people decided what they wanted the results of drug trials, or qualitative studies, or engineering safety tests were in advance, and when legitimate questions were raised they were ignored...

[Dr. Lao]

No I'm pointing out quite successfully the disingenuous nature of the posts that gumboot is making, first he creates a false dilemma, and then when that is pointed out, he denies it, pretends to restate it, but actually creates another, separate, false dilemma.

This is *********, as any sensible person would realise and I have no intention of taking it seriously.

That you and many others here leap to it's defence, under the banner of 'critical thinking' - well, isn't that strange.

Mr Randi better order a revolving coffin, because he's going to have a fair bit of turning in his grave to do when he casts his skeptical eye over what's been going on here, and a heart attack if he looks now. Has he dealt with 911 'conspiracy theories' by any chance, including the offical story? I've had a look and failed to find any of his pronouncements on the issue. Any links to analysis from the man himself? Because Uri Geller must be laughing his head off, what with the number of spoon benders on this forum. This is after all, the essence of the 'official story' - the transmutation of solids on a grand scale. Does he post here?

And you seem to have mixed up the responsibilities - I see a lot of this. It's not for anyone to prove anything prior to a criminal investigation. The proof comes afterwards. The responsibility sits with the US Govt, to adequately explain the events of 911, and this has still not been done.


Scooby, you were asked a question.

Answer it.

Quit playing semantics, quit dodging and weaving, quit trying to introduce new conspiracies and quit hemming and hawing.

Focus like a laser beam and answer the question.

You are displaying the typical CT behavior, when cornered, you spin, and do everything but answer the question.

Is it any wonder that the world laughs at kooks?

[Mashuna]

And you seem to have mixed up the responsibilities - I see a lot of this. It's not for anyone to prove anything prior to a criminal investigation. The proof comes afterwards. The responsibility sits with the US Govt, to adequately explain the events of 911, and this has still not been done.

It has been adequately explained. You disagree? Ok, then I guess the onus is back on you. How are your silent bombs coming along?

[Dr. Lao]

Well, its obvious that some NWO lackey was putting negative sound generation devices which nulled out the sounds from the detonations.

Yeah, thats it! That must be the case! Its completely against logic and reason, so it is the only option.

(note, simplicity won't work for a CT, when challenged, they needlessly make their solution more complex. Kinda like in Austin Powers where Dr. Evil has to make a needlessly more complex way to kill his foes!)

[JimBenArm]

Well, its obvious that some NWO lackey was putting negative sound generation devices which nulled out the sounds from the detonations.

Yeah, thats it! That must be the case! Its completely against logic and reason, so it is the only option.

(note, simplicity won't work for a CT, when challenged, they needlessly make their solution more complex. Kinda like in Austin Powers where Dr. Evil has to make a needlessly more complex way to kill his foes!)
I heard they used noise-cancelling headphones on everyone. Even had some specially made for the camera mikes, so there wouldn't be any 'splody-like noises on the film. So there!

[volatile]

I heard they used noise-cancelling headphones on everyone. Even had some specially made for the camera mikes, so there wouldn't be any 'splody-like noises on the film. So there!

Maybe they used special-frequency explosives, and secretly fitted everyone on the planet born since 1900 with cochlear implants at birth to cut out only those precise sounds!

[Dr. Lao]

cochlear implants = mark of the beast


COME ON GUYS, ITS IN REVELATIONS!!!!


:D

[Tricky]

It appears that Nevada simply has no respect for its landmarks (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/26/mustang.ranch.ap/index.html).

RENO, Nevada (AP) -- The last remaining building on the grounds where the infamous Mustang Ranch brothel once stood went up in flames Sunday.
The 48-room, 20,000-square-foot structure known as the Mustang Ranch II annex was destroyed as part of a firefighting training exercise.

"It's out with the old and in with the new," said a woman who goes by Air Force Amy, who once worked there. "The day of the $20 roll in the hay in a trailer is gone."