Open Thread - Speak Your Mind

[Apollo20]

TAM:

Well, an OPEN thread with the heading "speak your mind" and my last nine posts get censored ... I wonder why ...

P.S. And I also wonder, will this one make it ten in a row?

[Rahne Everson]

TAM:

Well, an OPEN thread with the heading "speak your mind" and my last nine posts get censored ... I wonder why ...

P.S. And I also wonder, will this one make it ten in a row?

Well Dr. Greening, you've been quoted just to be sure.

[T.A.M.]

TAM:

Well, an OPEN thread with the heading "speak your mind" and my last nine posts get censored ... I wonder why ...

P.S. And I also wonder, will this one make it ten in a row?

lol...they were not sensored. Like about 7-8 of mine from the same thread, they were moved more appropriately here...

http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=58

TAM:)

[apathoid]

Thank you Apathoid, and my hats off to you too sir, as you have endured your share of slander, especially from Rob over at SLC lately...and you have taken it like a true gentleman as well.

TAM:)


Rob was slandering me? That no good &%#% $^&%less #%^@#ing $#%^ son of a #$%^% ^%$@#.

OK, that was weak, I suck at the special character explicatives...:D

[calebprime]

Well, that thread is now closed.

Apollo, I'm wondering about your story of being experimented on by Osmond.

If you feel like talking about it, that is.

I'd rather hear your side of it than try to piece together something myself, at present.

[T.A.M.]

The thread is not closed, it is just moved to Abandon All Hope. You can still post there...I think.

TAM:)

[MIKILLINI]

Apollo, is that your alter ego ;Max Photon? And welcome to the forum, One Red Eye

[OneRedEye]

Thank you, MIKILLINI. And what a fun time to be here.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Sixthed.... :bigclap :hug6 :cheerleader4 :cheerleader3 :cheerleader1 :cheerleader5 :that one with the two beer glasses that I can't find

You are hereby banned from the Loose Change Forums for insufficient use of emoticons.

[calebprime]

The thread is not closed, it is just moved to Abandon All Hope. You can still post there...I think.

TAM:)

It does appear to be closed, not sure why.

But does anyone know where I can find Apollo's c.v., as LashL suggested? A quick Google of Dr. Frank Greening or F R Greening just pulls up the usual 9/11 stuff.

I'm at least curious enough to check the dates.

But maybe I should just leave it alone...

[ref]

Here is Greening's bio from 911myths:

http://www.911myths.com/html/dr_frank_greening_bio.html

[T.A.M.]

so when posts go to AAH, do they automatically close the thread, or just in this case?

TAM:)

[MikeW]

Long ago I went to Amazon and bought Steve Spak's "Day of Disaster" DVD, as it included clips of smoke pouring from WTC7 etc that you couldn't find anywhere else. Of course others bought it too, and the way Amazon uses data like this means we can get a feel for the product audience. Which meant when I just got an email saying "We've noticed that customers who have purchased or rated WTC 9/11/01 Day of Disaster have also purchased..." I was interested to see what it would be. The Naudet film? 9/11: Press for Truth? Griffin's video?

Ah, no. It's "UFOs Around The World" (http://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Around-World-Bill-Knell/dp/B000TKRIVU/ref=sr_1_1/002-3870127-4851242?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1184849380&sr=1-1), by Bill Knell:

An enhanced version of Bill Knell's Seminar, UFOs Around The World. This presentation includes added video footage of UFOs, unique and historic audio played during the seminar and an interview with a UFO Witness who was in his car when it was lifted off the road by a UFO. Famous UFO sightings, photographic and physical evidence cases, different types of Aliens, strange creatures associated with UFOs, UFO adductions, crash retrieval cases, a video history of the phenomenon, exclusive cases, amazing facts and non-stop surprises.

It's good to know they're doing research.

[ref]

Long ago I went to Amazon and bought Steve Spak's "Day of Disaster" DVD, as it included clips of smoke pouring from WTC7 etc that you couldn't find anywhere else. Of course others bought it too, and the way Amazon uses data like this means we can get a feel for the product audience. Which meant when I just got an email saying "We've noticed that customers who have purchased or rated WTC 9/11/01 Day of Disaster have also purchased..." I was interested to see what it would be. The Naudet film? 9/11: Press for Truth? Griffin's video?

Ah, no. It's "UFOs Around The World" (http://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Around-World-Bill-Knell/dp/B000TKRIVU/ref=sr_1_1/002-3870127-4851242?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1184849380&sr=1-1), by Bill Knell:



It's good to know they're doing research.

Mike, do you have the entire Discovery Channel "The Flight That Fought Back" -documentary? It was aired here a couple of days ago, and I missed about half of it. It had many informative clips, besides that of Mark Bingham's mother of course.

[Revolutionary91]

Long ago I went to Amazon and bought Steve Spak's "Day of Disaster" DVD, as it included clips of smoke pouring from WTC7 etc that you couldn't find anywhere else. Of course others bought it too, and the way Amazon uses data like this means we can get a feel for the product audience. Which meant when I just got an email saying "We've noticed that customers who have purchased or rated WTC 9/11/01 Day of Disaster have also purchased..." I was interested to see what it would be. The Naudet film? 9/11: Press for Truth? Griffin's video?

Ah, no. It's "UFOs Around The World" (http://www.amazon.com/UFOs-Around-World-Bill-Knell/dp/B000TKRIVU/ref=sr_1_1/002-3870127-4851242?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1184849380&sr=1-1), by Bill Knell:



It's good to know they're doing research.

Steve Spak must be making a nice profit from those videos. He certainly isn't making them available free on google video.

[MikeW]

Mike, do you have the entire Discovery Channel "The Flight That Fought Back" -documentary? It was aired here a couple of days ago, and I missed about half of it. It had many informative clips, besides that of Mark Bingham's mother of course.
I've got that on DVD, yes. I might have an AVI, too... I'll look.

[T.A.M.]

Rev:

are you going to ever contribute in a meaningful way, debunker or truther, on this site, or have you taken to acting like a pesky mosquito?

TAM:)

[MikeW]

Mike, do you have the entire Discovery Channel "The Flight That Fought Back" -documentary? It was aired here a couple of days ago, and I missed about half of it. It had many informative clips, besides that of Mark Bingham's mother of course.
I've no file version of that, sorry. I can make one, but not for a few days as I'm busy with real-life work. I'd say check for torrents now, then if you can't find out, let me know next week & I'll sort something out.

[T.A.M.]

when I looked for the film, I believe parts are on youtube, but I think I found the full thing here...

http://www.guba.com/watch/2000877651

TAM:)

[ref]

I've no file version of that, sorry. I can make one, but not for a few days as I'm busy with real-life work. I'd say check for torrents now, then if you can't find out, let me know next week & I'll sort something out.

Ok, great. Thanks.

[ref]

when I looked for the film, I believe parts are on youtube, but I think I found the full thing here...

http://www.guba.com/watch/2000877651

TAM:)

Thanks TAM. Excellent.

[ref]

Here is the full Discovery Channel documentary "The Flight That Fought Back"

Part 1: http://www.guba.com/watch/2000877651

Part 2: http://www.guba.com/watch/2000872308

It's recommendable. It has many actual recordings in it, including 3 from Jiad Jarrah, 1 from Ceecee Lyles and some Air Traffic Control tapes. It also has interviews with numerous relatives, who actually talked to the people on board. It has eyewitnesses of Flight 93 who saw it flying and crashing. And an interview with Ziad Jarrah's flight instructor, as well as Jarrah's Martial Arts trainer. Very informative stuff. I don't know how anyone can claim there was no plane.

[T.A.M.]

I agree it is excellent, although I have only watched the first half...highly recommended.

TAM:)

[robinson]

so when posts go to AAH, do they automatically close the thread, or just in this case?

TAM:)

All threads in Hell are closed.

[uk_dave]

uk_dave: regarding your assessment of Apollo20, the portion "Does the speculator do so because the constant warbling of the 'truthers' is just crying out for such a smackdown? Or does the speculator decide that maybe the calcs will prove that it had to be CONTROLLED DEMOLITION..." somewhat suggests that you approve of the former motivation for undertaking the analysis in question.


To be honest, I'm not sure I can see the point of the analysis in the first place.

For one, the model has to be simplistic or else it requires a much more powerful sandpit within which to play.

So a simple model of the wtc tower collapse is constructed mathematically to see if explosives were needed to make it happen.

Unsurprisingly (to me) it is discovered that they were not needed. But then the model itself is pounced upon by 'truthers' who disagree with the parameters used.

The point is, the impact damage and fires which the wtc towers suffered resulted in a massively chaotic collapse scenario. To me a simplified model does nothing to deny or confirm reality.

NIST probably felt the same since they didn't attempt to model the actual collapse. And neither did the recent simulation from perdue (sp?).

So, yes I do question the motives behind the simple model analysis of the wtc tower collapse, regardless of the actual outcome.

Dr Greening has shown on this forum with his recent posts that he's not averse to conducting his own mathematical analysis of major events. Does one do this unless one is suspicious of the results presented in the official account? Or perhaps no results are presented in an official account (because no one thought anyone would be that interested?) and yet Dr Greening applies himself to making that analysis. And the results, in the case of Apollo 11, allow him to insinuate some kind of cover-up in the official account, even though his figures are then disputed on these pages.

Should I not wonder as to his motivation with regard to 9/11?

[uk_dave]

Further to the above, if someone living in a two storey house with a pitched roof decided in a moment of insanity to remove the first floor (second floor to the colonials here) and the ceiling joists (or bottom chord of the roof trusses) and then the building collapsed, I wouldn't be needing calculations to tell me why.

[OneRedEye]

Thanks for elaborating, uk_dave. That was a silly little nitpick that I should have let go rather than break silence after months of passive observation. Too late!

I certainly agree that the scenario is massively chaotic. The degree of applicability, accuracy, and usefulness a simplified model or analysis affords depends greatly on the context (as you well know - no offense!). Broadly speaking, energy considerations seem to me most likely to be fruitful in a grossly simplified analysis of this scenario, if anything. Quite a number of people here and at physorg apparently agree thus Greening's earlier work was accepted by many as a useful exercise leading to a meaningful result.

As you say, "it is discovered that they [explosives] were not needed" and this result has been used at this board and elsewhere to refute claims that insufficient energy sources were available to produce collapse. Though, if I understand you correctly, unnecessarily so. Icing on the cake, and that's fine as it goes.

Yes, I was there when R. Mackey showed up to slap down Apollo20 with the Greening paper. It was a golden moment in countless hours spent in front of this box reading the same old back and forth over and over. Of course, that pales in comparison to the adrenochrome...

Personally, I think you should question the motivations of Dr. Greening and anyone else you care to. I do. Moreover, I do think that what you wrote in that post was, all in all, pretty interesting. Probably wouldn't think so if I were Apollo20, but I'm not so too bad. It may even be accurate, but I have no opinion on that.

It WAS, without a doubt, entertaining. I mean I really am sorry to have injected myself into this business because you folks were my surrogate TV (or at least channel JREF). Has anyone seen that Family Guy episode where Peter Griffin is watching the live report of the cops kicking down his door and wrestling him to the ground? yeah, like that.

Now I've gone and perturbed the system over some nonsense! But I won't self-aggrandize; even though this board is a chaotic system and my posts may be the beat of the butterfly wings, my simplified analysis shows that if I shut up for more than an hour, everyone will forget I exist. Whoa, it already happened! Should I post?

PS -- the use of 'JERF' by CC was also a great running gag. I don't usually tune in to JREF for laughs but high drama always has a little comedy thrown in as well.

PPS -- CC, say hi to Harry Eagar for me.

PPPS -- not in any way meaning to trivialize what you do. To the contrary, I've learned a lot of things on this board. Thank you all.

[Civilized Worm]

I think because, at least for most religions, they are benign, if not benificent organizations, which try to do good for people. Of course there are exceptions. However, I see nothing good from the CTists. The reason I leave most CTs alone (Moon Hoax, Bigfoot, etc...) is because they are harmless. the 9/11 truth CTs are far from harmless. That is the reason I, me personally, do not attack religions, but do so with the 9/11 CTs.

TAM:)


Really? You think religion is more harmless than conspiracy theories? How many people have been killed in the name of conspiracy theories? I suppose you could make a case that the nazi's persecution of the jews was partly based on conspiracy theorys, but I'd wager you could make a stronger case for how it was based on the religious idea that jews are "christ killers".