Open Thread - Speak Your Mind

[ref]

Have we ever had an open thread here? Speak what's on your mind (conspiracy related maybe in this subforum).

I can start.

I just came from France (country of Thierry Meyssan) and I saw NOTHING 9/11 related. Not a single thing. 9/11 truth movement is NOT a big movement. The movement was totally invisible even in the country of the best-selling CT author. I saw thousands of graffiti's and even those spoke nothing about 9/11. I didn't see a single CT book in the bookstores (not that I was even looking for), not a single banner anywhere, nothing.

Truther's think they are big, but they are totally invisible.

I hate truther lies :curse

What else? We've had an appreciation thread for Mark and for Mike. I'd like to appreciate the work of JamesB and Pat. Appreciated :clap:

That's all this time.

PS: Avoiding real discussion is a tell-tale sign of the movements lies (Griffin, Willie, Kevin Ryan etc.)

[Alt+F4]

Kudos to James & Pat. I love SLC, especially since I can curse over there and be mean to people (I post under zippychippy)!

Since this is an open thread, I came across this page that looks like it's a real Yahoo! News story regarding "a new study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth" but on closer inspection it seems to be a press release. How/why does Yahoo! News allow this?

Linky:http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20070621/bs_prweb/prweb534642;_ylt=Aikas6H8n8AyQ121GTdrHxmoOrgF

[ref]

Since this is an open thread, I came across this page that looks like it's a real Yahoo! News story regarding "a new study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth" but on closer inspection it seems to be a press release. How/why does Yahoo! News allow this?

Linky:http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20070621/bs_prweb/prweb534642;_ylt=Aikas6H8n8AyQ121GTdrHxmoOrgF

Wow. Not a good thing. No idea how that could have ended up there, but it's a real shame. Even the smallest visibility for Fetzer and Rob is too much.

[T.A.M.]

Here is something that bothered me recently.

Truthers seem to think that they are entitled to see "all the evidence". For instance, Revolution911 recently stated he wanted to see all the debris from flight 93. I have others scream "what about the 84 tapes", or Bermas ranting about wanting to see the wreckage from the other planes, "like they did with TWA 800"

Where do the godamn truthers get off thinking, as lowly joe publics, they are entitled to see everything from every investigation conducted. Can you imagine if the world really worked that way...

PS. I really like the idea of our own "say anything" thread, as we tend to be a bunch that tends to stick together here...not to discourage floating about the rest of the forum.

TAM:)

[apathoid]

I'd just like to say the I appreciate the hard work of all the debunkers here, but especially Gravy and MikeW as well as the Debunking911 crew and, of course, the SLC guys. When I started this journey well over a year ago, we had very few debunking videos, papers, blogs and websites to offer - it seemed that the vast majority of 9/11 related material on the web was all denier BS and little by the way of debunking material. That has changed. Needless to say, I'm quite pleased at the growth of the rationalist movement.

Like many others, I've begun to fall victim to Chronic Debunking Fatigue Syndrome and I've been lurking more and more lately, only posting sporadically. I used to get extremely irriated by troofer idiocy, which fueled my desire to actively take them on. But, lately I've become immune to the factless, illogical, and often downright offensive posts. My emotions have gone from anger to pity to apathy.
I still find the Truthers a fascinating bunch though, I marvel at how the human mind can become so jaded. I just hope it never happens to me.

Oh and I still have yet to meet a real life Tr00fer....and I know a BUNCH of bomb shelter libertarians and ultra-rightwingnuts. I'll keep looking for one though.....:D

[R.Mackey]

Couple of quick observations...

I'm a scientist and I work with aircraft. Nobody in my circles, not one, has ever expressed the slightest doubt about what happened, or about the "official" explanation. This includes US Gov't employees, contractors, private firms, folks working in the UK, France, and elsewhere. I was at Boeing in Everett, Washington, working with their commercial aircraft division, on the morning of 11 September 2001 -- not a single darn thing about any of the four crashes looked the least bit "impossible" to us, not even at first glance. Doubly so now that I and many others have pored over tens of thousands of pages reconstructing what happened.

I would suggest that the intelligence services of the United States were working at a sub-par level prior to the events of that day, and I think political resistance has stymied many of the reforms that could and should have been implemented. Criticism of the government is warranted, and one could even call that a "cover-up" if one wanted.

Thermite and mini-nukes, remote-control planes and demo charges that survive the largest office fire of all time, that's a bunch of fairy stories and always has been. Anyone with any technical expertise knows this to be true. This is even provable -- ref, your excellent summary (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=86189) of the origins of "Truth Movement" theories demonstrates how rapidly every single idea emerged, and how impervious they all are to new evidence. This certifies that it's all based on speculation, and therefore nonsense. There is no logical argument that they can make. Either they come up with new theories based on actual investigation, or they have nothing.

The vast majority of them, of course, are not particularly logical people. They need help. I have genuine pity for nearly all of them, particularly those who show signs of mental illness. I don't know how to help them.

There are also those (a precious few indeed) within the "Truth Movement" who are completely rational and even polite. Many people here have changed their minds. Also of interest is that I'm unaware of anyone who has switched sides the other way...

I'm on the fence about Teh Stundies. The moderators seem to be grudgingly comfortable with it and it's their call. It's certainly not in good taste. I'm torn because, even though arrogance cannot teach, ridicule can.

Finally, and off-topic, the notion that French wines are the best in the world is the result of a conspiracy. My apologies to anyone from the République Française -- while you have many highlights of cultural achievement, this popular myth is simply an exaggeration. (Let's see if this finally stirs up some competition to Sept. 11th stuff... ;) )

[Alt+F4]

Truthers seem to think that they are entitled to see "all the evidence". For instance, Revolution911 recently stated he wanted to see all the debris from flight 93. I have others scream "what about the 84 tapes", or Bermas ranting about wanting to see the wreckage from the other planes, "like they did with TWA 800"

I totally agree with you TAM. My ex, an RN, was a volunteer at ground zero during the first few days when they were still looking for survivors. She said there were large body parts laying in the street, marked with little numbered orange cones.

It's sick that the truthers want to further invade these people's privacy and dignity to further their own selfish fantasies.

[aggle-rithm]

Where do the godamn truthers get off thinking, as lowly joe publics, they are entitled to see everything from every investigation conducted. Can you imagine if the world really worked that way...



TAM:)


Reminds me of George Carlin's old routine about people slowing down for accidents: "The police are there to help. Ask them to move the bodies closer to you so you can see them!"

[aggle-rithm]

....or Bermas ranting about wanting to see the wreckage from the other planes, "like they did with TWA 800"

TAM:)


That's what gets me. I don't know how many times I've tried to explain to these guys that there's a difference between a plane that disappears from radar, and later flaming wreckage is found in the sea, and a plane that thousands of people witness crashing into a building.

[aggle-rithm]

There are also those (a precious few indeed) within the "Truth Movement" who are completely rational and even polite. Many people here have changed their minds. Also of interest is that I'm unaware of anyone who has switched sides the other way...


Although I haven't switched sides, I've definitely become more critical of how the Bush administration handled the crisis, particularly with the environmental fallout from the attacks. In that respect the troof movement has educated me in some small manner. (Or, more accurately, I have educated myself in response to the troof movement...)

As far as the IMMEDIATE response to that attacks, though, it was so unexpected that I don't think realistically they could be expected to have handled it much better.

[sackett]

A few weeks back, somebody posted some truthoid links on our little in-house mailing list here at work*, along with some of the usual shrill boilerplate about conspiracy! just axing questions! teh NWO! realictice! and so forth.

I was able to answer back instantly and effortlessly with links to Gravy's site. The response was a deafening silence, and it continues. All praise to Gravy, and many thanks.

* Where do I work? In a college of engineering at a big university. Alas.

[ElMondoHummus]

Two completely unrelated thoughts (well, save for the fact they're issues with conspiracy fantasists):

1. This is really just a rant, but: Why do people say there's a "ton of information" regarding 9/11 conspiracy fantasy on the web? Ten thousand sites echoing each others stuff with only 5 or 10 sites containing truly original content is not "tons" of information. It's ounces bounced back and forth in an echo chamber.

Plus, don't folks realize that the Google's rankings are built partially on interlinking? The fact that those sites come up first in searches is strictly an artifact of multiple linkage and referral; it's far from being any sort of validation of the information to begin with.

2. What's the deal with the talk about mini-nukes? (See, I told you they were unrelated). I've found sites that blame the Bali bombing, the embassy bombing in Nigeria, 9/11 (of course)... the hit on Lebanon's Hariri, fer Chrissakes! - on "mini", "micro", "suitcase", "(fill-in-the-blank)", or whatever nukes. I mean, for starters, no one's familiar with the origins of the myths of "suitcase nukes" (which were roughly the dimensions of a refridgerator... hardly a "suitcase"), and those were merely theoretical. Thinking that the natural progression of technology would make them the size of coffee cans (yes, someone said that) is a wonderful compliment for mankind, but utterly gullible and misinformed. How do these folks say these things in all seriousness? I mean, doesn't something like the lack of radiation clue these folks in? I remember seeing a treatise from a fantasists saying that because such a small amount of radioactive material was used, the half life was too short to leave much radioactive fallout (don't ask me to start in on all the fallacies involved in holding that belief...), but that's physics by BS. Half life is the half life regardless of the amount present, and it doesn't change when using smaller amounts... well, anyway, I'm starting in and I shouldn't. Anyway, what the hell's all this about? Why claim nuke use when standard explosives are a perfectly reasonable explanation, and when nuke use doesn't necessarily create more outrage to begin with? Anyone think Hariri supporters would be any more pissed if it were a nuke that took him out? Or any less angry because it wasn't? Dead is dead, and he died in an explosion; whether the boom came from chemical reactions or fission is beside the point. He was assasinated; the outrage comes from the politics, not the method.

Anyway... it's so idiotic to bend over so far backwards to contend mini/micro/suitcase nukes that I'm left speechless by the contortions. Yess, this is basically just a rant too, but still, how to people arrest the analytic parts of their minds to that degree? It must take extremes of effort to willfully blind oneself to reality; why would they go that far? I'm just boggled.

Eh.... there's my contribution to the open thread. Have fun guys.

[Stellafane]

Good thread topic.


...Like many others, I've begun to fall victim to Chronic Debunking Fatigue Syndrome and I've been lurking more and more lately, only posting sporadically. I used to get extremely irriated by troofer idiocy, which fueled my desire to actively take them on. But, lately I've become immune to the factless, illogical, and often downright offensive posts. My emotions have gone from anger to pity to apathy.
I still find the Truthers a fascinating bunch though, I marvel at how the human mind can become so jaded. I just hope it never happens to me.

That's me in a nutshell. I actually went on hiatus for a while in this forum (got those "you haven't posted in a while" prompts and everything), basically because I cared too much and I was having an increasingly difficult time participating without becoming furious. Lately, however, the opposite is true -- I'm having a harder and harder time taking this crap seriously. I just don't see any signs that this stuff is catching on in any significant way. Every time that seem to make a little stride (like "almost" getting on The View) they get smacked down like the loser in Whack-a-mole. But they still offer some facination as an example of one of the forms of extreme behavior the human mind can produce.

Oh, and so long as it's open mike time, I've arrived at a point where I think a truther either has to be stupid, crazy, or both. Sorry if that's not particularly PC, but come on...how exactly can any informed, rational person still think 9/11 was an inside job? There's vastly more evidence that Santa Claus exists.

[Brainster]

Thanks for the message of appreciation for SLC. We do it because we hope to help out those getting pestered by their "Truther" friends, and because 9-11 is too important to be misunderstood as badly as the Deniers have done. And of course the NWO bucks don't hurt, although I'm still looking for someplace to spend all these Ameros.

I ask a lot of people if they have heard of the 9-11 Conspiracy theories and my general impression is that maybe one in ten has, and as it happens I know quite a few 20-somethings, who are certainly in the target demo.

[Reality Believer]

I like the psychological defect angle of the analysis on why troofers think the way they do. It really makes the most sense that there is a clinical problem, not just ignorance at work. Here is an article from "Psychology Today" that gives a quick viewpoint:

http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20050125-000003.html

[Rahne Everson]

I just came from France (country of Thierry Meyssan) and I saw NOTHING 9/11 related. Not a single thing. 9/11 truth movement is NOT a big movement. The movement was totally invisible even in the country of the best-selling CT author. I saw thousands of graffiti's and even those spoke nothing about 9/11. I didn't see a single CT book in the bookstores (not that I was even looking for), not a single banner anywhere, nothing.

Truther's think they are big, but they are totally invisible.

The French are far more concerned with their politics, especially now that Sarkozy is president. They don't have time to peddle with silly American stuff, or they will taunt us a second time. ;)

At any rate, big shoutouts to Gravy, Mike W, Pat and James B, Fact Check, and all the regulars here for their tireless debunking efforts. Especially Gravy, and especially Mike W... and especially James B and Pat, and especially Fact Check, and... oh hell, you guys are just great. If it weren't for you I wouldn't nearly have the amount of sources and material to counteract conspiracy silliness and I'd still be on the fence on 9/11. If I could, I'd make cookies for all of you. You guys deserve it.

[The Demon's Head]

Why are the theorists so willing to preach about their theories in the open while there is a big, bad government lurking in the shadows and preying on its people? Wouldn't the theorists be afraid to speak out against the government?

[Mobyseven]

While it's open mike night, I might as well say my two centicles worth.

Conspiracy theories are what brought me to this forum. Prior to arriving at whatever stage last year it was I arrived, I had no idea that there were really people who believe that the 9/11 attacks were not planned and executed by Islamic extremists, and James Randi was but a flicker in the back of my mind, a name I had heard a few times but couldn't connect to anything.

At the time I joined up here I was moderating another forum, RPGMaker.net, and one of the members there told me about this forum, provided me with a link and effectively said, "Check it out, it's good for a laugh to see what some people will believe!"

Shortly after that, RPGMaker.net shut down for remodelling in preparation for becoming the new host for the Misao Awards (amateur game making awards). I found myself with a lot of spare time on the internet, and despite my efforts to keep contact with the admin at RPGMaker.net I was not notified when the site started up again and I was not asked to come back as a moderator. This doesn't bother me greatly as I don't really have time to stay involved in that community anymore, though it would have been nice of them to keep the articles and reviews that I had written.

One of the first threads I read in this forum was the Realistice thread, and in fact it was that thread that caused me to join up as a member on the forums. "Surely," I told myself, "the flaw in his reasoning is obvious! All he needs is for someone to point it out to him, perhaps explain it in a different way?"

I soon discovered that some people are impervious to logic and reasoning no matter how hard you try. Sure, I had come across people like that before, but never in such numbers and to such a degree! I made (and still make) an effort to educate myself about the 9/11 attacks, an event that had previously had very little signifigance in my life.

This forum changed that. 9/11 now has more of a meaning to me than it did prior, and I now hold high-rise buildings in respectful awe. While I had not previously given any thought to it, it now amazes me that people are able to design buildings so tall that can ever hope to stay standing in the first place! I look like a country hick walking around Melbourne, because I often find myself staring at the skyscrapers with my head craned back as though I have never seen them before.

Of course as anyone will tell you, to much time in this forum is damaging to your faith in humanity. And so I spread out and started posting in other places on the forum for relief whenever CT gets too much. But I still call CT my home base on these forums - we're a tight knit community after all.

As for Teh Stundies - I more than anyone am aware that they tread a fine line here. I obviously support the idea of Teh Stundies, for reasons I have stated previously, and it is for this reason that I try to keep them as far inside the rules as possible. I sometimes worry that people will think I am adding too many rules, but hopefully it hasn't gotten to that stage yet, and hopefully there aren't too many more rules I need to add! I personally feel that it is interesting to watch an award like Teh Stundies evolve over time: The competition itself was the result of an evolutionary process (of sorts) and it continues to evolve in its rules as each month progresses.

I suppose that's my feelings for the moment. I might add more later if I think of anything.

[Apollo20]

I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.

By way of proof that the US government has a long history of abusing its own citizens I would list a few examples:

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, 1932 – 1972
Radiation Exposure from Atomic Weapons Testing, 1945 – 1970
Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1962 –1971
Gulf War Syndrome, 1991
The Jonestown Massacre, Guyana, 1978
The Waco Massacre, 1993

These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases. However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.

[CHF]

Apollo20,

I don't think anyone would disagree that the US government has done horrible things against its own citizens - not to mention millions in other countries.

That's why I believe that a LIHOP scenario isn't out of the question. Is it possible that the government had indications that 911 would happen and saw it as a chance to further their own agenda? Sure it is.

But demolitions, missiles and shoot downs are beyond absurd.

[uk_dave]

Crikey!

Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1962 –1971
Deliberate, or just an unfortunate side affect?

Gulf War Syndrome, 1991
Confirmed to exist? Causes?

The Jonestown Massacre, Guyana, 1978
ermmmm...ahem.... US Govt? Really?

The Waco Massacre, 1993

Law enforcement operation gone wrong? Is every unlawful or regrettable killing by a US law enforcement officer now a govt conspiracy?

These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases.
Of course they are.

However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.
oooooookkkkkkkkkkkk

[Alt+F4]

I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.

By way of proof that the US government has a long history of abusing its own citizens I would list a few examples:

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, 1932 – 1972
Radiation Exposure from Atomic Weapons Testing, 1945 – 1970
Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1962 –1971
Gulf War Syndrome, 1991
The Jonestown Massacre, Guyana, 1978
The Waco Massacre, 1993

These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases. However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.

I agree with most of this except for Jonestown (where the U.S. govt. connection there?) and AIDS. I remember folks telling me that the federal government created AIDS in a lab in order to kill off homosexuals yet they had no explaination as to why lesbians never contracted the virus through sex.

[apathoid]

I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.

Apollo, I don't if you've noticed - but many(most?) of the folks here aren't even USians. Besides, this "debunking" point is one that I've seldom seen employed.


The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, 1932 – 1972
Radiation Exposure from Atomic Weapons Testing, 1945 – 1970
Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1962 –1971
Gulf War Syndrome, 1991
The Jonestown Massacre, Guyana, 1978
The Waco Massacre, 1993

These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases. However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.

Evidence?

I am getting the impression that you really don't like the US government, Apollo.

[R.Mackey]

One might add the Philadelphia MOVE bombing to the list of US Gov't screwups, or consider Japanese-American internment in WWII or wholesale slaughter of Native Americans among that list...

... it happens. Name me a government that's never done anything stupid, wrong, or even evil.

I'm having a real hard time swallowing the idea that AIDS is artificial, however. That will take quite extraordinary evidence.

[twinstead]

I am getting the impression that you really don't like the US government, Apollo.

To me that's always a red flag. People with predisposed opinions are the absolute worst investigators...

[Alareth]

Since this is an open thread, I came across this page that looks like it's a real Yahoo! News story regarding "a new study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth" but on closer inspection it seems to be a press release. How/why does Yahoo! News allow this?

Linky:http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20070621/bs_prweb/prweb534642;_ylt=Aikas6H8n8AyQ121GTdrHxmoOrgF

Wow. Not a good thing. No idea how that could have ended up there, but it's a real shame. Even the smallest visibility for Fetzer and Rob is too much.

This was discussed in a thread here a few weeks ago.

The short version is that for about $80, http://www.prweb.com will post any press release you give them to the major news outlets. Yahoo is one of those outlets.

It was the internet version of a late night infomercial. PFT bought the webspace.

[MaGZ]

Apollo20,

I don't think anyone would disagree that the US government has done horrible things against its own citizens - not to mention millions in other countries.

That's why I believe that a LIHOP scenario isn't out of the question. Is it possible that the government had indications that 911 would happen and saw it as a chance to further their own agenda? Sure it is.

But demolitions, missiles and shoot downs are beyond absurd.

Question:
Would you discount an Israeli version of LIHOP?

[beachnut]

I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.

By way of proof that the US government has a long history of abusing its own citizens I would list a few examples:

The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, 1932 – 1972
Radiation Exposure from Atomic Weapons Testing, 1945 – 1970
Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1962 –1971
Gulf War Syndrome, 1991
The Jonestown Massacre, Guyana, 1978
The Waco Massacre, 1993

These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases. However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.
Proof the government can be as stupid and ignorant and disrespectful as the truth movement! Now all we have to do is find some redeeming fact for the truth movement. But you list has some no fault idiot encounters in it.

Waco? Guyana? Not the governments fault alone, cult idiots need to go to court to win. It seems when two sets of idiots get together like Waco and the ATF, you get total melt down. Guyana is not even close to being a government problem unless you like cults and want to protect the terminally stupid. Gulf War Syndrome? Should I see a doctor?

[Apollo20]

On AIDS I suggest folks should read "STATE ORIGIN- The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS" by B.E. Graves

On Waco and the government use of CS gas on women and children I suggest "THE ASHES OF WACO" by D. J. Reavis

On the Jonestown Massacre, try "THE BLACK HOLE OF GUYANA" by John Judge

These events were not "government screwups" or "police actions gone wrong", like let's say, KENT STATE....

[Stellafane]

...I'm having a real hard time swallowing the idea that AIDS is artificial, however. That will take quite extraordinary evidence.

Gee, why not? After all, imagine the military usefulnes of a weapon that requires your enemy to engage in unprotected sex, that can be easily avoided once you're aware of it, that doesn't kill your enemies right away, but instead leaves them (at least initially) fully functioning physically and mentally, furious about what you've done to them, and feeling like they have absolutely nothing to lose? I can just imagine some Joint Chiefs type saying damn, order me up a batch of that.

Sheesh, does common sense play absolutely no part whatsoever in what CTers are willing to believe?

[beachnut]

I have not found one person off line who believes in 9/11 truth ideas. ZERO! No body. In fact my five minutes on line now will cost me dinner and gifts since I am posting about idiots who believe in 9/11 truth junk. I have to work extra time to do chores so I do not get committed for posting about idiots who can not figure out simple logical things. Yet 9/11 covers topics so broad people can learn much about the world studying just one day, 9/11. Physics, math, flying, ATC, NORAD, military, police, fire, firefighting, structures, materials, chemistry, accident investigation, forensics, the fallibility of the press, the plight of ignorance, political bias, liars, frauds, snake oil salesmen, cult movements, group think, irony, satire, humor, disrespect, scum, lowest form of human life who sell lies to idiots. The list is long.

Not one person I know off line believes in 9/11 truth. Of those who even offer comments they think the 9/11 truth movement is nuts.

[Darth Rotor]

Have we ever had an open thread here? Speak what's on your mind
I was just thinking how much I'd like to have an afternoon, a quiet glade by a waterfall in Tahiti, a magnum of Tattinger, a plate of Brie, grapes, Wasa crackers, and Scarlet Johansen (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/25/89552893_7b9782767f_m.jpg) there to share it all with me, to include her being there without a stitch on, in a playful mood, and fascinated/turned on by me.

(The last consideration is, of course, the least likely.)

To hell with CT's. :cool:

DR

[T.A.M.]

I for one, would readily say that lots of governments are capable of hurting its citizen's to further its gains or agenda. I would also say that without solid proof and evidence one is being slanderous to the very people they have put trust in to lead them.

As for the AIDS thing, hogwash until someone can proof it to me with solid SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. This rumor has been running around for years, and just like most CTs, it will not die.

TAM:)

[R.Mackey]

On AIDS I suggest folks should read "STATE ORIGIN- The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS" by B.E. Graves


Sultan Muhammad (SM): In the early seventies, during the so-called “sickle cell anemia” scare, could the purpose of the blood collection (said to be done to determine if that person had the disease) have been to acquire enough blood from Blacks to use in the study of biological warfare?

Boyd Graves (BG): That’s exactly correct. That program was again a part of the Special Virus Program. The program began officially in 1962. However, the research shows that it began a lot longer ago than that. The collection of blood, the tinkering with the Black genome, has been going on throughout the entire 20th century.

We have a memorandum from February 1948, Foreign Policy Statement No. 21 written by George W. McKenna, where it states emphatically that the United States has to get over the niceties. That the United States had to develop/devise a scheme to deal with the burgeoning population of the Third World.

We further cite a Time magazine article from June 3, 1946, “Better Than The Bomb,” where the May 1946 Appropriation Hearing is discussing a biological agent. We believe that they’re discussing the inducement of visna into the human genome. But we find in the 1971 Progress Report, on page 39, that there is a statement by the United States that visna has not yet been associated with human disease. Today, according to the Journal of American Medical Association (JANA) in a 1987 paper, they conclude that HIV/AIDS evolved from visna.

Source (http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_1597.shtml)

Eugenics and tinkering with genomes for 75+ years, huh. By the way, HIV/AIDS did not evolve from visna (http://www.righto.com/theories/visna_seq.html).

Oh, wait, it gets better -- Enter the Joos!


SM: What is this cure called?

BG: Tetrasil. It has a second name, which is Imusil. The patent number is 5676977.


SM: Who has the patent on this drug?

BG: The patent was issued to Rabbi Dr. Marvin Antelman of Morantech Corporation in Providence, Rhode Island. In my research and contact with Rabbi Dr. Antelman, he told me he had a college relationship with Dr. Gallo, who had stolen something that he and others had been working on. That led me to think that perhaps Dr. Antelman was given the AIDS cure as a payback by Dr. Gallo. There is a connection between the AIDS invention and the AIDS cure patent program.


This is crackpottery of the highest order, falling far below the Gravy Line.

Stop crying "Wolf," Dr. Greening.

[petra10]

It was not until I joined this forum that I relised how big some Americians were about the 9/11 conspiracy theories.Here in Britain is just not mentioned in the main media.So I lurked about some of the threads to see just what it was all about,to my amazment people are really serious about it.Now I just avoid these threads as some people have done a great job de-bunking the daft theories and the CTers just keep going on about the same old rubbish.Oh I dont have a clue what SLC is.

[Stellafane]

On AIDS I suggest folks should read "STATE ORIGIN- The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS" by B.E. Graves

On Waco and the government use of CS gas on women and children I suggest "THE ASHES OF WACO" by D. J. Reavis

On the Jonestown Massacre, try "THE BLACK HOLE OF GUYANA" by John Judge

These events were not "government screwups" or "police actions gone wrong", like let's say, KENT STATE....

But why do you believe sources like Graves and Judge, when there are many, many more that contradict what they are saying, and offer detailed and verifiable evidence to back it up? Why do you consistently seek answers in the fringe, among those who base their conclusions primarily on supposition and innuendo, promoting theories that not only have no factual basis, but don't even make any sense?

It seems that you have carefully and deliberately chosen materials consistent with a pre-existing world view, rather than to serve an open-minded quest for the truth. And this, in a nutshell, is what I believe is the main problem with CT theorists, and why they will never, ever be taken seriously by anyone but themselves. Sorry to be so harsh, but I believe this is a very valid question, one that you frankly should be asking yourself.

[R.Mackey]

Further entertainment for those of you enjoying the latest AIDS hoax: US Patent No. 5,676,977 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5676977.PN.&OS=PN/5676977&RS=PN/5676977)

As a chemist, Dr. Greening, do you have any problems with the claims listed here?

Now the US Patent Office -- there's a known (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0506.roth.html) example of a "government screwup." :D

[uk_dave]

I can't help wondering if perhaps Dr Greening was actually disappointed when he discovered that the collapse of the towers hadn't needed any help from explosives.

Not that he would have entered into his analysis with any preconceived notions, of course.

[T.A.M.]

I know Dr. Greening has had his issues with engineers, due to the dishonesty SOME of them displayed, but I think he has got to be yanking our chain on the AIDS thing...

TAM:)

[3bodyproblem]

Well I got into this crazy topic a few months ago now. I had heard on a local radio station in Detroit that there was some issues with the events of 9/11. It sounded interesting so I decided to do some of my own investigating, which naturally lead me to YouTube. Right off the bat you are inundated with the CT agenda. I was entertained to say the least.

No planes hit the WTC? Really? Click! ...WTF! Ok, that's just a fringe group, got to be expected.

What no video of flight 77? AH HA! Click!...WTF! That's all the video evidence they have? Well that's suspicious, it's the Pentagon after all.

Google. Click. WTF! Almost 100 people saw or heard the plane hit. Why would someone choose to disregard this? Mass hysteria, lol, I don't think so. I beginning to feel used...

Google. Click. Logic. Ahh, back side of a building, object moving at 500 MPH, surveilence cameras, low refresh rates, looking down for people not planes. Now it makes sense. Oh well, there's still something fishy going on here, I mean it is the US government after all...

Flight 93 shot down, no one on plane? Oh yah, here we go. Click! WTF! No fighters even in the area? FDR confirms crash? People made phone calls to loved ones. Coroner confirms events! Debris field not really 4 miles, impact area suggests plane hit ground travelling full speed. Darn, I am being used, but there are so many professional looking videos, people dedicated to getting the word out, there must still be something to this...

YouTube. LC vs. PM. Click! WTF! A couple of angry, smartass, smug, college kids lying to make a buck. Read posts, "DA and JB are heroes, they totally owned the PM guys!" Are we watching the same video? "Watch LC and WAKE UP people" Ok...

YouTube. LC. Click. WTF! Lie,?,omission, misleading,lie, doens't make sense, omission, lie, lie, lie. Hmmm...better balance this out.

YouTube. SLC. Click. Yep, ahhhh, makes sense, I knew it, see I was right, yah that's what I thought, yep, oh really? This makes much more sense, gives the full context and follows from logic exactly as I thought it would. And this guy is Canadian?! He must be like me, logical and unbiased. He has way too much time on his hands though, he must be from Toronto (what does one do when it's -35C in January?)

YouTube. 9/11 Mysteries. Click. NO! Screw 9/11 Mysteries. Click. YES!

YouTube. Crazy place, people can say anything without reprocussion., and do. Blog my opinion. Attack! Blog. Attack! Blog. Attack! Attack back! Repeat to the point of exhaustion. Creepy feeling most are not dealing from a full deck.

Google. Paranoia. Click! Uh Oh. Shocking similarities. Creepy feeling changes to certainty.

Google. Woods, Fetzer, Jones. Click! ROFLMAO. Back-Click! Curiousity. Click! ROFLMAO! Back-Click! Make mental note: Note-these people are mental.

YouTube. Blog. Filter and sift. Some sanity observed. Some credible and interesting ideas. Discuss collapse. Apply building and physics experience. NIST falls short. Suspicion. Greening? Wierzbicki? Calculations. No collapse! Re-calculate. Collapse! Relief, suspicions removed.

Since this is turning into an appreciation thread I would like to thank Marky X, for providing easy access to a logical refutation of the CT. By compiling all of this information into a video on YouTube you saved me (and others I'm sure) from having to wade through the dis-info prevalent on the net.
And Dr. Greening for picking up where NIST left off. I would probably be still mired in Woo had I not seen your work.

[gumboot]

I'm quite grateful of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.

Coming to this forum, and researching 9/11, has opened my eyes to a wealth of knowledge that I was previously unaware of. I could not even begin to cover the number of topics that I have learned about.

-Gumboot

[Redtail]

I agree with most of this except for Jonestown (where the U.S. govt. connection there?) and AIDS. I remember folks telling me that the federal government created AIDS in a lab in order to kill off homosexuals yet they had no explaination as to why lesbians never contracted the virus through sex.

Because to many of those who have an irrational fear of homosexuality in men lesbians, who are under 30 and hot of course, are not only ok but should be encouraged.:rolleyes:
It's kinda funny, when ever homosexuality comes up in one of my classes the "uber hetero" guys who are deeply offended by any male homosexuality and declare it worng and against nature will stand and cheer at this.

[3bodyproblem]

Finally, and off-topic, the notion that French wines are the best in the world is the result of a conspiracy. My apologies to anyone from the République Française -- while you have many highlights of cultural achievement, this popular myth is simply an exaggeration. (Let's see if this finally stirs up some competition to Sept. 11th stuff... ;) )

Wrong. They are just over priced. On the average, the French wines are of a higher complexity, possibly because of said cultural achievments, perhaps merely because of self imposed standards. Don't get me wrong, I have had outstanding wines from all of the major wine producing countries France, Italy, Germany, Chile, Australia, USA, Canada, Spain and Argentina come to mind. But on the whole the French wines have had more of an impact on me. Unfortunately at times this impact from French wines has been in the pocket book. I think they warrant an average $3 per bottle higher price than similar wines from different countries, and not the $7-10 I seem to encounter.

It also depends on your tastes. If I'm looking for a nice peppery Shiraz to pair with a fat Delmonico (rib eye), I'll go Australian any day. A cab? I see bang for my buck in Chile. Cab Franc? I'm going Okanagan or US (yes, even in a Cab Franc, unless I have an extra $20 to blow then I will for a fat Bordeaux). As a snob, I hardly venture into whites, but if I wanted a nice Gewurz I'll go German. Dry Reisling? Back to the Okanagan. Ice wine? Niagra.

But defining your own personal preferences takes time and money as well. As an enthusiast, you can do this and find excellent wines from around the world that put the French to shame. However, if you are unfamiliar with what to choose, and you have a few extra dollars, you go French. You are more likely to get a good wine, and less likely to get a bad one. (unless it's a white wine, I have no idea there, I've never had anything white from France except Piat d'Or, on accident, er a bet..dare? jk, it's OK for $8 a bottle)

And finally, independant taste tests confirm repeatedly, France then Italy then Australia round out the top three wine producing countries. While there may be some romaticism associated with the French wines, I hope you aren't suggesting that the all tasters have been "got to"?!? Show me some proof or CORK IT!

[R.Mackey]

Wrong. They are just over priced. On the average, the French wines are of a higher complexity, possibly because of said cultural achievments, perhaps merely because of self imposed standards.

Really? They're higher in complexity?

But defining your own personal preferences takes time and money as well. As an enthusiast, you can do this and find excellent wines from around the world that put the French to shame. However, if you are unfamiliar with what to choose, and you have a few extra dollars, you go French. You are more likely to get a good wine, and less likely to get a bad one. (unless it's a white wine, I have no idea there, I've never had anything white from France except Piat d'Or, on accident, er a bet..dare? jk, it's OK for $8 a bottle)

Hmm, you must be a real expert!

And finally, independant taste tests confirm repeatedly, France then Italy then Australia round out the top three wine producing countries. While there may be some romaticism associated with the French wines, I hope you aren't suggesting that the all tasters have been "got to"?!? Show me some proof or CORK IT!

Really?

[/Killtown] OK, I can't keep this up. I'm just not enough of a jerk. But think about this: How on earth would you normalize such a taste test? Even assuming you were doing it fairly and comparing equal varietals and averaging over multiple vintages, you still won't find this kind of consensus.

The 100-Point Scale used in the Wine Spectator and other places is a scam. I'm not the first to notice this. (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/01/05/150353.php) Any taste test based on this is worthless. It would be a relatively simple matter to propose this as a conspiracy.

For what it's worth, my own personal favorite of favorites is Italian, and relatively inexpensive at about $30 to the bottle. But taste is totally subjective. There are no fair comparisons.

Out of the French wines I've had, the one that strikes me as most obviously best-in-class is, believe it or not, a port. It's from Bordeaux, but it's still a port.

Thanks for playing along. :D

[uk_dave]

Chilean red was pretty cool a couple of years ago, but it seems to have become rather average of late.

Italian is certainly good table wine, when served in Rome with a plate full of pasta and the sound of cars crashing in Trastevere. ahhhhhh memories.

[Mr.Herbert]

I am still a Boones Farm kinda guy! :D The Olé Strawberry Hill is a sort of "comfort food" for me. :sour:

I have pretty much been a lurker in here for a couple years just reading and educating myself. Gravy's works have had the most impact on me and my debunking of the CT'ers. His papers state the obvious and in terms that are more easily understood by those that typically haven't learned how to pick up their pants past their thighs.

I still have a problem with all the math, engineering, and physics of the collapses. I have read them all quite honestly... :confused: :confused:

I am pretty much hated on all CT sites as a paid shill and an agent of the NWO. I believe I hold the record for the two quickest bannings at the LCF. (at least tied)
1. One post.. refreshed page... Banned!
2. Logged on As "Barry Jennings", ask a time line question... POOF!

Since I don't have a firm grasp on Engineering, Physics, and Math, I have more patience with the twoofers when they start spewing that crap.

All the other crap is what annoys me. IE: Silverstein quote, No skyscrapers have ever..blah blah... etc.

Anyway.. .thats my rant for now...along with a huge thanks to all of you in here that have done all the research and shared your expertise with us. It makes the debunking that much easier !!

[Brainster]

Oh I dont have a clue what SLC is.

SLC=Screw Loose Change, a blog dedicated to debunking 9-11 CTs in general and Loose Change in particular, which JamesB and I run.

[Alareth]

SLC=Screw Loose Change, a blog dedicated to debunking 9-11 CTs in general and Loose Change in particular, which JamesB and I run.

Lovely place. No Rule 8 when you've reached your limits of tolerance ;)

[Apollo20]

Mackey:

"Emerging Viruses" by L. Horowitz is also an interesting discussion of the origins of AIDS.

But I would ask you to also consider other political, non-conspiratorial, tracts that raise serious questions about 9/11:

THE TERRORISM TRAP by Michael Parenti

DERAILING DEMOCRACY by David McGowan

THE WAR ON FREEDOM by Nafeez Ahmed

AMERICA'S "WAR ON TERRORISM" by Michel Choussudovsky

THE WAR AGAINST AMERICA by Laurie Mylroie

DOLLARS FOR TERROR by Richard Labeviere

KILLING HOPE by William Blume

TRIPLE CROSS by Peter Lance

Then tell me again to "stop crying wolf"!

[3bodyproblem]

Really? They're higher in complexity?

Hmm, you must be a real expert!

Really?

[/Killtown] OK, I can't keep this up. I'm just not enough of a jerk. But think about this: How on earth would you normalize such a taste test? Even assuming you were doing it fairly and comparing equal varietals and averaging over multiple vintages, you still won't find this kind of consensus.

The 100-Point Scale used in the Wine Spectator and other places is a scam. I'm not the first to notice this. (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/01/05/150353.php) Any taste test based on this is worthless. It would be a relatively simple matter to propose this as a conspiracy.

For what it's worth, my own personal favorite of favorites is Italian, and relatively inexpensive at about $30 to the bottle. But taste is totally subjective. There are no fair comparisons.

Out of the French wines I've had, the one that strikes me as most obviously best-in-class is, believe it or not, a port. It's from Bordeaux, but it's still a port.

Thanks for playing along. :D

Yes, they are more complex, unless you consider that glycol based swill coming out of California "refined" ;)

Expert? Yes. I'm Italian and recently (2 months ago, go figure) I discovered I am related to one of the largest vintners in California. I have my own collection of Riedel which I travel with, in a case, just in case.
hehe

Totally subjective, and yet there are distinctions in flavour, bouquet, nose etc. that make you go "MMMMM". I know it when I taste it and I know when there are more "MMMMM"'s at the table the better the wine. If you sincerely wish to experience wine, you have to taste a lot, end of story. Develop a palate. DON'T READ HOW GOOD IT TASTES, TASTE HOW GOOD IT TASTES. If it tastes good, then it is a good wine, if it tastes bad, it is a bad wine. I still recall my first experience with Ice wine. I spit it out. It was horrible. In my opinion, the best Ice wines just don't taste as bad as the worst ice wines.

The conspiracy is letting the self described experts tell you what to think. I learned to be a shepard and not a sheep, a good practise in many areas of life. And give the French a break, It's not their fault!

I'm personally not a big fan of port, although I make an excellent toro sashimi topped with a slice of blood orange wrapped in pickled ginger and port wine reduction, served in a spoon. I like to pair it with a Nouveau. Yes, that's two red wines with fish! Just try and stop me...

[3bodyproblem]

Mackey:

"Emerging Viruses" by L. Horowitz is also an interesting discussion of the origins of AIDS.

But I would ask you to also consider other political, non-conspiratorial, tracts that raise serious questions about 9/11:

THE TERRORISM TRAP by Michael Parenti

DERAILING DEMOCRACY by David McGowan

THE WAR ON FREEDOM by Nafeez Ahmed

AMERICA'S "WAR ON TERRORISM" by Michel Choussudovsky

THE WAR AGAINST AMERICA by Laurie Mylroie

DOLLARS FOR TERROR by Richard Labeviere

KILLING HOPE by William Blume

TRIPLE CROSS by Peter Lance

Then tell me again to "stop crying wolf"!


The Secret History of The American Empire, by John Perkins would round out that booklist nicely as well.

[The Demon's Head]

Apollo20,

I don't think anyone would disagree that the US government has done horrible things against its own citizens - not to mention millions in other countries.

That's why I believe that a LIHOP scenario isn't out of the question. Is it possible that the government had indications that 911 would happen and saw it as a chance to further their own agenda? Sure it is.

But demolitions, missiles and shoot downs are beyond absurd.

This is sort of the reason why LIHOP is utter BS as is MIHOP. So, if the US government knew in advance that 9/11 was going to happen and knew exactly how it would happen and planned to use controlled demolition, ect. then doesn't that cancel out LIHOP and verges into MIHOP territory? The theorists can't have it both ways.

[Gravy]

Thanks for the message of appreciation for SLC. We do it because we hope to help out those getting pestered by their "Truther" friends, and because 9-11 is too important to be misunderstood as badly as the Deniers have done. And of course the NWO bucks don't hurt, although I'm still looking for someplace to spend all these Ameros.

I ask a lot of people if they have heard of the 9-11 Conspiracy theories and my general impression is that maybe one in ten has, and as it happens I know quite a few 20-somethings, who are certainly in the target demo.You guys amaze me. To constantly compile information and write incisively about the deniers, while also reading and reporting on legitimate research, and to do that every day, makes my head spin!

[BeAChooser]

However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.

You really believe that? And if you do, do you think they did it deliberately?

[CaptainHair]

Speak our mind, huh?

Okay...

54 40' or Fight!!!

AAAAAHHHHHH...much better. :D

The Captain.

[LashL]

<snip>I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.

I do not recall ever seeing anyone here "insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people", nor do I recall seeing anyone here using "this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11".

If you are insinuating that such positions have been posited here, please provide evidence of same. If, instead, you are referring to such positions being posited elsewhere, you should make that clear, and also provide evidence of same.

[R.Mackey]

Yes, they are more complex, unless you consider that glycol based swill coming out of California "refined" ;)
Hey, hey, now. I'm certainly not defending California wines. Most of them are pretty bad, though I know of a few that will stand tall.


Totally subjective, and yet there are distinctions in flavour, bouquet, nose etc. that make you go "MMMMM". I know it when I taste it and I know when there are more "MMMMM"'s at the table the better the wine. If you sincerely wish to experience wine, you have to taste a lot, end of story. Develop a palate. DON'T READ HOW GOOD IT TASTES, TASTE HOW GOOD IT TASTES. If it tastes good, then it is a good wine, if it tastes bad, it is a bad wine.

Agree completely. Still, I'm appalled at how many people go by the 100-point ratings, or worse, by the pricetag. Books, their covers, and judgment should never be allowed to mix.


The conspiracy is letting the self described experts tell you what to think. I learned to be a shepard and not a sheep, a good practise in many areas of life. And give the French a break, It's not their fault!

I just picked the French because everyone seems to think they're the best at wine. They're rarely bad, and for some varietals I'd agree that they are the best, but it's just not that simple.

I've been to France. I like France.

I'll tell you what, though, some experts know their stuff...

Example, I have a top-notch wine bar within walking distance, and I know the proprietor well. We are relative amateurs, while he is a seasoned professional. Last night he, my wife and I conducted an informal, double-blind tasting of eight reds, then compared notes. Only one of the eight did my comments land out of family, and when asked to guess which of the eight was from California, we both nailed it. He and I also took a stab at 100 point ratings and except for the one "flier," we were within about 3 points every time...

Still, don't you think the rating system would be a swell conspiracy? Think about it:

The Project for a New Viticultural Century releasing secret papers about how we need a "New Boston Tea Party" to kick off new bottling technologies (screwcaps? Urk!)
The CIA brokering deals between Mondavi and the Rothschilds (Mouton Rothschild, that is)
Peak Bordeaux
prices collapsing at free-fall speeds...
These days, there's even Charles Shaw, which you can buy for no more than a little Loose Change. :duck:

[Gravy]

Jonestown? Yes, it was horrible of a U.S. Congressman and staff to go there on a fact-finding mission after learning the people were not free to leave the cult, then being told by members in Guyana that this was true, then being followed to the airport by gunmen who murdered them. While that was happening, most of the rest of the cult members murdered their children and killed themselves.

WTF?

AIDS was created in a lab in the 60's and 70's? Well, HIV, which mutates quickly, was found in human blood from the Congo from 1959, and is believed to have spread in humans in the 1940's and 50's. So there's that.

[R.Mackey]

Mackey:

"Emerging Viruses" by L. Horowitz is also an interesting discussion of the origins of AIDS.

But I would ask you to also consider other political, non-conspiratorial, tracts that raise serious questions about 9/11:

[...]

Then tell me again to "stop crying wolf"!
I'll stop telling you not to cry "Wolf" when you vet your reading list. It took me all of five minutes after first hearing about Boyd Graves to determine that he's completely nuts and thoroughly refuted by actual research. It's precisely such poorly considered statements that makes others doubt whether any of these other opinions of yours are worth considering, even though AIDS hoaxes and Sept. 11th have absolutely nothing in common.

Moving on... Several of those names I'm already familiar with, e.g. Choussudovsky. Others I'm not. It would help, as I've mentioned before, if you mentioned what you find intersting about them, rather than simply dropping names.

P.S.: Len Horowitz is equally nuts (http://www.steamventinn.com/3e/). AIDS is not man-made. That's no wolf, it's Bigfoot!

[bje]

Here is something that bothered me recently.

Truthers seem to think that they are entitled to see "all the evidence". For instance, Revolution911 recently stated he wanted to see all the debris from flight 93. I have others scream "what about the 84 tapes", or Bermas ranting about wanting to see the wreckage from the other planes, "like they did with TWA 800"

Where do the godamn truthers get off thinking, as lowly joe publics, they are entitled to see everything from every investigation conducted. Can you imagine if the world really worked that way...
TAM:)


What it really reveals is the lack of any evidentiary standard by truthers.

My favorite is "No 757 hit the Pentagon because there is no video showing a 757, or because the government confiscated all the videos."

As if none of the other evidence of a 757 hitting the Pentagon is relevant in any way whatsoever...

[T.A.M.]

actually, in the purest sense, the word AIDS is man made, a man made abbreviation to represent "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome". this longer name, in fact, is also man made, a man made list of signs and symptoms collectively reflecting the medical condition associated with the decline in Immune Response caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, or HIV. HIV, however, is not man made, nor are the symptoms and/or effects it has on the body that lead one to have AIDS.

TAM:)

[R.Mackey]

Point taken, O master of pedantry. ;) And technically it isn't Bigfoot, it's Chewbacca... but that doesn't make sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense)!

[PhantomWolf]

However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.

I wouldn't, mainly because it's a load of rubbish. AIDs cases can be traced back beyond 1962, in fact studies on blood serum (Zhu, Tuofu, Bette Korber & Andre J Nahinias. "An African HIV-1 Sequence from 1959 and Implications for the Origin of the Epidemic" Nature, 1998: 391: p. 594-597) have pointed towards the introduction of HIV into Humans as a mutated form of SIV as far back as 1940. Further work by Dr. Anne-Mieke Vandamme in Belgium (Anne-Mieke Vandamme et al. "Tracing the origin and history of the HIV-2 epidemic" PNAS, Vol. 100, No. 11, 27 May 2003) also places the initial human infects of HIV in the early 1940s.

Add to that Dr Bette Corbor's research which placed the first human case of HIV in the 1930's ± 15 years and that further study of the two strains of HIV (type I and II) and their mutual mutation rates from each other have also placed their separation from SIV in the 1920-30's, the evidence firmly points at HIV being introduced to humans around the time of WWII as a mutation from SIV. The speculation is that it was introduced via a hunting wound, and then spread from there.

Regardless of the actual source, it cannot have been created in 1962 because the first proven case occured 3 years eariler in 1959 (other cases even eariler have been suspected, but without tissue or blood serum to test, these speculations based on AIDS-like symptoms, can not be confirmed.)

[PhantomWolf]

Point taken, O master of pedantry. ;) And technically it isn't Bigfoot, it's Chewbacca... but that doesn't make sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense)!

No being really pedantic is pointing out that Chewbacca does not live on Endor. ;)

[3bodyproblem]

It's all so clear to me now.

A shortage of cork? LOLZ, WAKE UP people, it grows on trees!

[Rahne Everson]

Jonestown? Yes, it was horrible of a U.S. Congressman and staff to go there on a fact-finding mission after learning the people were not free to leave the cult, then being told by members in Guyana that this was true, then being followed to the airport by gunmen who murdered them. While that was happening, most of the rest of the cult members murdered their children and killed themselves.

WTF?

AIDS was created in a lab in the 60's and 70's? Well, HIV, which mutates quickly, was found in human blood from the Congo from 1959, and is believed to have spread in humans in the 1940's and 50's. So there's that.

The Origin of AIDS
(http://www.avert.org/origins.htm)
Three of the earliest known instances of HIV infection are as follows:

A plasma sample taken in 1959 from an adult male living in what is now the Democratic Republic of Congo.An African HIV-1 sequence from 1959 and implications for the origin of the epidemic (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v391/n6667/abs/391594a0.html)

Here we report the amplification and characterization of viral sequences from a 1959 African plasma sample that was previously found to be HIV-1 seropositive. Multiple phylogenetic analyses not only authenticate this case as the oldest known HIV-1 infection, but also place its viral sequence near the ancestral node of subtypes B and D in the major group, indicating that these HIV-1 subtypes, and perhaps all major-group viruses, may have evolved from a single introduction into the African population not long before 1959.
HIV found in tissue samples from an American teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969.BOY'S 1969 DEATH SUGGESTS AIDS INVADED U.S. SEVERAL TIMES (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DEFD6173AF93BA15753C1A9619482 60&sec=&pagewanted=all)

New evidence that a St. Louis teen-ager died of AIDS in 1969 suggests that the AIDS virus may have been introduced into the United States several times before touching off the current epidemic, according to experts in disease transmission.


Until now, many experts have assumed that the virus that causes acquired immune deficiency syndrome first appeared in the country sometime in the mid-1970's. Evidence indicates to many experts that the disease originated before then in Africa, although this has not been proved.


The patient, identified only as Robert R., died in 1969 of an illness that baffled his doctors at Washington University in St. Louis. They published a paper in 1984 suggesting that, with hindsight, his symptoms resembled those of AIDS. About two months ago, molecular biologists at Tulane University in New Orleans examined stored specimens of Robert R.'s tissues for signs of the AIDS virus and found that the 15-year-old was apparently infected with it.


''Our diagnostic tests confirmed the presence of the AIDS virus,'' said Dr. Robert Garry of Tulane. ''We're pretty confident about this case now.''


HIV found in tissue samples from a Norwegian sailor who died around 1976.The Norwegian sailor died of AIDS in 1976, at the age of 29, as did his wife and youngest daughter, born in 1967. Since the debunking of the case of the sailor from Manchester who died in 1959 with symptoms of immunosuppression (but not, it would appear, HIV infection) (but please note that all of these articles were published before 1998 when the report I cited earlier came out, see more below) the members of this Norwegian family now represent the earliest confirmed cases of AIDS. The first symptoms appeared in 1966 in the sailor, in 1967 in his wife, and in 1969 in their daughter.

The great majority of group O isolates come from people originating from west central Africa, and in particular Cameroon and Gabon. The central and coastal provinces of Cameroon (containing, respectively, the capital, Yaoundé, and the main port and commercial centre, Douala), have the highest current prevalence of group O, which causes just over 5% of all HIV infections in these two regions.

The Norwegian sailor's maritime history is interesting. Between 1961 and 1965 he travelled the world's oceans, calling at ports in all six inhabited continents. On his first voyage, which began in August 1961 just after his 15th birthday, he worked as a kitchen hand on a Norwegian vessel that sailed down the west African coastline, calling at ports in Senegal, Guinea, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria, and Cameroon (almost certainly Douala). A gonorrhoeal infection during this trip shows that he was already sexually active. He returned home in May 1962, and apart from a two day stopover in Mombasa, Kenya, in 1964, he never returned to Africa (K F Wefring, personal communications, 1993, 1994, 1997). The sailor was, however, most unlikely to have been infected in Kenya, for only one group O isolate has been identified from that country—and that in 1995-6.No evidence exists to suggest that the sailor was bisexual, which means that sexual contact with a woman in Douala is the most straightforward explanation for his infection. This would suggest that HIV-1 group O has been circulating in that part of Africa for at least 35 years.

From the first link:

A 1998 analysis of the plasma sample from 1959 has suggested that HIV-1 was introduced into humans around the 1940s or the early 1950s; much earlier than previously thought. Other scientists have dated the sample to an even earlier period - perhaps as far back as the end of the 19th century.


In January 2000 however, the results of a new study presented at the 7th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, suggested that the first case of HIV-1 infection occurred around 1930 in West Africa . The study was carried out by Dr Bette Korber of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. The estimate of 1930 (which does have a 15 year margin of error) was based on a complicated computer model of HIV's evolution. If accurate, it means that HIV was in existence before many scenarios (such as the OPV and conspiracy theories) suggest.

Origin of HIV-1 in the chimpanzee Pan troglodytes troglodytes (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v397/n6718/abs/397436a0.html;jsessionid=BBA117E6B9899742381A57C98 B3B2170)

The human AIDS viruses human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and type 2 (HIV-2) represent cross-species (zoonotic) infections. Although the primate reservoir of HIV-2 has been clearly identified as the sooty mangabey (Cercocebus atys), the origin of HIV-1 remains uncertain. Viruses related to HIV-1 have been isolated from the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), but only three such SIVcpz infections have been documented, one of which involved a virus so divergent that it might represent a different primate lentiviral lineage. In a search for the HIV-1 reservoir, we have now sequenced the genome of a new SIVcpz strain (SIVcpzUS) and have determined, by mitochondrial DNA analysis, the subspecies identity of all known SIVcpz-infected chimpanzees. We find that two chimpanzee subspecies in Africa, the central P. t. troglodytes and the eastern P. t. schweinfurthii, harbour SIVcpz and that their respective viruses form two highly divergent (but subspecies-specific) phylogenetic lineages. All HIV-1 strains known to infect man, including HIV-1 groups M, N and O, are closely related to just one of these SIVcpz lineages, that found in P. t. troglodytes. Moreover, we find that HIV-1 group N is a mosaic of SIVcpzUS- and HIV-1-related sequences, indicating an ancestral recombination event in a chimpanzee host. These results, together with the observation that the natural range of P. t. troglodytes coincides uniquely with areas of HIV-1 group M, N and O endemicity, indicate that P. t. troglodytes is the primary reservoir for HIV-1 and has been the source of at least three independent introductions of SIVcpz into the human population.

------------------------

*cough*

[3bodyproblem]

duplicate

[Reality Believer]

I had a thought about the WTC fire temperature argument. I know that the office fires were sufficient to weaken the steel and cause global collapse.

One element of the scenario that I have not heard mentioned is the on-board oxygen of the aircraft. The crew and flight attendants have bottled oxygen and the passengers have chemical oxygen generators that produce oxygen as they burn - chlorate candles - up to 20 minutes per seating position.

Interesting factiod that probably doesn't count for much considering the total volume of the rest of the fire event, but an interesting piece of trivia none the less.

[Rahne Everson]

I was gonna post this in the Enterprise thread, but I thought it would be best suited here.

According to the CTists, is there nothing that's not a false flag operation anymore? Yeah, I know of the main ones, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine, and the Reichstag fire, but the USS Enterprise sinking is false flag? Bay of Pigs, false flag? Gunpowder Plot, false flag? Is there nothing that people actually do to each other in this world? Is everybody doing sh#t to themselves and making is look like other people are doing it? Is the fact that I'm missing a sock from my laundry a false flag? That I can't find my car keys? That my rat died? But it's ALL part of the NWO plot, right? Avacado died for the Zionist agenda.

Good god man.

[Reality Believer]

Forgive me for another stream of consciencioness thought, but do truther's lack a sense of humor? Is it part of the pathology?

I have observed that most of the "real world" people that engage in debunking, also engage in topics of science, comedy, religion, etc... A very diverse topic spectrum.

Truther's seemed to be very focused on their mission. I have seen very few (if any) jokes posted by truther's. Very few attachment's to pop culture references or humorous anecdotes.

I propose that a truther's psychology is not a psychology of the light of heart, but of the heavy heart. A deep, dark, heaviness.

A disclaimer: I am not a psychologist, but I occasionally impersonate a gynecologist.

[Rahne Everson]

Forgive me for another stream of consciencioness thought, but do truther's lack a sense of humor? Is it part of the pathology?

I have observed that most of the "real world" people that engage in debunking, also engage in topics of science, comedy, religion, etc... A very diverse topic spectrum.

Truther's seemed to be very focused on their mission. I have seen very few (if any) jokes posted by truther's. Very few attachment's to pop culture references or humorous anecdotes.

I propose that a truther's psychology is not a psychology of the light of heart, but of the heavy heart. A deep, dark, heaviness.

A disclaimer: I am not a psychologist, but I occasionally impersonate a gynecologist.

I firmly believe in what Lewis Black said, that humor is essential and that people devoid of it go crazy. This goes for truthers as well as everybody else on the loony fringe, evangelics, religious fundementalsts, ecofanatics, the lot of them. You're right, extremist and obessive thinking generally doesn't leave a lot of room for jokes.

And you should join my practice. :)

[Brainster]

Well, if this thread has certainly revealed that Dr Greening is not quite a member of the rationalist community.

What, no CIA started the crack epidemic theories?

[Gravy]

Well, if this thread has certainly revealed that Dr Greening is not quite a member of the rationalist community.

What, no CIA started the crack epidemic theories?Don't even start in on spider eggs in the Bubble Yum.

[~enigma~]

To me that's always a red flag. People with predisposed opinions are the absolute worst investigators...This quote seems quite apt at the moment. Please read this Apollo.

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time. (http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/37028.html)
James Madison (http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/James_Madison/) (1751 - 1836), The Federalist, Paper # 10

[Reality Believer]

And you should join my practice. :)
At your service.. for the right commission!

[Pardalis]

Apollo, I don't if you've noticed - but many(most?) of the folks here aren't even USians. Besides, this "debunking" point is one that I've seldom seen employed.


ahem... It's "American". "USian" is derogatory (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=USian), besides it doesn't make any sense.

[ref]

Yet 9/11 covers topics so broad people can learn much about the world studying just one day, 9/11. Physics, math, flying, ATC, NORAD, military, police, fire, firefighting, structures, materials, chemistry, accident investigation, forensics, the fallibility of the press, the plight of ignorance, political bias, liars, frauds, snake oil salesmen, cult movements, group think, irony, satire, humor, disrespect, scum, lowest form of human life who sell lies to idiots. The list is long.

Exactly. Studying the events of that day has taught me so much about all those topics you mentioned. There's no way I would have studied all this stuff, if I hadn't joined here.

As for this thread, it has been good reading :) I've enjoyed the wine debate, the AIDS discussion, been surprised about Dr. Greenings thoughts and so on.

And CaptainHair, what on earth did your post mean? :D

Ah, I just had a sip of Hennessy. And the sun finally shines here too :cool: Holidays rule.

[Apollo20]

Well, the blind support for U.S. capitalism/imperialism embodied in many of the responses to my original post on this thread is duly noted.

Wow, what a boring place this world would be if it was populated by the JREFers who don't like my reading material!

One world, one mind, one vision of reality, brought to you by the corporate controlled media....

What, you disagree?

Then tell me what is the source of all your INSIGHTS and your DEEP KNOWLEDGE of world history.

Would it be of the CNN/Time Magazine variety?

But I note how selective most of you are in your criticisms of my reading. No comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange, or about the use of CS gas INDOORS at Waco?

So please stay in your comfortable world, with your comfortable house and your comfortable car and keep drinking those diet drinks.... don't you just love that Nutra-Sweet!

Nice, very nice, here in Mr Rogers' Neighborhood.....

[CHF]

Apollo20,

Blum's "Killing Hope" is indeed a great book. So is "Rogue State." But Michel Choussudovsky is a bit...out there.

I think you got no comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange etc. because no one disputes it.

[Mr.Herbert]

Most diet drinks have Splenda in them.

[apathoid]

:soapbox




Feel better ?

BTW, what's wrong with Capitalism?

[Revolutionary91]

Well, the blind support for U.S. capitalism/imperialism embodied in many of the responses to my original post on this thread is duly noted.

Wow, what a boring place this world would be if it was populated by the JREFers who don't like my reading material!

One world, one mind, one vision of reality, brought to you by the corporate controlled media....

What, you disagree?

Then tell me what is the source of all your INSIGHTS and your DEEP KNOWLEDGE of world history.

Would it be of the CNN/Time Magazine variety?

But I note how selective most of you are in your criticisms of my reading. No comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange, or about the use of CS gas INDOORS at Waco?

So please stay in your comfortable world, with your comfortable house and your comfortable car and keep drinking those diet drinks.... don't you just love that Nutra-Sweet!

Nice, very nice, here in Mr Rogers' Neighborhood.....

Great post. I would nominate it but you and I know it would never win.

I think the CS gas in Waco was the least of their problems, they were probably more concerned about the troops firing machine guns at them as they tried to flee, as proven by the FLIR footage.

[Civilized Worm]

I would like to point out that I have trouble with people who insist that the US government would never deliberately set out to do harm to its own people, and use this belief to argue the impossibility of US government complicity in 9/11.


I don't think there's anyone here dumb enough to argue that.


These examples, I believe, are well-documented and proven cases. However, I would also suggest that people should give serious consideration to the US government’s role in creating the AIDS virus via the Special Virus Cancer Program at the National Cancer Institute in the period 1962 to 1978.


And there goes what little respect I still had for you.



Well, the blind support for U.S. capitalism/imperialism embodied in many of the responses to my original post on this thread is duly noted.


Which responses? Certainly not the ones I read.


Wow, what a boring place this world would be if it was populated by the JREFers who don't like my reading material!

One world, one mind, one vision of reality, brought to you by the corporate controlled media....

What, you disagree?

Then tell me what is the source of all your INSIGHTS and your DEEP KNOWLEDGE of world history.

Would it be of the CNN/Time Magazine variety?

But I note how selective most of you are in your criticisms of my reading. No comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange, or about the use of CS gas INDOORS at Waco?

So please stay in your comfortable world, with your comfortable house and your comfortable car and keep drinking those diet drinks.... don't you just love that Nutra-Sweet!

Nice, very nice, here in Mr Rogers' Neighborhood.....


Aaaand the transformation to total twoofer crackpot is complete! (Though you forgot to call us "sheeple" or tell us that Orwell would be proud of us)

[Civilized Worm]

To me that's always a red flag. People with predisposed opinions are the absolute worst investigators...


Hey now! I dislike all governments but I'm sane enough to dislike them for things they've actually done rather than making things up.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

ahem... It's "American". "USian" is derogatory (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=USian), besides it doesn't make any sense.

Pourquoi Pas?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Great post. I would nominate it but you and I know it would never win.

I think the CS gas in Waco was the least of their problems, they were probably more concerned about the troops firing machine guns at them as they tried to flee, as proven by the FLIR footage.

Oh no. Say it isn't so! :boggled:

[T.A.M.]

I believe something is true if...

1. It makes logical sense
2. The majority of my peers believe it to be true.
3. There is no Conflicting factual evidence to it.

So, if you feel AIDS was man made, show me some scientific EVIDENCE, not opinion, that this is the case.

If you feel Nutrasweet causes brain cancer (thats an old CT, must be 8-10 years now or more) than show me a study that proves it. The one study I read, about 3-4 years ago, showed no increase in cancer when they fed rats the equivelent of 70 Litres per day of diet cola for several months. But I am sure you have got a good, independent double blind control trial to show me that shows a statistically significant increase in Cancer rates in people using nutrasweet versus placebo...RIGHT?

TAM:)

[Storm Warning]

I believe that Malcolm Kirkman is having a bit of fun with us. I think he probably does believe some of the stuff he says, but - like most teenagers - other things he says just to get a reaction from us. And boy, do we ever give him a reaction.

Apart from him, I think that some of the other twoofers on here are sincere, if somewhat misguided. And others are just bats**t nuts.

[R.Mackey]

Well, the blind support for U.S. capitalism/imperialism embodied in many of the responses to my original post on this thread is duly noted.

Wow, what a boring place this world would be if it was populated by the JREFers who don't like my reading material!

One world, one mind, one vision of reality, brought to you by the corporate controlled media....

What, you disagree?

I guess what bothers me is the asymmetric way you seem to approach different topics. On one hand, you encounter the Sept. 11th lunatic theories. You don't accept them as fact or even ask others to read them. Instead, you go back and perform an enormous amount of independent research, produce numerous calculations including journal-quality articles, support them with interviews and Internet postings, etc. For this you receive admiration from many people here, myself included.

On the other hand, you encounter something else, like the theory that HIV/AIDS is a US Government plot to keep the black man down. Even the most cursory investigation proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the proponents are barking mad, contradicted by any and all science, and are hocking books and even "happy water" quackery rather than being real activists -- not even of the insane variety. Five minutes is all it would have taken. Furthermore, when others point this out to you, there's no acknowledgement at all. Instead you come up with another set of personal attacks such as the post quoted. For this you receive derision, and justly so.

What's so hard to understand about this?


Then tell me what is the source of all your INSIGHTS and your DEEP KNOWLEDGE of world history.

Would it be of the CNN/Time Magazine variety?

But I note how selective most of you are in your criticisms of my reading. No comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange, or about the use of CS gas INDOORS at Waco?
I grew up and did my undergrad in one of the most activist cities in the United States, Santa Cruz California. My "insights" are rooted in exposure to activists and political thinkers of all stripes, from those who work within the system (such as Lou Gold and Jerry Brown), those on the fringe (e.g. Angela Davis), and those waaaay over the edge (Earth First! and the Sea Shepherds). I don't know who you think you're talking to, but the idea that I'm a complacent, dittohead drone is really quite amusing...

My "deep knowledge," essential to tame the activist spirit, comes from a concept you should be familiar with: Research. Throw me a link or an idea, and I'll follow it up. I'll try to find corroboration or alternate viewpoints. I'll seek third-party opinions on what I find and submit conclusions for review. This forum is a useful place for that. The key, however, is to accept conflicting viewpoints -- such as my criticism of your vaunted "AIDS researchers." Checking one's ego at the door always helps the process.

I actually protested the events at Waco, not to mention several others. Be careful with that broad brush you're swinging.

So please stay in your comfortable world, with your comfortable house and your comfortable car and keep drinking those diet drinks.... don't you just love that Nutra-Sweet!

Nice, very nice, here in Mr Rogers' Neighborhood.....

I can't bear Nutra-Sweet, but I had considerable respect for Mr. Rogers.

The most important thing I've learned from exposure to so many activists was this: Always examine their thinking before following them blindly, because any one of them, no matter how noble her goals, may turn out to believe something kooky. Apparently we've found this to be true for you, as well. It happens. No personal attack implied -- I merely ask you to keep an open mind.

[Horatius]

Great post. I would nominate it but you and I know it would never win.





This is one of the things that really bothers me about CT thinking. It encourages the "everything's a conspiracy, so you might as well not even try" mindset. You "know" it would never win, even though you think it's a "great post". Why is that? Because you believe we nasty JREFers would never vote for a post that contradicts us?



Of course, I don't think it will win, but not because of it's content, but simply because it isn't very well written. But if you're convinced no CT post could ever win, you'll never even try to improve the quality of your work, in hopes of eventually winning.

[3bodyproblem]

I was randomly flipping through the channels last night and to my horror stopped on what I thought was a full run of Loose Change. I missed the beginning, but there was a good 3 minute clip (DA narrating the collapse and "squibs", with the footage in cross hair style magnification) It was playing on the Space channel and the show was "Beyond"?. I missed the segway into LC and was wondering if anyone else saw this recently as well? I'm curious how it was introduced in the show. After the clip it went on about the masons and building the American Empire in a very short time.

[CHF]

Great post. I would nominate it but you and I know it would never win.

Horatius, this type of thinking is indeed common among conspiracy theorists. Why? Because deep down they know they're full of it.

Despite all their rhetoric about truth, justice and having popular support, they don't start up political parties, they don't hire anyone to persue their case in court and they don't submit their work for peer-review.

It's just a fun little fantasy they can endulge in to make themselves feel special and intelligent. If they truely believed their own words they'd be doing something productive with their amazing evidence.

[The Demon's Head]

Right. The truth movement is nothing more than just a fan club. I seriously doubt any one of the truthers would submit their theories as evidence in a court of law.

[Alareth]

I believe something is true if...

1. It makes logical sense
2. The majority of my peers believe it to be true.
3. There is no Conflicting factual evidence to it.

So, if you feel AIDS was man made, show me some scientific EVIDENCE, not opinion, that this is the case.

If you feel Nutrasweet causes brain cancer (thats an old CT, must be 8-10 years now or more) than show me a study that proves it. The one study I read, about 3-4 years ago, showed no increase in cancer when they fed rats the equivelent of 70 Litres per day of diet cola for several months. But I am sure you have got a good, independent double blind control trial to show me that shows a statistically significant increase in Cancer rates in people using nutrasweet versus placebo...RIGHT?

TAM:)

Studies indicate that laboratory testing causes cancer in rats.

[Apollo20]

To all you diet drink lovers out there:

From an article by N. Markle:

"When the temperature of Aspartame exceeds 86 degrees F, (this occurs in the stomach) the wood alcohol in Aspartame converts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. (Formic acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants.) The methanol toxicity mimics multiple sclerosis, thus people were being diagnosed with having multiple sclerosis in error. The multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, where methanol toxicity is. In the case of systemic lupus, we are finding it has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis, especially with diet Coke and diet Pepsi drinkers. Also, with methanol toxicity, the victims usually drink three to four 12 oz. cans per day, some even more. In the cases of systemic lupus, which is triggered by Aspartame, the victim usually does not know that aspartame is the culprit."

And so on and so on....

Hey, but it's a free country, so don't let me stop you ingesting that stuff!

And surely, if it was bad for me, the government would ban it?

Wouldn't they?

[T.A.M.]

Apollo20:

are you really insisting on dragging up this whole Nutrasweet bs again...

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/n/nutrasweet.htm

TAM:)

[3bodyproblem]

Chemists and biologists make for the worst small talk. I have two buddies doing their PhD's right now and the topic of conversation seems steer towards "everything will kill you" at one point or another. To add to what Apollo has already pointed out, sucralose? is also very bad for you and if I'm not mistaken sorbitol will kill your puppy. I believe sucralose is just an isomer of sucrose which allows it to pass through your system unabsorbed (different bond sites?) and yet is does something incideous. For me, I'm love sugar and butter just they way they are thank you very much. :)

[T.A.M.]

Here is another, but I doubt you care...I think more an more Dr. Greening that you are either pulling all our legs, or are a full blown CTer in disguise.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/aspartame.asp

TAM:)

[Redtail]

Well, the blind support for U.S. capitalism/imperialism embodied in many of the responses to my original post on this thread is duly noted.

Wow, what a boring place this world would be if it was populated by the JREFers who don't like my reading material!

One world, one mind, one vision of reality, brought to you by the corporate controlled media....

What, you disagree?

Then tell me what is the source of all your INSIGHTS and your DEEP KNOWLEDGE of world history.

Would it be of the CNN/Time Magazine variety?

But I note how selective most of you are in your criticisms of my reading. No comments on Tuskegee, atomic weapons testing, agent orange, or about the use of CS gas INDOORS at Waco?

So please stay in your comfortable world, with your comfortable house and your comfortable car and keep drinking those diet drinks.... don't you just love that Nutra-Sweet!

Nice, very nice, here in Mr Rogers' Neighborhood.....

So, we all believe that the US government has never done anything wrong because we do not agree with some of the points you tried to make. (For the record, I see Waco as a botched operation rather than intentional malice by the government.) That's a pretty broad brush you have there.

[T.A.M.]

and another:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blasp.htm

TAM:)

a quote from the above article, concerning the claim Apollo20 has quoted by the unidentifiable Mrs. Markle (martini)lol


Most of the allegations contradict the bulk of medical evidence (see next page), but its author offers a convenient explanation: collusion between aspartame's manufacturers, the medical establishment, and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration.

[Pardalis]

And surely, if it was bad for me, the government would ban it?

Not necessarily.

[T.A.M.]

I suppose, just as you find NIST to be FOS and bought, you would find all of these organizations to be "bought" or "in on it" as well re: aspartame:


The Food and Drug Administration, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the World Health Organization, the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community and regulatory agencies in more than 100 countries have reviewed aspartame and found it safe for use. The American Medical Association, the American Dietetic Association and the American Diabetes Association also have found aspartame safe.

http://www.aspartame.org/aspartame_experts.html

TAM:)

[Alareth]

I was gonna post this in the Enterprise thread, but I thought it would be best suited here.

According to the CTists, is there nothing that's not a false flag operation anymore? Yeah, I know of the main ones, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine, and the Reichstag fire, but the USS Enterprise sinking is false flag? Bay of Pigs, false flag? Gunpowder Plot, false flag? Is there nothing that people actually do to each other in this world? Is everybody doing sh#t to themselves and making is look like other people are doing it? Is the fact that I'm missing a sock from my laundry a false flag? That I can't find my car keys? That my rat died? But it's ALL part of the NWO plot, right? Avacado died for the Zionist agenda.

Good god man.

When and where did people start saying the USS Maine was a false flag?

[twinstead]

When and where did people start saying the USS Maine was a false flag?

I've heard a lot by rabid CTs that the Maine was sunk on purpose to facilitate war with Spain.

It was propitious to those who wanted war with Spain ;)

[T.A.M.]

http://www.acsh.org/publications/pubID.1316/pub_detail.asp

Quote:


Executive Summary

* Foods and beverages containing sugar substitutes are widely used in the United States and other countries; they offer attractive dietary options for people who are trying to limit calorie intake and/or reduce the risk of tooth decay.
* Extensive scientific research supports the safety of the five low-calorie sugar substitutes currently approved for use in foods and beverages in the U.S. — acesulfame-K, aspartame, neotame, saccharin, and sucralose.
* In several instances, scientific studies have raised questions about the safety of specific sugar substitutes. Concerns about the possible cancer-causing potential of cyclamate and saccharin, raised during the 1960s and 1970s, respectively, have been resolved. A controversial animal cancer study of aspartame is currently being reviewed by regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries.
* Three sugar substitutes currently used in some other countries — alitame, cyclamate, and stevia — are not approved as food ingredients in the United States. Alitame and cyclamate are under consideration for approval. Stevia may be sold as a dietary supplement, but marketing this product as a food ingredient in the U.S. is illegal.
* A variety of polyols (sugar alcohols) and other bulk sweeteners, including two unusual sugars, trehalose and tagatose, are accepted for use in foods in the U.S. The only significant health issue pertaining to these sugar substitutes, most of which are incompletely digested, is the potential for gastrointestinal discomfort with excessive use.
* The availability of a variety of safe sugar substitutes is a benefit to consumers because it enables food manufacturers to formulate a variety of good-tasting sweet foods and beverages that are safe for the teeth and lower in calorie content than sugar-sweetened foods and beverages.

Or here:

http://www.nationalmssociety.org/site/PageServer?pagename=HOM_ABOUT_headlines_aspartame

Quote:


What Causes MS?

Stories Linking Aspartame and Multiple Sclerosis Unfounded

Several websites and documents circulating on the Internet are making unsubstantiated claims about aspartame, an artificial sweetener used in many diet soft drinks and other foods.

These stories claim that Aspartame is the cause of a variety of illnesses, including MS, lupus, Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, birth defects, Desert Storm syndrome, brain tumors, and seizures. However, please bear in mind the following:

* The claims are not documented.
* There is no evidence for "epidemics" of multiple sclerosis, lupus, and some of the other diseases as claimed in the articles.
* There is no evidence that authors of the claims have any scientific, medical, or academic credentials; nor is there any evidence that they have done any scientific research to support their claims.
* No published, peer-reviewed scientific research exists that supports the claims being made in the articles.

MS symptoms come and go, often randomly. Thus, it is sometimes too easy to assume that something coincidental in a person's life-a food eaten, a specific event, an unproved therapy-is related to the onset of symptoms or the end of symptoms. In fact, it may be independent of any of these things.

Scientifically controlled studies are of great importance, whether they prove a drug is of true benefit or that a substance is of true harm.

Shall I go find more?

TAM:)

[CHF]

And surely, if it was bad for me, the government would ban it?

Wouldn't they?

Well they've already banned cigarettes and alcohol...

[PhantomWolf]

BTW Apollo20, in between the sniping at the other board members, are you planning to admit that the evidence provided showws that HIV is not a man-made virus, and was not created by the US?

[Civilized Worm]

I'd like to know what other crazy s**t he buys in to. Tell us Frank, where do you stand on JFK? Roswell? The moon landings?

[Alareth]

I'd like to know what other crazy s**t he buys in to. Tell us Frank, where do you stand on JFK? Roswell? The moon landings?


The moon landings were an inside job.

[PhantomWolf]

The moon landings were an inside job.

Except for the poor guys that had to work outside on the launchpads.

eta: and of ciourse the Astronauts who were outside a lot with their training, geology trips, and stuff, and of course during the EVA's, though one could argue that their suits were sorta a spaceship, and thus they were inside, but since they were outside the LM, we'll say that part was outside too. of course they did spend more time inside then outside of the LM, so that was mostly an inside job too, and the CMP was inside all the time.

[MIKILLINI]

The moon landings were an inside job.

And they did it in plane site, err..ah, I mean plain sight.:D

ETA: Apollo, did crazy Chainsaw e-mail you anything about what he discovered about the nano-thermites? If not, here is the thread he put out a few days ago.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=86724

[Apollo20]

You know it is indeed amusing that I have been accused of childish behavior on this very forum, (by folks I will not befoul my mouth to mention by name because they KNOW who they are), when so many JREFers display such extremely childish behavior all of their own in so many ways!

Take for example the use by many JREFers of words that have no dictionary meaning like “twoofer” and “woo”. And, of course, the mysterious word: “sundies”, or “stundies”… or whatever….

Yes, stand up and be counted all of you who claim to be ADULTS yet feel comfortable using these non-words on a public forum that claims to be EDUCATIONAL!

Woo! Twoo!

PLEASE!

To those JREFers who feel comfortable with such drivel I say:

“Physician, heal thyself.” … Luke 4, 23.

Or this:

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child” … I Corinthians 13,1.

Because quite FRANKLY, the use of such cant or argot ON A PUBLIC FORUM betrays a juvenile pathology bordering on imbecility that truly BOGGLES THE MIND…

And TAM, tell me, do you believe that it was ok for U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to have approved the use of “ferret rounds” of CS gas suspended in methylene chloride against American citizens in April 1993, when it was well known to the authorities that orthochlorobenzenamalonitrile, a lachrymator that is corrosive to metals never mind human tissue, and its propellant, CH2Cl2, a solvent that exhibits a propensity to generate HCl and phosgene, Cl2CO, a poison gas used in WWI, actually constitute a lethal concoction of noxious chemicals when deployed INDOORS.

So, TAM, if you have tears, prepare to shed them now:

76 american men, women and children died as a result of this deliberate act of STATE TERROR.

Oh my America, my New Found Land!

[MIKILLINI]

I've heard a lot by rabid CTs that the Maine was sunk on purpose to facilitate war with Spain.

It was propitious to those who wanted war with Spain ;)

:dl:

[Mobyseven]

You know it is indeed amusing that I have been accused of childish behavior on this very forum, (by folks I will not befoul my mouth to mention by name because they KNOW who they are), when so many JREFers display such extremely childish behavior all of their own in so many ways!

Take for example the use by many JREFers of words that have no dictionary meaning like “twoofer” and “woo”. And, of course, the mysterious word: “sundies”, or “stundies”… or whatever….

Yes, stand up and be counted all of you who claim to be ADULTS yet feel comfortable using these non-words on a public forum that claims to be EDUCATIONAL!

Woo! Twoo!

PLEASE!

Noun

slang (uncountable)
[list="1"] Language that is outside of conventional usage.
Language that is unique to a particular profession or subject; jargon.
The specialized language of a social group, sometimes used to make what is said unintelligible to those not members of the group; cant.

Are you suggesting that adults do not use slang?

To those JREFers who feel comfortable with such drivel I say:

“Physician, heal thyself.” … Luke 4, 23.

Or this:

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child” … I Corinthians 13,1.

Because quite FRANKLY, the use of such cant or argot ON A PUBLIC FORUM betrays a juvenile pathology bordering on imbecility that truly BOGGLES THE MIND…

Then to you I would respond with:

"Boasting is not courage. He who boasts much cannot do much. Much gesticulation does not prove courage." - Anonymous

Or this:

"Man is arrogant in proportion to his ignorance." - Edward Bulwer-Lytton

Or maybe this:

"Paranoids are not paranoid because they're paranoid, but because they keep putting themselves, f***ing idiots, deliberately into paranoid situations." - Thomas Pynchon

[Pardalis]

Yes Dr. Greening, quoting the Bible is going to help you in a skeptic's forum...

[CHF]

Apollo, are you gonna respond on the AIDs issue?

Or was that all just to get a reaction?

[Apollo20]

Pardalis:

Too much TWOOF for you is it?

Come on, fess up, you've used the word WOO too haven't you!

[Pardalis]

Come on, fess up, you've used the word WOO too haven't you!

When dealing with woo, of course.

[Apollo20]

CHF:

If you look back at what I wrote, I asked people to consider the origin of AIDS!

You guys are a laugh a minute and quite paranoid really!

[Apollo20]

Pardalis:

Then pray tell me, what is WOO?

Sounds like BABY talk to me....

[CHF]

If you look back at what I wrote, I asked people to consider the origin of AIDS!

Right. And they looked into it and then asked for your response to what they found.

You guys are a laugh a minute and quite paranoid really!

Asking for a response is paranoia? Interesting...

[Pardalis]

Pardalis:

Then pray tell me, what is WOO?

Sounds like BABY talk to me....

Actually, it's woo-woo (http://www.skepticwiki.org/index.php/Woo-woo)

[Brainache]

Pardalis:

Then pray tell me, what is WOO?

Sounds like BABY talk to me....

By reading it in context, it shouldn't be too difficult to work out for yourself Dr Greening.

I believe it was coined by James Randi to describe the various types of irrational beliefs espoused by crackpots.

[Apollo20]

CHF:

Denying the possibility that the "authorities" could occasionally be wrong is certainly symptomatic of a state reminiscent of catalepsy that might manifest itself to an observer as paranoia.

[Complexity]

I don't doubt that Cheney, his monkey, and others like them would have allowed/caused 9/11 to occur if it suited their purposes.

I just don't think that they did.

Other thugs were more than happy to do it on their own initiative.

I do think that Cheney and his monkey took full advantage of 9/11 and that their unforgivable actions have damaged this country much more than 9/11 ever could.

Truthers really need to get lives or, at the very least, laid.

[Apollo20]

Pardalis:

When I was a wittle boy my twain set went "woo woo".

Am I getting it?

I mean am I close to understanding the deeper meaning of this particular example of JREFerese?

By the way, is this how JREFers spend their free time?

Talking WOO!

[CHF]

Denying the possibility that the "authorities" could occasionally be wrong is certainly symptomatic of a state reminiscent of catalepsy that might manifest itself to an observer as paranoia.

And I'm sure you'll show me where I denied that authorities could occasionally be wrong.

Cuz I sure don't recall it.

[Pardalis]

Are you drunk?

[3bodyproblem]

Oh my America, my New Found Land!

If this was meant as a double entendre it's possibly the most hilarious thing I have ever seen on this forum. You sneaky devil you.

[Unsecured Coins]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Jaye77/078062372X01_PE67_Woo._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

[MIKILLINI]

Actually, it's woo-woo (http://www.skepticwiki.org/index.php/Woo-woo)

Hey a definition! There ya go! It relates to what I thought of when I wondered what it would remind me of, or how I would associate the pronunciation as to what it sounds like when pronounced. Twilight Zone was My first thought. :cool:

[DavidJames]

By the way, is this how JREFers spend their free time?

Talking WOO!In your case, I think it's talking to woo.

All I can say is wow. I think you've turned out to be everything I expected, and more. It took longer then most CTists, but eventually, you've displayed for everyone your true self. Does it feel good to be out of the closet?

[PhantomWolf]

You know it is indeed amusing that I have been accused of childish behavior on this very forum, (by folks I will not befoul my mouth to mention by name because they KNOW who they are), when so many JREFers display such extremely childish behavior all of their own in so many ways!

Yet you like to spend your time moaning about that rather then adressing the posts that don't. Perhaps you just like to whine.

Take for example the use by many JREFers of words that have no dictionary meaning like “twoofer” and “woo”. And, of course, the mysterious word: “sundies”, or “stundies”… or whatever….

"woo" is not a "JREF" word, it is a very common word used in most of the Skeptic community to describe bunk. "Stundie" is a poster's screen-name and the award was named after him. I guess though you'd moan that the William Webb-Ellis Cup or the Oscars are silly names too.

Yes, stand up and be counted all of you who claim to be ADULTS yet feel comfortable using these non-words on a public forum that claims to be EDUCATIONAL!

Pot... Kettle. Kettle... Pot.

“Physician, heal thyself.” … Luke 4, 23.

Or this:

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child” … I Corinthians 13,1.


You know, using Bible quotes on a board brimming with Atheists are going to get you about as far as a slug pushing a piano.

Because quite FRANKLY, the use of such cant or argot ON A PUBLIC FORUM betrays a juvenile pathology bordering on imbecility that truly BOGGLES THE MIND…

And quite frankly Frank, your behaviour is just as bad, if not worse. You ignore any post that counters you in a mature and factual manner, and whine like a 3-year old throwing a tantrum about the rest. You act like a CT in many ways, don't act so shocked when people call you on it. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, the odds are it isn't a ostrich.

And TAM, tell me, do you believe that it was ok for U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to have approved the use of “ferret rounds” of CS gas suspended in methylene chloride against American citizens in April 1993, when it was well known to the authorities that orthochlorobenzenamalonitrile, a lachrymator that is corrosive to metals never mind human tissue, and its propellant, CH2Cl2, a solvent that exhibits a propensity to generate HCl and phosgene, Cl2CO, a poison gas used in WWI, actually constitute a lethal concoction of noxious chemicals when deployed INDOORS.

Firstly, can you prove that she knew the chemistry? Secondly, she didn't approve any such rounds; TWO rounds were used, approved by the commander in the field, and used on a concrete bunker, not on the main building. The CS gas introduced to the main building was done with high-pressure air canisters blowing it through the barrel of a CEV into holes in the wall.

76 american men, women and children died as a result of this deliberate act of STATE TERROR.

Bollocks, they died because they got so brainwashed that they were willing to set themselves on fire.

Firstly, the ATF were there to execute a legitimate and legal search warrant, the members of the group resisted that warrant with firearms, and while true enough that it'll never be known who shot first in that action, they were in the wrong to have armed up and prevented the execution of a legal search warrant in the first place. Had they not taken that action, none of the rest of the matter would have occurred. That they did, and in the process killed 4 ATF agents meant that those involved in that action were responsible for 10 (4 ATF and 6 of their own group) counts of Felony Murder.

What isn't in doubt however, is that later that day Mike Schroeder opened fire on the ATF before they returned fire killing him.

Secondly, the introduction of the CS gas had nothing to do with the fires, surveillance tapes that recorded the conversations inside show that the members set them themselves, the fires starting in multiple place inside the building simultaneously.

Thirdly, no-one prevented the members leaving the buildings except themselves. Nine people did escape and survived, the others choose their fate by setting fire to the buildings and then staying inside. The FBI did not force that on them.

Now having said that, I do believe that the FBI did not handle the situation at all well. They had no understanding of what was going on inside the compound and so their response was totally incorrect, doing nothing other then pushing those inside into more and more extreme actions. Had the FBI understood the mindset of those that they were up against they probably would have reacted differently, but this total lack of understanding lead to actions that essentially made a crazy man crazier. That this was done out of malice rather then ignorance however, would be a highly contentious position to take and one that I feel would be very hard to support. In the end there was plenty of opportunity for the group to have defused the situation and got out of it during the 51 days of the siege. What is also entirely clear is that such a resolution was never going to happen from Koresh. If he had been willing to do so he would have held up his end of the agreement 5 days in when his demands were met, but he failed to surrender, instead he just kept demanding more and more time, something that in the end the FBI wasn't willing to keep giving out of fears of another Jonestown.

[3bodyproblem]

Are you drunk?

Pardalis I've been meaning to ask you if your nic name was based on latin? Just curious, I used to own a business called Pardalis Imports, and I used to breed Furcifer Pardalis.

[Pardalis]

Pardalis I've been meaning to ask you if your nic name was based on latin? Just curious, I used to own a business called Pardalis Imports, and I used to breed Furcifer Pardalis.

Yes it's based on the latin pardalis, it refers to leopardus pardalis, a pretty wild cat I always liked. :)

[LashL]

You know it is indeed amusing that I have been accused of childish behavior on this very forum, (by folks I will not befoul my mouth to mention by name because they KNOW who they are), when so many JREFers display such extremely childish behavior all of their own in so many ways!

Take for example the use by many JREFers of words that have no dictionary meaning like “twoofer” and “woo”. And, of course, the mysterious word: “sundies”, or “stundies”… or whatever….

Yes, stand up and be counted all of you who claim to be ADULTS yet feel comfortable using these non-words on a public forum that claims to be EDUCATIONAL!

Woo! Twoo!

PLEASE!

To those JREFers who feel comfortable with such drivel I say:

“Physician, heal thyself.” … Luke 4, 23.

Or this:

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child” … I Corinthians 13,1.

Because quite FRANKLY, the use of such cant or argot ON A PUBLIC FORUM betrays a juvenile pathology bordering on imbecility that truly BOGGLES THE MIND…

And TAM, tell me, do you believe that it was ok for U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to have approved the use of “ferret rounds” of CS gas suspended in methylene chloride against American citizens in April 1993, when it was well known to the authorities that orthochlorobenzenamalonitrile, a lachrymator that is corrosive to metals never mind human tissue, and its propellant, CH2Cl2, a solvent that exhibits a propensity to generate HCl and phosgene, Cl2CO, a poison gas used in WWI, actually constitute a lethal concoction of noxious chemicals when deployed INDOORS.

So, TAM, if you have tears, prepare to shed them now:

76 american men, women and children died as a result of this deliberate act of STATE TERROR.

Oh my America, my New Found Land!

Apollo,

1) Your behaviour here, since your arrival, appears to the rational-minded to be a rather bizarre combination of childishness, pettiness, megalomania, arrogance, egocentricity, and irrational hatred towards those of certain professions, with occasional flashes of brilliance, intelligence, and proper use of your specific knowledge.

Occasionally - when you stick to the things you know - you come across as reasonable and rational. However, when you cross over into subjects and pretend to have an expertise that you do not possess - which is often - you do sometimes come across as childish, and sometimes as a rude, boorish oaf.

Your arguments are generally sound and well-grounded when you stick to what you know, but your arguments just as often come across as lame and ill-founded when you cross into territory that you are not particularly well versed in, since you tend to try to paint yourself as an expert on *everything* that you opine on, and that's where you fall down, in my opinion. You seem to exhibit an attitude of "because I'm a chemist, I'm also an expert on everything else I care to opine about" and that's just wrong. My personal expertise is in certain areas of law, but when I need an expert in other areas of law (or other subject matters entirely), I call upon experts in those specific areas of law or in other fields, as the case may be. You would do well to do the same, and you would do well to realize that you are not an expert in anything except your own particular field in chemistry.

2) If you have been accused of being childish, it is because you have, indeed, exhibited childish behaviour, such as your consistent overuse of exclamation points!!! and CAPITAL LETTERS!!!! and your apparent inability to stick to the subject at hand.

And now you're citing the Bible as the basis for what you seem to think is a scathing response to legitimate criticism? Wow. Just wow.

3) There is nothing inherently wrong with - and nothing childish about - utilizing words such as "twoofer" and "woo" and "Stundies". You should, perhaps do some research into the use of slang, urban slang, and the legitimacy of same.

4) When, if ever, are you going to admit that you were off base on your contention that HIV/AIDS was a US Government plot, rather than just changing the subject?

5) Lastly, I think you should read this post by R.Mackey (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2761894&postcount=89) again. He articulated very well what many here, myself included, are probably thinking.

[PhantomWolf]

CHF:

If you look back at what I wrote, I asked people to consider the origin of AIDS!

You guys are a laugh a minute and quite paranoid really!

And a number of us have answered it, including giving journal references, all of which you have ignored in an effort to whinge about the use of the word "Woo" which isn't a JREF construct anyway, but is wide spread throughout the Skeptic community. So far there are a number of us waiting for you to actually get off your soap box and act like a adult by engaging in conversation instead of this petty sniping. So far we have been woefully disappointed. And then you wonder why you are copping flack about your attitude.

[MIKILLINI]

CHF:

Denying the possibility that the "authorities" could occasionally be wrong is certainly symptomatic of a state reminiscent of catalepsy that might manifest itself to an observer as paranoia.

Actually Apollo, you can associate catalepsy to the Bush Administration and Congress after 9/11.

[3bodyproblem]

Yes it's based on the latin pardalis, it refers to leopardus pardalis, a pretty wild cat I always liked. :)

Ahh, a taxonomy buff, very cool.

[Redtail]

You know it is indeed amusing that I have been accused of childish behavior on this very forum, (by folks I will not befoul my mouth to mention by name because they KNOW who they are), when so many JREFers display such extremely childish behavior all of their own in so many ways!

So you are above such childish behavior, yet sou will use such childish behavior when it suits you?

Take for example the use by many JREFers of words that have no dictionary meaning like “twoofer” and “woo”. And, of course, the mysterious word: “sundies”, or “stundies”… or whatever….
So you will provide quotes by Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Einstein, etc that use the word "jiggy"? Or will you admit that slang does not only exist, but can also be recognized as acceptable parlay?


Yes, stand up and be counted all of you who claim to be ADULTS yet feel comfortable using these non-words on a public forum that claims to be EDUCATIONAL!What dictionary is "JREFers" in?

Woo! Twoo!

PLEASE!

To those JREFers who feel comfortable with such drivel I say:

“Physician, heal thyself.” … Luke 4, 23.

Or this:

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child” … I Corinthians 13,1.Why do you hate children?

Because quite FRANKLY, the use of such cant or argot ON A PUBLIC FORUM betrays a juvenile pathology bordering on imbecility that truly BOGGLES THE MIND… Yet ANY author you post is 100% right and we should just take our cues from them?

And TAM, tell me, do you believe that it was ok for U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to have approved the use of “ferret rounds” of CS gas suspended in methylene chloride against American citizens in April 1993, when it was well known to the authorities that orthochlorobenzenamalonitrile, a lachrymator that is corrosive to metals never mind human tissue, and its propellant, CH2Cl2, a solvent that exhibits a propensity to generate HCl and phosgene, Cl2CO, a poison gas used in WWI, actually constitute a lethal concoction of noxious chemicals when deployed INDOORS.You've never served in the military have you?

So, TAM, if you have tears, prepare to shed them now:

76 american men, women and children died as a result of this deliberate act of STATE TERROR.

Oh my America, my New Found Land!No, they died because Davey boy felt he was above the law.

[Apollo20]

Now I've heard it all:

The deep insights of a Phantomwolf:

"Bollocks, they died because they got so brainwashed that they were willing to set themselves on fire."

Well, PW, if you want to believe that, what can I say!

As for the rest of last night's show, well, what can I say....

Puerile comes to mind....

[uk_dave]

Puerile comes to mind....

hmmmm it does, doesn't it?

But seriously, how do you come to blame the law enforcement officers for a disaster which could have been averted had the cult members simply complied with the law?

What did the cult have to fear, other than prosecution if they were breaking the law (and we all agree those who break the law should be prosecuted, don't we?).

And precisely what was the govt conspiracy with regard to waco?
Likewise, jonestown?

[Apollo20]

Well we could gab all day about Waco and Jonestown... obviously my research tells a different story to yours. Please read THE ASHES OF WACO, because I have read the Time Magazine version that you appear to favor!

However, I have also been challenged as to my opinion on the Apollo missions. Well, I have researched this topic in some detail too and there are many undeniable anomalies in the record of the Apollo missions as published by NASA. Here is one to start with:

OXYGEN CONSUMPTION DURING THE APOLLO 11 MISSION

Typically the amount of oxygen consumed by a moderately active individual is about 600 litres (1.89 lb or 0.86 kg) per day. This number is consistent with the reported 22 lbs of oxygen consumed by the three-man crew of Apollo 13 during its 90 hr return journey to earth following the infamous explosion on board the command/service module.

But let’s look at the oxygen consumption for another, less perilous, mission prior to the ill-fated Apollo 13. Consider data for the Lunar Excursion Module, or LEM, which was designed to transport two astronauts from lunar orbit to the surface of the moon and back to orbit within 48 hours of undocking from the command/service module (CSM). It was specified by NASA that the LEM should carry enough O2 for four de-pressurization/re-pressurization sequences to allow for a number of periods of EVA (extra-vehicular-activity) by the two-man crew.

In the early Apollo missions (10 – 14) each LEM carried an O2 supply consisting of about 24.5 kg, (54 lb), of compressed gas stored in two tanks: a 22.2 kg, (49 lb), tank in the descent stage and a much smaller 2.3 kg, (5 lb), tank in the ascent stage.

A breakdown of the oxygen consumption and other related data published by NASA for Apollo 11 shows that the descent stage tank contained 49.4 lb at launch and 30.9 lb at mission end for a consumption of 18.5 lb. This was for a mission that lasted 25 hours with two cabin ventings, (one for the “giant leap” EVA and one to throw out garbage), leading to the loss of 12 lb of O2.
By the way, we can verify these numbers from the LEM cabin volume (6.7 m3), temperature (about 15° C) and pressure (4.8 psi).

The above data should be viewed together with the additional fact that the Apollo 11 LEM was subject to an O2 leak rate of 0.2 lb/hr*. For the mission duration of 25 hours this amounts to an O2 loss of 5 lb. We therefore see from the available oxygen consumption data that:

(i) The Apollo 11 LEM descent stage consumed 18.5 lb of O2 by mission end.

(ii) 12 lb of O2 was vented by two cabin de-pressurizations.

(iii) 5 lb was lost by direct leakage.

(iv) Only 1.5 lb of O2 was available for the two astronauts to breath.

(v) The resting metabolic consumption rate of O2 per astronaut should be about 0.05 lb/hour. Thus a two-man Apollo crew requires about 2.5 lb of O2 for a 25-hour mission (with no cabin leaks or ventings). This is more than 1.5 times the amount available!

* See for example “The NASA Mission Reports. Volume One: Apollo 11, p102.”

Some of the dialogue between the Apollo 11 astronauts and the Houston Mission Control Center, (reported by E.M. Jones in his Apollo Lunar Surface Journal), only serves to further confuse this issue. Thus, after returning from a 2 hour 40 minute EVA, the following exchanges occurred between Armstrong/Aldrin and Houston at the ground elapsed times (GET) noted:

114 hr: 31 min: 27 sec: Houston: I’ve got a consumable update for you if you are ready to copy or listen. Over.
114:31:38 Armstrong: Stand by.
114:31:43: Aldrin: Okay, go ahead.
114:31:45: Houston: Coming up on 115 hours GET, descent oxygen is 31.8 lb or 59 percent……….
114:32:28: Aldrin: Roger. Copy. Thank you very much.
114:32:32: Houston: Roger. Out.

The data given previously show that the amount of descent-stage O2 remaining at lift-off from the moon, (which occurred at 124 hrs 22 min GET) was 30.9 lb. But at 114 hrs 31 min GET, Houston informs Armstrong and Aldrin that they have 31.8 lb of O2, which they state to be 59 % of the initial charge (a number which is also suspect based on NASA data). This means that the Apollo 11 LEM had 31.8 lb of O2 remaining in the descent-stage tank with about 10 hours still to be spent on the lunar surface. Apparently in that 10-hour period the LEM and its crew consumed, through cabin leaks and respiration, a mere 0.9 lbs of O2 or about one-third of what was actually needed!

Houston, we have a problem……

[Horatius]

(i) The Apollo 11 LEM descent stage consumed 18.5 lb of O2 by mission end.

(ii) 12 lb of O2 was vented by two cabin de-pressurizations.

(iii) 5 lb was lost by direct leakage.

(iv) Only 1.5 lb of O2 was available for the two astronauts to breath.

(v) The resting metabolic consumption rate of O2 per astronaut should be about 0.05 lb/hour. Thus a two-man Apollo crew requires about 2.5 lb of O2 for a 25-hour mission (with no cabin leaks or ventings). This is more than 1.5 times the amount available!

* See for example “The NASA Mission Reports. Volume One: Apollo 11, p102.”





I haven't been able to find the referenced report online, so I'm not sure what these numbers actually mean, but in regards to the amounts of gas lost to both leaks and de-pressurizations, surely those include some amount of O2 that was actually used by the astronausts and converted to CO2? Or did they re-pressurize and then de-pressurize without ever taking a breath?

Also, do these numbers consider the time they spent on suit oxygen? Do the totals for the available oxygen include the suits?

[Apollo20]

Horatius:

CO2 concentrations in the LEM would be well below 1000 ppm I'm sure, so this gas can be ignored to a very good approximation. I'm not sure about the suit O2... All I know is that NASA's numbers don't add up

[T.A.M.]

Apollo20:

1. If I use childish language, it is rare, and I guess you can cast the first stone.

2. I have no doubt that elements of the government have allowed hurtful things to happen to people. Did you look at the enormous list of groups who say Aspartame is safe...not just govt associations, but many others. Are you accusing all of these organizations of allowing a harmful chemical to be consumed by fellow humans?

3. Your behaviour on this forum is far from setting a good example. You have gone through periods of nastiness here, periods of obtuseness, and periods of provocation of others, for what purpose I cannot tell. To have the nerve to them come here and condemn everyone else really says alot about who you are...

If it really bothers you so, leave...go over to LCF or 9/11 blogger, do what ever...you are sitting in front of your own computer and your own internet connection...no one forces you to read or to stay.

So are you adding physicians (such as I) to the engineers, as people you do not trust, or feel are out to get everyone else?


TAM:)

[Pardalis]

Dr. Greening, how many conspiracy theories do you believe in?

[Apollo20]

TAM:

Aren't you over-reacting a bit. After all, this particular thread was calling out for some ranting... so here I came .... a man with a mission ..... to boldly go.....

So I offered my innermost, darkest, thoughts to the JREFers, KNOWING FULL WELL that the sharks would bite. And out they came last night, RIGHT ON CUE! And they all eagerly participated in the feeding frenzy and gorged themselves silly until, full of self-righteous zeal, they crept back to their lairs, happy in the self-satisfied knowledge that they had defended their authoritarian position by putting that CRAZY CHEMIST in his place.

And TAM, I specifically asked you about WACO because you are a physician.... and I thought all human life is sacred to a physician.

But tell me TAM:

WHERE DO THE CHILDREN PLAY?

[JAStewart]

I was in Europe and I saw a poster for "The film the government does not want you to see" (Loose Change) in Germany.

I was in europe for 5 weeks.

And I saw 1 poster.

[Apollo20]

Pardalis:

"How many conspiracy theories do I believe in?"

Well I can tell you one theory I do not believe in:

EVOLUTION

The Stanley Miller experiment of 1953 proves NOTHING, absolutely nothing about the origin of life and yet it is touted as the be-all-and-end-all proof of evolution. In fact it's nothing of the sort!

[Pardalis]

Well I can tell you one theory I do not believe in:

EVOLUTION

...

[grmcdorman]

Pardalis:

"How many conspiracy theories do I believe in?"

Well I can tell you one theory I do not believe in:

EVOLUTION

The Stanley Miller experiment of 1953 proves NOTHING, absolutely nothing about the origin of life and yet it is touted as the be-all-and-end-all proof of evolution. In fact it's nothing of the sort!Dr. Greening, you are using the typical Creationist tactic of conflating abiogenisis and evolution. They are not the same thing; there is a difference between the origin of life and evolution of life. This conflation of the two is a typical Creationist tactic, and has been repeatedly corrected to no avail (sound familiar?).

No reputable life-sciences scientist would argue that the Miller-Urey experiment is a argument for evolution.

What's more, that is old science. There has been a lot of work since then; for example, see this article (http://sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=9952573C-E7F2-99DF-32F2928046329479) at Scientific American (discussed here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=78543) at JREF).

[T.A.M.]

Apollo:

1. You are right, all life is sacred, and This is the ranting thread, my apologies for over reacting...I am in clinic, and the last couple of patients have left me...exhausted.

2. I remember seeing WACO on the TV. At the time I was not a GP, I do not think I was even in Medical School at the time, but that said, I remember how tragic it was. Since then I have not looked into it...sorry. Is there an angle or an article you thought might interest me?

3. I think, in all honesty, if you are here on a ranting/open mic thread, that for the benifit of the confused, you make your stands on certain things clear. I think it throws people off, naturally, when they do not know how to approach.

TAM:)

[Horatius]

Horatius:

CO2 concentrations in the LEM would be well below 1000 ppm I'm sure, so this gas can be ignored to a very good approximation. I'm not sure about the suit O2... All I know is that NASA's numbers don't add up



How does that jibe with:

(v) The resting metabolic consumption rate of O2 per astronaut should be about 0.05 lb/hour. Thus a two-man Apollo crew requires about 2.5 lb of O2 for a 25-hour mission ....


If they consume 2.5 lbs of O2, where does that go? Wouldn't a large percentage be exchanged for CO2?

ETA: and how does the use of CO2 scrubbers (remember the scence in Apollo 13?) affect these numbers?

[Pardalis]

Dr. Greening, you're not one of those (http://www.alaska.net/%7Eclund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm) are you?

[T.A.M.]

OMG that link, Pardalis, tell me that is a spoof. Tell me that such people, believing such things, don't exist...dear lord.

Than again, for every IQ=140, there is someone with an IQ=80

TAM;)

[Horatius]

So I offered my innermost, darkest, thoughts to the JREFers, KNOWING FULL WELL that the sharks would bite. And out they came last night, RIGHT ON CUE! And they all eagerly participated in the feeding frenzy and gorged themselves silly until, full of self-righteous zeal, they crept back to their lairs, happy in the self-satisfied knowledge that they had defended their authoritarian position by putting that CRAZY CHEMIST in his place.




Of course, you're posting on a sceptic's board, dedicated to addressing just these sorts of beliefs. So why should it surprise you that people would address your beliefs? It's what we're here for. If we weren't interested in discussing such things, we'd all be posting at IMDB, or something.

Really, why do you act as if this is a bad thing?





*Choosing to ignore the over-the-top mixed metaphors. Seriously, sharks "[creeping] back to their lairs"? :)

[Pardalis]

OMG that link, Pardalis, tell me that is a spoof. Tell me that such people, believing such things, don't exist...dear lord.

I had the same reaction when Regnad Kcin first told me about them. :D

[Alt+F4]

OMG that link, Pardalis, tell me that is a spoof.

That site is a spoof but there are folks out there who do believe the earth is flat.

Q: "Why do the all the world Governments say the Earth is round?"
A: It's a conspiracy

Q: "What about NASA? Don't they have photos to prove that the Earth is round?"

A: NASA is part of the conspiracy too. The photos are faked.

Linky: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0

[T.A.M.]

I am sorry, but every time I let it cross my mind what they believe, and that they ACTUALLY believe it to be true...I giggle on the inside.

TAM:)

[twinstead]

I had the same reaction when Regnad Kcin first told me about them. :D

I lean towards spoof, quite dryly funny, especially looking at their sign-up page

[Apollo20]

Horatius:

The Apollo 11 numbers I quoted are for O2 consumption, as reported by NASA. Now clearly the O2 taken up by the astronauts was part of that consumption, but most was actually consumed through leaks and purgings of the cabin air for EVA's. That some O2 was converted to CO2 and was scrubbed by LiOH, I believe it was, does not alter the figures since they are based on the contents of the supply tank(s).

[3bodyproblem]

So I offered my innermost, darkest, thoughts to the JREFers, KNOWING FULL WELL that the sharks would bite. And out they came last night, RIGHT ON CUE! And they all eagerly participated in the feeding frenzy and gorged themselves silly until, full of self-righteous zeal, they crept back to their lairs, happy in the self-satisfied knowledge that they had defended their authoritarian position by putting that CRAZY CHEMIST in his place.


Too much Discovery/History channel for you. I like the mad scientist angle though.

[Apollo20]

Pardalis:

Flat earth?

Well yes, the earth does show a flattening of 1/298.257

Is that what you mean?

[uk_dave]

Pardalis:

"How many conspiracy theories do I believe in?"

Well I can tell you one theory I do not believe in:

EVOLUTION

The Stanley Miller experiment of 1953 proves NOTHING, absolutely nothing about the origin of life and yet it is touted as the be-all-and-end-all proof of evolution. In fact it's nothing of the sort!

ohhhhh bloody hell.

You're not currently employed are you dr greening?

[twinstead]

Apollo20 what's the alternative theory to evolution then? Does it have more evidence to support it than evolution?

[Horatius]

Horatius:

The Apollo 11 numbers I quoted are for O2 consumption, as reported by NASA. Now clearly the O2 taken up by the astronauts was part of that consumption, but most was actually consumed through leaks and purgings of the cabin air for EVA's. That some O2 was converted to CO2 and was scrubbed by LiOH, I believe it was, does not alter the figures since they are based on the contents of the supply tank(s).


Well, I'd like to see that report, as it seems to me there has to be some overlap between the amounts purged and lost to leaks, and the amounts used by the astronauts. Fill LM with oxygen, breathe for a few hours, de-pressurize, repeat. Seems you're using all the same gases to me....

[T.A.M.]

Darwins THEORY of Evolution, is by far, the Theory with the most proof and science behind it. It is not Darwins LAW of Evolution, but in my opinion, it is darn well close enough.

TAM:)

[grmcdorman]

OXYGEN CONSUMPTION DURING THE APOLLO 11 MISSION


But let’s look at the oxygen consumption for another, less perilous, mission prior to the ill-fated Apollo 13. Consider data for the Lunar Excursion Module, or LEM, which was designed to transport two astronauts from lunar orbit to the surface of the moon and back to orbit within 48 hours of undocking from the command/service module (CSM). It was specified by NASA that the LEM should carry enough O2 for four de-pressurization/re-pressurization sequences to allow for a number of periods of EVA (extra-vehicular-activity) by the two-man crew.Nitpick: only Apollo hoax-believers still call it the LEM. The official term - before Apollo 11 - was LM (Lunar Module). Likewise the CM and SM (combined as the CSM).

In the early Apollo missions (10 – 14) each LEM carried an O2 supply consisting of about 24.5 kg, (54 lb), of compressed gas stored in two tanks: a 22.2 kg, (49 lb), tank in the descent stage and a much smaller 2.3 kg, (5 lb), tank in the ascent stage.From the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/A11_MissionReport.pdf, 11.6 MB), page 93-4:
Condition|Actual usage, lb|Pre-flight planned usage, lb
Loaded (at lift-off)||
Descent stage|48.2|48.2
Ascent stage||
Tank 1|2.5|2.4
Tank 2|2.5|2.4
Total|5.0|4.8
Consumed||
Descent stage|17.2|21.7
Ascent stage||
Tank 1|1.0|1.5
Tank 2|0.1|0.0
Total|1.1|1.5
Remaining in descent stage at lunar lift-off|31.0|26.5
Remaining at ascent stage jettison||
Tank 1|1.5|0.9
Tank 2|2.4|2.4
Total|3.9|3.3
So to start with, although your overall initial figures are almost correct, your description of the tanks are wrong: there are two ascent stage tanks.

A breakdown of the oxygen consumption and other related data published by NASA for Apollo 11 shows that the descent stage tank contained 49.4 lb at launch and 30.9 lb at mission end for a consumption of 18.5 lb.
Nope. 48.2 lb at launch, 31.0 lb at lunar lift-off, 17.2 lb consumption.

Ascent tanks: a total of 1.1 lbs were consumed.

This was for a mission that lasted 25 hours with two cabin ventings, (one for the “giant leap” EVA and one to throw out garbage), leading to the loss of 12 lb of O2.
By the way, we can verify these numbers from the LEM cabin volume (6.7 m3), temperature (about 15° C) and pressure (4.8 psi).

The above data should be viewed together with the additional fact that the Apollo 11 LEM was subject to an O2 leak rate of 0.2 lb/hr*.
Wrong; you are quoting the expected leak rate. The actual leak rate was an order of magnitude lower: 0.05 lb/hr. From the same document: 9.13.4 Oxygen
The actual oxygen usage was lower than the preflight predictions
because oxygen leak rate from the cabin was less than the specification
value. The actual rate was 0.05 lb/hr, as compared with the specification
rate of 0.2 lb/hr. In the following table, the actual quantities loaded
and consumed are based on telemetered data.

For the mission duration of 25 hours this amounts to an O2 loss of 5 lb.Nope, 1.25 lb.

We therefore see from the available oxygen consumption data that:

(i) The Apollo 11 LEM descent stage consumed 18.5 lb of O2 by mission end.17.2 lb, according to the document

(ii) 12 lb of O2 was vented by two cabin de-pressurizations.Source? (could not find this in the ALSJ).

(iii) 5 lb was lost by direct leakage.No, 1.25 lb.

(iv) Only 1.5 lb of O2 was available for the two astronauts to breath.

(v) The resting metabolic consumption rate of O2 per astronaut should be about 0.05 lb/hour. Thus a two-man Apollo crew requires about 2.5 lb of O2 for a 25-hour mission (with no cabin leaks or ventings). This is more than 1.5 times the amount available!Your 0.05 lb/hour is based on what? The rate may differ on the moon; not only was the cabin pure oxygen at a low pressure, but the 1/6 G would probably affect oxygen consumption as well, especially when resting.

Accepting your 12 lb for the cabin depressurization, we have 17.2-12-1.25=3.95 lb. Therefore, this is more than enough, based on these figures.

Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.

Some of the dialogue between the Apollo 11 astronauts and the Houston Mission Control Center, (reported by E.M. Jones in his Apollo Lunar Surface Journal), only serves to further confuse this issue. Thus, after returning from a 2 hour 40 minute EVA, the following exchanges occurred between Armstrong/Aldrin and Houston at the ground elapsed times (GET) noted:

114 hr: 31 min: 27 sec: Houston: I’ve got a consumable update for you if you are ready to copy or listen. Over.
114:31:38 Armstrong: Stand by.
114:31:43: Aldrin: Okay, go ahead.
114:31:45: Houston: Coming up on 115 hours GET, descent oxygen is 31.8 lb or 59 percent……….
114:32:28: Aldrin: Roger. Copy. Thank you very much.
114:32:32: Houston: Roger. Out.
This is essentially correct; from the ALSJ:114:31:45 McCandless: Okay. RCS (Reaction Control System, the steering jets) Alpha is 81 percent: RCS Bravo, 75 percent. Coming up on 115 hours GET, descent oxygen is 31.8 pounds or 59 percent; descent amp hours 858 (remaining), and ascent amp hours 574. Over. (Pause)
114:32:28 Aldrin: Roger. Copy. Thank you very much.The 59 percent apparently refers to total oxygen (total loaded - descent and ascent stages - was 53.2 lb; 59 percent of that is 31.4 lbs).

Also remember that from 114:52:57 to 120:59:04 the crew was sleeping. Oxygen consumption for that period should be much lower.

However:
123:14:45 Evans:And, Tranquility, I have a LM consumables update for you.
123:14:53 Aldrin: Roger. Ready to copy.
123:14:55 Evans: Okay. At plus 123 plus 00, RCS Alpha 78, (repeating) seventy eight percent, PQMD; Bravo is 76 percent PQMD; descent O2 is 62, sixty-two percent. Descent ampere hours are 590...590 remaining; ascent ampere hours are 574, 574 remaining. Over.It's not clear what's going on here, perhaps there was a misreading in one of the transmissions. However, 62 percent would be 33.0 lb, leaving 2 lbs for consumption in the approximately 1.25 hours between this update 123:14:55 and the switchover to the ascent tanks sometime prior to 124:22:00.

None the less, at some point between the consumables update at 114:31:45 but prior to the lift off from the lunar surface at 124:22:00 they would have switched to the ascent stage O2 tanks . So it's probably better to quote the combined O2 usage for the 114:31:45 to the rendezvous with the CSM; unfortunately I don't have a time for that. Note that the total ascent oxygen consumption was 1.1 lbs - that's somewhere around an hour.

I'm going to register at ApolloHoax.net, where there are posters that are very knowledgable in Apollo matters, and ask for clarification on this.

One further point: Dr. Greening, you are either trolling or seriously mistaken. In focusing on this item, you are playing the same game the truthers play: nit picking details while ignoring the larger picture. For Apollo to be hoaxed, it would require not only an Impossibly Astronomical Conspiracy, but the Soviet Union would have to be part of the conspiracy - plus all the geologists from 1969 to today. (The Soviets could and probably did track the Apollo missions to the moon and back. Further, Apollo brought back, in toto, approximately 600 lbs of samples, as I recall. None of these samples match anything on Earth, and show signs of exposure to the lunar surface - and no signs of re-entry like the lunar meteorites found in Antarctica - which, by the way, were only identified as such after Apollo 11.)

[Horatius]

Uhm, yeah. What he said!


I know when I'm out of my depth!

:)

[twinstead]

Uhm, yeah. What he said!

I know when I'm out of my depth!



And he's right about Apollohoax; those folks really know their stuff.

God help anybody who seriously thinks the moon landings were hoaxed who show up there.

[Apollo20]

Did I say APOLLO was hoaxed?

No I didn't!

You guys are all "knee-jerk government position" types aren't you!

But thank you for the data. I am also using published NASA data... so NASA has refined it's numbers............

Anyway, another Apollo issue would be the Van Allen Belts.

Too bad those Americans messed around with those belts:

U.S. Space Radiation Manipulation:

The existence of a region of trapped radiation surrounding the earth had been proposed by Carl Stömer and others at the turn of the century but its presence was not confirmed until the advent of artificial satellites in the late 1950s. Ironically, as soon as James Van Allen and his colleagues at the University of Iowa “discovered” the inner radiation belt in the spring of 1958, the US military started trying to modify it with high altitude atomic explosions. These attempts to modify the earth’s radiation belts stemmed from a classified proposal submitted to the US Air Force in October 1957 by Nicholas Christofilos, a Lawrence Radiation Laboratory scientist.

The basic idea put forward by Christofilos was that an atomic bomb exploded in the earth’s upper atmosphere would produce a slowly decaying region of high-energy electrons from the trapping of the fission product beta-decay particles in the earth’s geomagnetic field. Christofilos noted that the lifetimes of the trapped electrons would be proportional to the air density at the so called mirror points in the trapped electron’s trajectories. He estimated that electrons injected by an explosion a few hundred miles above the earth would form a radiation belt lasting several days that could be detected by rocket-borne instruments or ground-based auroral observations.

By the end of April 1958 it was decided to detonate three 1.7 kiloton W-25 nuclear warheads at high altitudes above the South Atlantic to test these predictions. Thus, shrouded in great secrecy, Operation Argus came into being. The full resources of the US military were dedicated to these tests which were conducted by Task Force 88, a naval organization consisting of nine ships and approximately 4500 men; the tests also included the launching of 19 sounding rockets and two earth orbiting satellites, Explorer IV and Explorer V.

The detonations were carried out in Aug - Sept 1958 as follows:

Argus I: Aug 27, altitude 160 km

Argus II: Aug 30, altitude 293 km

Argus III: Sept 6, altitude 750 km

After each detonation aurora were observed in the vicinity of the burst and at the so-called “conjugate mirror points” above the Azores Islands in the North Atlantic. The fission product residues from the Argus explosions rose rapidly into the extreme reaches of the earth’s upper atmosphere so that most of the beta-decay electrons were released at much greater altitudes than the injection altitudes. Geiger counters on the Explorer IV satellite recorded the creation of a well-defined radiation belt, a few hundred km deep at an altitude of about 6000 km. This new radiation belt decayed slowly over a period of several weeks.

The very existence of Operation Argus was not reported to the world’s press until about 6 months after its completion and technical details were only made available to scientists in August 1959 in a collection of articles published in Volume 64 of the Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR).

At this time “Argus” was billed as nothing more than an ingenious scientific experiment of value to geophysicists but only of passing interest to the general public. However, the paper contributed to the JGR by Nicholas Christofilos hinted at other, more sinister, aspects of Operation Argus. Thus, in his discussion of the physics behind the Argus experiment, Christofilos used the example of a 1 Megaton nuclear detonation, (as opposed to the 1.7 kiloton explosion that was actually used), to calculate the electron density and flux in the artificially created radiation belt. He arrived at a value for the flux of 1.5 ´ 109 electrons/cm2 sec and then, somewhat off-topic, he considered the associated radiation level inside a space vehicle. This he estimates to be more than 100 rad/hour. Christofilos concluded his paper with the following note of alarm:

“100 r/hr is a good fraction of the lethal dose. Consequently, it is obvious that any explosion of such magnitude can create a radiation hazard in outer space, and any space experiments involving A-bomb explosions must be carefully designed to avoid creation of hazardous radiation. Fortunately a much smaller yield, namely in the kiloton range, is sufficient to yield detectable quantities without creating any radiation hazard at all.”

These words were probably the first on record to reveal the potential for military applications of Argus-type experiments in space. However, back in 1958, the military’s real interest in man-made radiation belts above the earth was not simply to create radiation hazards to humans in space, since there was nobody up there (at that time), but more to interfere with radar tracking, communications and the electronics of satellites and ballistic missiles.

On June 20th 1962, in a test dubbed Starfish, a 1665 lb W-49 plutonium-based warhead was launched from Johnston Island in the nose-cone of a Thor rocket. Only 59 seconds into its trajectory the engine failed and the range safety officer destroyed the vehicle 10 km above Sand Island, scattering debris far and wide. Undeterred, the Americans tried again on July 9, this time with complete success. Being a second try, the US military called the test Starfish Prime although many discussions of this test still refer to it simply as Starfish. By whatever name authors choose to designate this 1.45 megaton explosion, it remains the subject of great controversy. The auroral effects of the blast were visible on Hawaii, more than a thousand kilometers from Johnston Island. At the same time, on the island of Oahu, a giant electromagnetic pulse surged through power lines, knocking out streetlights and tripping circuit breakers. The effects of the Starfish test on the Van Allen radiation belts proved to be quite spectacular, more than living up to the 1957 predictions of Nick Christofilos for the effects of a high altitude 1 Megaton burst.....

Oh my America, my New Found Land

[twinstead]

Apollo you change the subject just as quickly as any CT does.

If you don't think the Apollo program was hoaxed, I would be totally shocked; as soon as you are outside your expertise you revert to the same techniques and arguments that any conspiracy theorist would use.

You talk about knee jerk, but perhaps you should take a long look at YOUR reaction to any action the US government takes, be it in the past, present, or future.

[Corsair 115]

All I know is that NASA's numbers don't add upYou know what my first thought there is? The measuring equipment used at the simply wasn't that accurate. Considering that the fuel gauge used for measuring the amount of fuel left during the LM's descent to the moon wasn't particularly accurate (the famous "30 seconds of fuel left" was, at best, an approximation), errors in measuring the amount of oxygen seems a very reasonable explanation for any discrepancies.

ETA: I see now that grmcdorman has given a very detailed response, thus rendering mine pointless. I should have read to the end of the new replies first...

[twinstead]

Oh, and Apollo if you want to try your theories on those who know what they are talking about,

http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories

is the place to be. Register and tell them that NASA's numbers don't add up.

[grmcdorman]

Did I say APOLLO was hoaxed?

No I didn't!

You guys are all "knee-jerk government position" types aren't you!

But thank you for the data. I am also using published NASA data... so NASA has refined it's numbers............No, Dr. Greening. Those numbers are from the Apollo 11 Mission Report, dated November 1969. You can download the PDF (a scan of the original paper copy, I gather) from the link I gave.

Your number on the leak rate is bogus. (Well, not bogus, but it's the wrong one: the maximum design target, not the actual leak rate.)

As for your position on Apollo, no, you didn't say your position. You just implied it ... just like many other conspiracy theorists who claim to be "fence sitters."

And knee jerk? Ha. If I had posted a simple denial, or unsourced rebuttals, you could make that claim. I didn't; I spent a hour or so researching the claim and found that it is bogus based on published data.

Anyway, another Apollo issue would be the Van Allen Belts.

Too bad those Americans messed around with those belts:
[snip]
So what is your point here? So there were some high-altitude nuclear bomb tests. So what?

If you're trying to lead into the old "Van-Allen belts not survivable" or "6 feet of lead required", those have been thoroughly debunked. Go to www.clavis.org for details on that one (http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html).

ETA: I had a great deal of respect for you based on your chemical analyses and comments on that area. Unfortunately, outside of that you seem to be either argumentative, enjoy baiting (i.e. like a troll), or you're just another conspiracy theorist. You've basically trashed any respect I had for you by such actions.

ETA 2: You're also displaying typical conspiracy theorist - or troll - behaviour by switching to a new topic as soon as the previous one gets debunked; vis your non-response to the replies to your inflammatory evolution comment above.

[Childlike Empress]

Than again, for every IQ=140, there is someone with an IQ=80


Even if it's only a typo, the fact that nobody disputes this BS statement, while you pedanticly jump on every spelling error a "truther" commits, once again shows the sad and dangerous group think you people are engaging in.

[grmcdorman]

You know what my first thought there is? The measuring equipment used at the simply wasn't that accurate. Considering that the fuel gauge used for measuring the amount of fuel left during the LM's descent to the moon wasn't particularly accurate (the famous "30 seconds of fuel left" was, at best, an approximation), errors in measuring the amount of oxygen seems a very reasonable explanation for any discrepancies.

ETA: I see now that grmcdorman has given a very detailed response, thus rendering mine pointless. I should have read to the end of the new replies first...Yeah, I tried to be complete. Had fun, actually, since this is the first time I've looked at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journals. They're quite interesting; the transmission logs have a lot of commentary by the astronauts giving all sorts of fascinating details.

The discrepancies in the reported remaining oxygen at GET 114:31:45 and at GET 123:14:55 may be the sort of thing you're speculating about. I would imaging the sensors register the tank pressure, and the remaining amount is calculated from that - so it would, of course, be dependant on temperature. Which could change, of course, due to both what the astronauts are doing and due to (slow) changes in sun position.

[William Rea]

Even if it's only a typo, the fact that nobody disputes this BS statement, while you pedanticly jump on every spelling error a "truther" commits, once again shows the sad and dangerous group think you people are engaging in.

I think that's pedantically.

[Childlike Empress]

Shill! :mad: ;)

[grmcdorman]

Even if it's only a typo, the fact that nobody disputes this BS statement, while you pedanticly jump on every spelling error a "truther" commits, once again shows the sad and dangerous group think you people are engaging in.CE, do you know "bell curves"? Where might these two values (140/80) fall on the curve?

In any event, the statement was a rhetorical device - the values were not meant to be exact, I would suspect, and most readers would understand that, and understand the point that T.A.M. was trying to make.

[Redtail]

So Apollo20 ends his moon landing post with a snide, hoaxbusterific line like "Houston we have a problem" and then falls back on the old "well I never said that!!11eleventy1"... Wow.:rolleyes:

[Childlike Empress]

CE, do you know "bell curves"? Where might these two values (140/80) fall on the curve?


Certainly there isn't a 140 for each 80.

[William Rea]

CE, do you know "bell curves"? Where might these two values (140/80) fall on the curve?

In any event, the statement was a rhetorical device - the values were not meant to be exact, I would suspect, and most readers would understand that, and understand the point that T.A.M. was trying to make.

No actually, in the context of how this forum is I don't think any latitude should be given to anyone for rhetorical devices unless the same courtesy is extended to every poster regardless of opinion.

[grmcdorman]

Certainly there isn't a 140 for each 80.Possibly. So if you have a source that says so, post it; you'll get more respect for that than just complaining about JREF bias.

None the less, the point I was making was that the original post was making a rhetorical point, and by complaining about the content - with nothing to back your complaint - rather than the meaning you come across badly.

FYI, minor spelling errors - and typos - generally don't bother me. Some grammatical errors do; what really bothers me, though, is those stream-of-consciousness posts that are all but unreadable due to an unholy mix of formatting, spelling errors, grammatical errors, and horrendous logic (or lack thereof).

By the way, what if I said "for every IQ of 120 there's one of 80"?

[William Rea]

...snip...By the way, what if I said "for every IQ of 120 there's one of 80"?

Where's your evidence?

[grmcdorman]

Where's your evidence?I'd like to see Childlike Empress's response first, please.

[Childlike Empress]

I didn't come across any posting of you so i'm not able to decide if you are trying to kid me but in the spirit of my last postings i'll say no and tell you that a huge problem that comes with the group think is that the ninja turtle ilk focuses on the weakest link and projects it on the "enemy" it's dealing with, hence coming to the conclusion that they are dealing with a bunch of idiots.

By the way, what if I said "for every IQ of 120 there's one of 80"?


I wouldn't dispute it even if you are a devote disciple of dubya.

[grmcdorman]

I didn't come across any posting of you so i'm not able to decide if you are trying to kid me but in the spirit of my last postings i'll say no and tell you that a huge problem that comes with the group think is that the ninja turtle ilk focuses on the weakest link and projects it on the "enemy" it's dealing with, hence coming to the conclusion that they are dealing with a bunch of idiots.I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; I presume it was directed at me. Could you reword it?

I wouldn't dispute it even if you are a devote disciple of dubya.OK. William, look at http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq04.htm

As for GW Bush ("dubya"), I'm not a U.S. citizen. I'm not going to go into my politics; that's generally a tar pit. I will say I generally don't think one should be a supporter of one person, or one party, no matter what.

ETA: William - and CE - I have learned from observing posts here that, where facts are crucial to one's argument a bit of research to find sources is in order. I did not respond to CE's first post before researching the topic a bit. Mind you, I didn't look very far for the IQ info, so I don't know the quality of that source. Were it more important I would have looked in more depth (like I did for the Apollo data).

[fitzgibbon]

Or for your consideration.....
imdb.com/title/tt0280436/

[Childlike Empress]

@grmcdorman: Yeah, whatever. Welcome to the forum. I'm glad you've learned something about bell curves.

[WildCat]

Or for your consideration.....
imdb.com/title/tt0280436/
:woowoo

[fitzgibbon]

Having suffered through that particular film, I think that deserves some sort of award. :)

[William Rea]

...snip...

OK. William, look at http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq04.htm

...snip...

You originally said 140 and 80 and now you're changing your story to 120 and 80?

How can I possibly take anything else you post seriously from now on?

[Childlike Empress]

Come on William, he only wanted to see if i'm a moron who has to read up on bell curves on wikipedia ...well... while he was reading up on bell curves on wikipedia.

[Mince]

I want some peanuts.


ETA: Oh, open thread with a conspiracy bend. Hmmmm. I think the NWO is broadcasting radio waves that make me desire peanuts. Then I'll go buy some peanuts that they've laced with mercury. This will make me easier to brainwash. Bastards!

[William Rea]

Come on William, he only wanted to see if i'm a moron who has to read up on bell curves on wikipedia ...well... while he was reading up on bell curves on wikipedia.

Lol, now you done chilled me wid ya humour I cannot continue to be as cruel as the typical JREFer.

@grmcdorman I was pulling your leg, I knew what you meant.

[~enigma~]

I had a great deal of respect for you based on your chemical analyses and comments on that area.You are a better man than me. Ever since his first post here i have seen his snide remarks, superior attitude and childish "gutter sniping." I have not had any respect to lose but my feelings are now (after the aids remark and the others) are that he is a bitter old codger suffering from a form of senile dementia and it is a very good thing I am not a doctor in Canada (where he is) because I definitely would refuse to treat him.

[Mince]

I cannot continue to be as cruel as the typical JREFer.

Are you going to cry? Maybe an 12 y/o and under AOL chatroom would be more suitable to your fragile disposition. Wait, forget that. Those kids are exponentially more tortuous then we are. They'll call your mom fat and the like.

[Childlike Empress]

Oh yes, since this is an open thread. Dave Emory was very excited last week because he was able to cite one of his arch enemies, Ahmed Huber, actually agreeing with him. I thought about opening a thread but the reaction of the ninja turtles was so predictable ("irrelevant opinion of an insane islamofascist" (at least islamofascist being true)), that i refrained from creating it. His opinion on 9/11:

"I have my own idea about 11 September. Among Muslims it’s a very controversial debate. Many Muslims still believe that the 11th of September was organized by the CIA and the Mossad to bring closer together the relationship between Israel and the United States, and to help make war in the Middle East, and to put under Western-Jewish control the most important geo-political zone on earth, which is the Middle East. I believe that 11 September, but I have no proof, was organized by American patriots, Muslims and non-Muslims together with the help of foreign Muslims residing in the United States.

From 1988 to 1998, I was in America every year, at Islamic conferences. I made big lecture tours through the United States and I always met three groups of people at these conferences. There were American right-wing people . . . people who were rather close to the extreme right of the Republican Party, or other independent right-wing groups. Then [the second group was] Muslims, young American Muslim patriots, who came from Muslim countries. And then [the third group was] the Nation of Islam people. And these three groups . . . always told me two things. They said, ‘We must free American from Jewish-Zionist rule.’ And two, ‘Then we must change the foreign policy of the United States toward the national interests of the American people. . . . We must end this Jewish-Zionist rule over America.’ And when I asked, them, ‘How will you do it?’ they said, ‘Well, we have friends in very high places and there will be a big bang. It will happen here to wake up the American people, you know, like Pearl Harbor.’ Pearl Harbor was organized by Roosevelt and his Jewish [advisers] to provoke Japan to attack America. Then Hitler would immediately declare war on America. It was not Japan—they really wanted America to go to war against Germany. . . . Then the way was open to make war against Germany. And this is what these people told me. Something similar will happen here. They said, ‘You will hear a big bang.

And then came the 11th of September, and my Egyptian wife said, ‘You see the Mossad and the CIA.’ And I believed it also. But then I got telephone calls from American friends, and they said, ‘See now they have done it.’ I said. What?’ and then they said to me, they have done it, and then the coin was dropped. I said, ‘This is counterproductive. This 11 September will provoke a huge alliance of American and Israeli Zionism against Islam, against the Muslim world.’ And they told me, ‘Yes, it will be at the beginning, but then America will get into difficult days and after some time, the American people will wake up. When it is up to the nose in difficult days—political, economic, war, and so on—they will ask who is responsible for this. And they will say it’s the Jews and the Zionists.’ One told me that around the beginning of September 2001, a telephone call, a very good friend of mine, told me, ‘You know Ahmed, then we will have 1933.’ And then of course, I knew. He said that the American people will wake up [as did] the German people [woke] up in 1933. For me, I still didn’t believe it. Now the more and more things go on, I see how Bush and all his experts, I mean Mr. Wolfowitz, Mr. Perle, Mr. Kissinger, Mr. Feingold, I say maybe there is something to what my friends in America told me. It is possible now that things will go in that direction. You know. In the 1990’s, when I was in America , we were talking about how to change Jewish rule in America. For me, a Swiss, it was fascinating. One of these young persons said, ‘You know, we may have many sympathizers in the American Army, and if necessary the American Army will make a coup d’etat against the Zionist-American regime in Washington.’”

(The Enemy of My Enemy; by George Michael; Copyright 2006 by the University Press of Kansas; ISBN 0-7006-1444-3; p. 236-237)

[William Rea]

Are you going to cry? Maybe an 12 y/o and under AOL chatroom would be more suitable to your fragile disposition. Wait, forget that. Those kids are exponentially more tortuous then we are. They'll call your mom fat and the like.

You appear to have more of the right intellect and experience of that type of chat room than me. I'll take your word for it that they're like that and leave you to the 12 y/o's shall I.

[William Rea]

Oh yes, since this is an open thread. Dave Emory was very excited last week because he was able to cite one of his arch enemies, Ahmed Huber, actually agreeing with him. I thought about opening a thread but the reaction of the ninja turtles was so predictable ("irrelevant opinion of an insane islamofascist" (at least islamofascist being true)), that i refrained from creating it. His opinion on 9/11:

What are the "ninja turtles" CE?

[Childlike Empress]

Lol, now you done chilled me wid ya humour I cannot continue to be as cruel as the typical JREFer.


Oops, another misspelling? :boxedin:

[Horatius]

You originally said 140 and 80 and now you're changing your story to 120 and 80?

How can I possibly take anything else you post seriously from now on?



Psst: He wasn't the one who said it "originally". You'd better edit that post so you don't look silly.



Than again, for every IQ=140, there is someone with an IQ=80

TAM;)


And besides which, so long as the number of 80s is greater than the number of 140s, there is one 80 for every 140. We'll just have a bunch left over as spares, is all.

[Gravy]

Pardalis:

"How many conspiracy theories do I believe in?"

Well I can tell you one theory I do not believe in:

EVOLUTION

The Stanley Miller experiment of 1953 proves NOTHING, absolutely nothing about the origin of life and yet it is touted as the be-all-and-end-all proof of evolution. In fact it's nothing of the sort!You seem to be misinformed about the Miller experiment, but if you're not just trying to push buttons, I'd be genuinely interested in hearing your theory of how the variety of biological forms came to be, and to what mechanisms of change you believe they are subject.

[Childlike Empress]

What are the "ninja turtles" CE?


Oh, in the beginning of this vendetta people of this forum formed the "JREF Ninjas", fighting for whatever, and i decided to call them "ninja turtles" for no particular reason. I've made a little collage for them back then (in answer to a similar one by some cat with a melon on its head):


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990744cab5fb319b4.jpg

[William Rea]

Oops, another misspelling? :boxedin:

That was patois! We all speak like that down in the 'hood. :D




Hmmm, my stalker is back. :rolleyes:

[fitzgibbon]

What are the "ninja turtles" CE?

Gravy can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe he/she/it is referring to the self-proclaimed JREF 'Ninjas' who've been fighting the good fight against the Loosers vis a vis WTC fallacies.

[William Rea]

Oh, in the beginning of this vendetta people of this forum formed the "JREF Ninjas", fighting for whatever, and i decided to call them "ninja turtles" for no particular reason. I've made a little collage for them back then (in answer to a similar one by some cat with a melon on its head):


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990744cab5fb319b4.jpg

OK, I had you down as a JREFskeptic, am I wrong about that?

[Childlike Empress]

And besides which, so long as the number of 80s is greater than the number of 140s, there is one 80 for every 140. We'll just have a bunch left over as spares, is all.

Oh my... ninja turtles... ;)

[Mince]

You appear to have more of the right intellect and experience of that type of chat room than me. I'll take your word for it that they're like that and leave you to the 12 y/o's shall I.

Oh, my intellect is broad spectrum. Those 12 y/o punks don't intimidate me. I can insult someone's mother like I was getting paid; oh, and my dad can beat up their dad.

[Childlike Empress]

OK, I had you down as a JREFskeptic, am I wrong about that?


I'm a Wilson skeptic - not a Randi skeptic - and i'm very skeptical of JREF/CT.

[William Rea]

Oh, my intellect is broad spectrum.

Probably a skewed distribution on the infra side of the spectrum though.

[Horatius]

Oh my... ninja turtles... ;)



I ain't no ninja! Pure samurai!


:)


Or at least, I play one in the dojo.....

[fitzgibbon]

Oh, in the beginning of this vendetta....

[snippity]


I love how one whose views disagree with yours is on a "vendetta". If any group could be guilty of 'vendetta', it would be the Loosers.

[William Rea]

I'm a Wilson skeptic - not a Randi skeptic - and i'm very skeptical of JREF/CT.

OK, what's a "Wilson skeptic"?

[fitzgibbon]

I'm a Wilson skeptic - not a Randi skeptic - and i'm very skeptical of JREF/CT.

Kinda puts you on the fence being a JREF/CT skeptic, doesn't it? What exactly DO you believe?

[Childlike Empress]

OK, what's a "Wilson skeptic"?


Robert Anton Wilson. IMO the difference is that the Randi Skeptic follows a belief system (fundamentalistic materialism) while the Wilson Skeptic is skeptical about everything and likes to change his belief system everytime Randi Skeptics change their underwear. Both are united in their fight against religious fundamentalism (with the mentioned extension of the Wilson Skeptics definition of it ;)).

I'll go to bed before the storm breaks loose.

[William Rea]

Robert Anton Wilson. IMO the difference is that the Randi Skeptic follows a belief system (fundamentalistic materialism) while the Wilson Skeptic is skeptical about everything and likes to change his belief system everytime Randi Skeptics change their underwear. Both are united in their fight against religious fundamentalism (with the mentioned extension of the Wilson Skeptics definition of it ;)).

I'll go to bed before the storm breaks loose.

Hmmm, just had a quick read, sounds like something I might be interested in. Obviously, I don't want to fall into the fallacy of the middle way! Fundies hate fence sitters almost as much as they hate each other in my experience. :rolleyes:

[Mobyseven]

Damn I'm disappointed.

I thought that this thread had real potential, and was actually quite looking forward to seeing what some of the other people on the forum are thinking about at the moment in regards to conspiracy theories.

Then the thread got hijacked by Greening. C'est la vie.

If anyone does want to return to the original 'open mike' idea rather than this CT debate that has sprung up, I for one would be fascinated to get a bit more of an insight into what is running through everyone's head.

[Alareth]

What exactly DO you believe?


I'd speculate anything that allows her to act smug, arrogant and condescending.

[Rika]

.. I just noted your new sig. Ah, to be persecuted (falsely).

(for that matter, CE,you seriously remidn me of another person. But.. okay, off topic in an off topic thread)

See, I lately.. don't care much about truthers, they tend to repeat the same things ad infinitum. So.. I stopped commenting on threads here. What little knowledge I have is useless (as others can explain it better than I can) and I wanted to earn my lurker badge..

Then I got a computer capable of posting without choking. So.. I'm back!

Now, on to the topic (!?) I read the Apollo20-board debates and.. I had to say, he at least.. seemed to be rational.. but this.. is outright believe even when people can answer them.. and an admission to trolling. Sad.

[William Rea]

I'd speculate anything that allows her to act smug, arrogant and condescending.

Fundies hate fence sitters almost as much as they hate each other in my experience.

See what I mean CE. :rolleyes:

[LashL]

No, Dr. Greening. Those numbers are from the Apollo 11 Mission Report, dated November 1969. You can download the PDF (a scan of the original paper copy, I gather) from the link I gave.

Your number on the leak rate is bogus. (Well, not bogus, but it's the wrong one: the maximum design target, not the actual leak rate.)

As for your position on Apollo, no, you didn't say your position. You just implied it ... just like many other conspiracy theorists who claim to be "fence sitters."

And knee jerk? Ha. If I had posted a simple denial, or unsourced rebuttals, you could make that claim. I didn't; I spent a hour or so researching the claim and found that it is bogus based on published data.

So what is your point here? So there were some high-altitude nuclear bomb tests. So what?

If you're trying to lead into the old "Van-Allen belts not survivable" or "6 feet of lead required", those have been thoroughly debunked. Go to www.clavis.org for details on that one (http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html).

ETA: I had a great deal of respect for you based on your chemical analyses and comments on that area. Unfortunately, outside of that you seem to be either argumentative, enjoy baiting (i.e. like a troll), or you're just another conspiracy theorist. You've basically trashed any respect I had for you by such actions.

ETA 2: You're also displaying typical conspiracy theorist - or troll - behaviour by switching to a new topic as soon as the previous one gets debunked; vis your non-response to the replies to your inflammatory evolution comment above.

Just quoting this to get past the derail by the guy who calls himself "Childlike Empress" and the girl or guy who calls herself/himself "William Rea" so that Frank (who calls himself Apollo here) doesn't miss it.

[William Rea]

Just quoting this to get past the derail by the guy who calls himself "Childlike Empress" and the girl or guy who calls herself/himself "William Rea" so that Frank (who calls himself Apollo here) doesn't miss it.

We derailed a derailed thread?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2766522#post2766522

Is there no underhand tactic you whingers won't use in order to make a personal attack (whinger is a word accepted by Moderation precedent).

[LashL]

We derailed a derailed thread?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2766522#post2766522

Is there no underhand tactic you whingers won't use in order to make a personal attack (whinger is a word accepted by Moderation precedent).

Like I said above, I quoted the prior post to get the thread past your off-topic whining and snivelling. Give it a rest already.

[William Rea]

Like I said above, I quoted the prior post to get the thread past your whining derail. Give it a rest already.

Like I said, how do you derail a derailed thread? Apparently Greening was a derail according to the link I posted so your bypass was really just an attempt to flame against ** and myself really wasn't it.

In logical terms you were trying to bypass a derailed thread back to a derail. In my book the train is still off the tracks.

[LashL]

Like I said above, I quoted the prior post to get the thread past your off-topic whining and snivelling. Give it a rest already.

[William Rea]

Like I said above, I quoted the prior post to get the thread past your off-topic whining and snivelling. Give it a rest already.

Actually no.

You're whining and snivelling about us going off topic in a thread that apparently had already gone off topic? You started this exchange so don't start whining about giving it a rest when I contest your false accusation.

I see your Rawk and Rawl Stormtrooping buddy decided to join the fray as well (see below). :)

[~enigma~]

Actually no.

Your whining and snivelling about us going off topic in a thread that apparently had already gone off topic? You started this exchange so don't start whining about giving it a rest when I contest your false accusation.
You can shut up and stop arguing stupidity with LashL or you can keep it up entertaining us all and showing how stupid you can be...your choice :)

[LashL]

Following is the the relevant post that the guy who calls himself "Childlike Empress" and the guy or girl who calls himself/herself "William Rea" keep working at burying, but I think it's certainly worthy of a response from Frank, who calls himself "Apollo" on this forum, and that, therefore, it ought not be buried.

No, Dr. Greening. Those numbers are from the Apollo 11 Mission Report, dated November 1969. You can download the PDF (a scan of the original paper copy, I gather) from the link I gave.

Your number on the leak rate is bogus. (Well, not bogus, but it's the wrong one: the maximum design target, not the actual leak rate.)

As for your position on Apollo, no, you didn't say your position. You just implied it ... just like many other conspiracy theorists who claim to be "fence sitters."

And knee jerk? Ha. If I had posted a simple denial, or unsourced rebuttals, you could make that claim. I didn't; I spent a hour or so researching the claim and found that it is bogus based on published data.

So what is your point here? So there were some high-altitude nuclear bomb tests. So what?

If you're trying to lead into the old "Van-Allen belts not survivable" or "6 feet of lead required", those have been thoroughly debunked. Go to www.clavis.org for details on that one.

ETA: I had a great deal of respect for you based on your chemical analyses and comments on that area. Unfortunately, outside of that you seem to be either argumentative, enjoy baiting (i.e. like a troll), or you're just another conspiracy theorist. You've basically trashed any respect I had for you by such actions.

ETA 2: You're also displaying typical conspiracy theorist - or troll - behaviour by switching to a new topic as soon as the previous one gets debunked; vis your non-response to the replies to your inflammatory evolution comment above.

[3bodyproblem]

Actually no.

You're whining and snivelling about us going off topic in a thread that apparently had already gone off topic? You started this exchange so don't start whining about giving it a rest when I contest your false accusation.

I see your Rawk and Rawl Stormtrooping buddy decided to join the fray as well (see below). :)

Hehe, your name is Wiliam. It's bound to attract attention.

[Childlike Empress]

Just quoting this to get past the derail by the guy who calls himself "Childlike Empress" and the girl or guy who calls herself/himself "William Rea" so that Frank (who calls himself Apollo here) doesn't miss it.


It's an open thread, boring lawyer girl. Your secret love Mr. Greening will return, don't worry.

[Childlike Empress]

(for that matter, CE,you seriously remidn me of another person. But.. okay, off topic in an off topic thread)


Let it out. OPEN THREAD.

[William Rea]

Following is the the relevant post that the guy who calls himself "Childlike Empress" and the guy or girl who calls himself/herself "William Rea" keep working at burying, but I think it's certainly worthy of a response from Frank, who calls himself "Apollo" on this forum, and that, therefore, it ought not be buried.

Practical suggestion.

Instead of whinging about how us nasty people are derailing the derailed thread why don't YOU answer Greening instead of adding more fluff on top of his post? I'm sure if people are REALLY that bothered about the Greening post they'll go looking for it!

[Rika]

Open thread is not so open I can derail it to every extent. Anyway, you remind me of Rei Murasame...doubt you're actually her, since she always says she hates JREF (.. Yes, I talked to her over IRC. Yes, I think she's a nice person as long as you only talk to her about anime. It gets hazy to "... you acutally think Alex Jones is sane!?" further on.)

[Rika]

Greening has been answered. It's making sure he reads it.

[Childlike Empress]

Gravy can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe he/she/it is referring to the self-proclaimed JREF 'Ninjas' who've been fighting the good fight against the Loosers vis a vis WTC fallacies.Kinda puts you on the fence being a JREF/CT skeptic, doesn't it? What exactly DO you believe?


I believe you shouldn't confuse my with Gravy. That's where my humour ends.

[William Rea]

Greening has been answered. It's making sure he reads it.

I'm sure Greening is intelligent enough to find it if he wants to.

[Childlike Empress]

Open thread is not so open I can derail it to every extent. Anyway, you remind me of Rei Murasame...doubt you're actually her, since she always says she hates JREF (.. Yes, I talked to her over IRC. Yes, I think she's a nice person as long as you only talk to her about anime. It gets hazy to "... you acutally think Alex Jones is sane!?" further on.)


Incredible. You're now officially in bed with Oliver. Miss Murasame is a nationalist from britain while i am a frickin' evil globalist from germany.

[~enigma~]

Incredible. You're now officially in bed with Oliver. Miss Murasame is a nationalist from britain while i am a frickin' evil globalist from germany.
He's in bed with Oliver cause he spoke to Rei? You drunk?

[LashL]

Interesting that the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea" have taken such an interest in burying a legitimate post directed to Frank, who posts as "Apollo".

As a lawyer (or a "boring lawyer girl", according to the guy posting as "Childlike Empress"), I make it a point to provide ease of reference in correspondence with other lawyers - we are busy people and prefer not to have to wade through an entire file to locate a particular piece of correspondence or a particular point of reference, so we tend to provide a copy of the piece of correspondence or point at issue to which we are referring. I'm sorry that that is beyond the knowledge or comprehension of the fellow posting as "Childlike Empress" and beyond the ken of the guy/girl posting as "William Rea".

We also tend to filter out the nonsense, such as the posts above by the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea" so will likely only peripherally respond to same, and only when a response, peripheral or otherwise, is required for context.

So, for Apollo's ease of reference, here is the relevant post once again, to save him from wading through the nonsense above:

No, Dr. Greening. Those numbers are from the Apollo 11 Mission Report, dated November 1969. You can download the PDF (a scan of the original paper copy, I gather) from the link I gave.

Your number on the leak rate is bogus. (Well, not bogus, but it's the wrong one: the maximum design target, not the actual leak rate.)

As for your position on Apollo, no, you didn't say your position. You just implied it ... just like many other conspiracy theorists who claim to be "fence sitters."

And knee jerk? Ha. If I had posted a simple denial, or unsourced rebuttals, you could make that claim. I didn't; I spent a hour or so researching the claim and found that it is bogus based on published data.

So what is your point here? So there were some high-altitude nuclear bomb tests. So what?

If you're trying to lead into the old "Van-Allen belts not survivable" or "6 feet of lead required", those have been thoroughly debunked. Go to www.clavis.org for details on that one.

ETA: I had a great deal of respect for you based on your chemical analyses and comments on that area. Unfortunately, outside of that you seem to be either argumentative, enjoy baiting (i.e. like a troll), or you're just another conspiracy theorist. You've basically trashed any respect I had for you by such actions.

ETA 2: You're also displaying typical conspiracy theorist - or troll - behaviour by switching to a new topic as soon as the previous one gets debunked; vis your non-response to the replies to your inflammatory evolution comment above.

[Rika]

.. Even more amusing is I knew Rei from a roleplay group before I realized she was a CT anti-globalist. I seriously didn't know that until she started ranting about the JREF out of NOWHERE.

But.. no. I am not in bed with Oliver, and we both disagree on many things anyway. It was simply an observation.

EDIT: I'll wait until Greening reads the posts. Besides, I've got games calling.

[William Rea]

Interesting that the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea" have taken such an interest in burying a legitimate post directed to Frank, who posts as "Apollo".

As a lawyer (or a "boring lawyer girl", according to the guy posting as "Childlike Empress"), I make it a point to provide ease of reference in correspondence with other lawyers - we are busy people and prefer not to have to wade through an entire file to locate a particular piece of correspondence or a particular point of reference, so we tend to provide a copy of the piece of correspondence or point at issue.

We also tend to filter out the nonsense, such as the posts above by the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea".

So, for Apollo's ease of reference, here is the relevant post once again, to save him from wading through the nonsense above:

ROFLOL, seriously? You wrote that without a smile on your face?

All the BS from JREFers that pads the threads in this Forum and you're moaning about CE and myself posting in an already derailed thread.

Get yourself a life LashL before it's too late.

POSTSCRIPT

There you go that'll be my open mike - speak my mind topic. Why don't we adopt LashL's suggestion and stop posting padding into threads. It really drives me nuts, like opening one of those milk cartons.

[Revolutionary91]

ROFLOL, seriously? You wrote that without a smile on your face?

All the BS from JREFers that pads the threads in this Forum and you're moaning about CE and myself posting in an already derailed thread.

Get yourself a life LashL before it's too late.

I second that emotion!

[~enigma~]

I second that emotion!
Hey Rev...I always meant to ask you if all that revolving makes you dizzy :)

[Childlike Empress]

Interesting that the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea" have taken such an interest in burying a legitimate post directed to Frank, who posts as "Apollo".

As a lawyer (or a "boring lawyer girl", according to the guy posting as "Childlike Empress"), I make it a point to provide ease of reference in correspondence with other lawyers - we are busy people and prefer not to have to wade through an entire file to locate a particular piece of correspondence or a particular point of reference, so we tend to provide a copy of the piece of correspondence or point at issue to which we are referring. I'm sorry that that is beyond the knowledge or comprehension of the fellow posting as "Childlike Empress" and beyond the ken of the guy/girl posting as "William Rea".

We also tend to filter out the nonsense, such as the posts above by the guy posting as "Childlike Empress" and the guy/girl posting as "William Rea".

So, for Apollo's ease of reference, here is the relevant post once again, to save him from wading through the nonsense above:


Seriously, boring lawyer girl, there is a PM function on this forum. Simply drop your Prince a line like "Frank, i've written a very important message for you, please take a look". Cuts the deal, doesn't it?

[William Rea]

Seriously, boring lawyer girl, there is a PM function on this forum. Simply drop your Prince a line like "Frank, i've written a very important message for you, please take a look". Cuts the deal, doesn't it?

I didn't realise LashL had written the message she is so keen for him to read. Eugh that is cheesy.

[Childlike Empress]

But.. no. I am not in bed with Oliver, and we both disagree on many things anyway. It was simply an observation.


Yes OK, but he was the first one to "accuse" me of beeing her. Don't know why, she definately is smart and i like her somehow, but otherwise i find her "libertarian" agenda quite strange and, well, brainwashed. On the other hand, i'm sure she would have nothing less but a CAPITAL "socialist" for me. ;)

[~enigma~]

I didn't realise LashL had written the message she is so keen for him to read. Eugh that is cheesy.She didn't. Would you follow CE if he drank purple kool aid?