9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Steven Collins
Minor Poster

Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 85
Location: ESSEX

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:46 am Post subject: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

Hi all you 911 sceptics sceptics (correct/proper English spelling). Listen to your hero from Popular Mechanics to hear how stupid you all really sound www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3 _________________ There's nothing wrong to adding to a conspiracy theory when there might be a conspiracy, in fact.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:59 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

Steven Collins wrote:

Hi all you 911 sceptics sceptics (correct/proper English spelling).

Listen to your hero from Popular Mechanics to hear how stupid you all really sound Laughing

www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3

I listened to about half of it. The interviewer did exactly what he set out to do, in my opinion: Get the interviewee flustered by hitting him relentlessly with questions he could not answer.

And why couldn't he answer? Not because he was stupid, but because the questions were unreasonable. In effect, they were a demand that Popular Mechanics FORCE the government (both federal and NYC) to release photographic/video evidence that was not in the public domain.

First of all, the guy isn't Popular Mechanics -- he just works there. Second, from his viewpoint, and the viewpoint of most reasonable people, there isn't likely to be anything in the visual records withheld that could possibly contradict what had already been found by careful investigation. Third, Popular Mechanics doesn't have the power to force the government to do anything. And, finally, it is the conspiracy theorists who want to see this additional evidence, so why don't THEY force the government to reveal it?

I wouldn't say he was "taken apart"; "ambushed" would describe it more accurately.

Alek
Minor Poster

Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 29

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:54 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

Steven Collins wrote:

Hi all you 911 sceptics sceptics (correct/proper English spelling).

Listen to your hero from Popular Mechanics to hear how stupid you all really sound Laughing

www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3

One thing I found interesting about that interview was the admission by the Popular Mechanics researcher Davin Coburn that there are police photos of the south side of the WTC 7 building he saw which they have not released to the public. I wasn't even aware these photos existed, but apparently they do and the authorities don't want us to see them!

Later in the broadcast Coburn tells an outright lie when he says "The term 'pull it' is not a demolition term." This is interesting, because in the very same PBS documentary "America Rebuilds" where Larry Silversteam makes his cryptic comment, you can hear a demolition worker saying "We're getting ready to pull building six." This is followed immediately by another who then says "We had to be very careful how we demolished building six." I've also heard a taped phone call to Controlled Demolition, Inc. specifically asking what the term "pull" means, and they confirmed that it is the actual process of bringing the building down. So here we have a case of a Popular Mechanics "researcher" who is either lying, or promoting misinformation. This didn't really damage Popular Mechanics' credibility with me, since they had none prior.

It's worth taking another look at Silverstein's comment:

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

First of all, it is a matter of record that there were no firefighters in building 7. Silverstein later explained that by "it" he meant firefighters. That's a curious use of a singular pronoun when he could have just as easily said "them". His second comment denotes a sequence, between the decision to pull and the watching of the building's collapse, alluding to a cause-and-effect relationship. The language used gives me the impression there was no delay between whatever he meant by "pull it" and the building collapsing.

In the context of all of the other oddities about what happend to WTC 7 on 9/11, Silverstein's cryptic and suspicious comments and the suppression of police photos of the south side of building seven don't lend credibility to the official lie.

Here are links to Silverstein and other's comments in the America Rebuilds video:

Silverstein comments
Construction worker audio

blackcat
Validated Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:09 pm Post subject:

The PM "researcher" described a "twenty storey" gash in the WTC7 which he said he saw on the unreleased photo. Just how does gravity acting downwards on a collapsing building 300 feet away cause such extensive damage?? Especially when there were buildings in between to prevent a sldeways slide of rubble. The only possible answer is the material from the collapse of one of the main towers was ejected with such explosive force that it caused the damage. Or there is no such photo of course. Lets hear it for the supercharged exploding diesel tank that no-one heard go bang!!

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

The PM "researcher" described a "twenty storey" gash in the WTC7 which he said he saw on the unreleased photo. Just how does gravity acting downwards on a collapsing building 300 feet away cause such extensive damage?? Especially when there were buildings in between to prevent a sldeways slide of rubble. The only possible answer is the material from the collapse of one of the main towers was ejected with such explosive force that it caused the damage. Or there is no such photo of course. Lets hear it for the supercharged exploding diesel tank that no-one heard go bang!!

That's just a 12 degree angle from the top of the tower to WTC 7. That's not steep, nor explosive.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Alek
Minor Poster

Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 29

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:59 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

aggle-rithm wrote:

I listened to about half of it. The interviewer did exactly what he set out to do, in my opinion: Get the interviewee flustered by hitting him relentlessly with questions he could not answer.

It's too bad you didn't listen to the whole thing. You would have heard Coburn assert that DNA evidence of the hijackers was collected "all over the place", presumably authenticating them as the hijackers. When the radio host next asked where they obtained the original DNA samples against which to match the hijackers, Coburn was stymied.

Quote:

And why couldn't he answer? Not because he was stupid, but because the questions were unreasonable. In effect, they were a demand that Popular Mechanics FORCE the government (both federal and NYC) to release photographic/video evidence that was not in the public domain.

Questions pertaining to why the government hasn't been forthright in its release of evidence, and why it has lied (NORAD) are not unreasonable questions at all. This is especially true in the context of an event for which the destructive foreign policy of the past five years, and the forseeable future is rooted in. Why indeed would the NYC police allow a Popular Mechanics researcher to view unreleased photos of the south side of the WTC 7 building, and exclude the public at large?

Quote:

First of all, the guy isn't Popular Mechanics -- he just works there. Second, from his viewpoint, and the viewpoint of most reasonable people, there isn't likely to be anything in the visual records withheld that could possibly contradict what had already been found by careful investigation. Third, Popular Mechanics doesn't have the power to force the government to do anything. And, finally, it is the conspiracy theorists who want to see this additional evidence, so why don't THEY force the government to reveal it?

He was representing Popular Mechanics, and he did so very poorly. Most reasonable people don't like to be told the equivalent of "move along, there is nothing to see here." If visual records don't contradict what has been found in the "careful investigation", then let us see them for ourselves. You'll forgive me if I don't give the government or the media much credibility. Popular Mechanics can't force the government to do anything, but apparently they have a special right to view NYC police photos that the rest of the public does not. Why should we have to force the government to disclose evidence pertaining to the greatest mass-murder in American history for a case that's already been slammed shut with the conviction of Osama Bin Ladin and nearly one billion muslims?

Quote:

I wouldn't say he was "taken apart"; "ambushed" would describe it more accurately.

Yes. He was ambushed by disturbing questions that many of us have, and that many more of you choose to write off. He, like you, has failed to answer them.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

Alek wrote:

He was representing Popular Mechanics, and he did so very poorly.

That's about all there is to say about this interview.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:51 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 conspiracy debunker taken apart on Arizona radio

Quote:

Questions pertaining to why the government hasn't been forthright in its release of evidence, and why it has lied (NORAD) are not unreasonable questions at all.

They are if they're asked of someone who has nothing to do with the government or NORAD and can't possibly answer.

SHERITON HOTEL
Moderate Poster

Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 988

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:42 pm Post subject:

D'ya know what? I reckon the conspiracy nuts invented this popular mechanics guy to discredit the official conspiracy theory recovered DNA indeed! sweat globules on the passport?

Serge
Moderate Poster

Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 188

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/281104unmistakablech arges.htm To those who refuse to remove their heads out from the sand, why are explosions clearly seen here?. Still the anti brigade fools will not see explosions taking place. The critics are so predictable. _________________ The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject:

Serge wrote:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/281104unmistakablech arges.htm

To those who refuse to remove their heads out from the sand, why are explosions clearly seen here?.

Still the anti brigade fools will not see explosions taking place. The critics are so predictable.

So why isn't that corner doing anything other than falling down if there's all those explosions over there? All the while the middle is collapsing inwards and there's no explosions there. I'm just asking questions....
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Serge
Moderate Poster

Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 188

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:51 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Serge wrote:

Study the entire collapse video and you would see clearly the roof centre collapsing downwards with the sides being pulled in.
The physics of gravity on a building with a hole in the side would mean a partial collapse of the floors above, not the entire building which again was brought down with the use of explosives.

Based on a so called hole or section of the building collapsing, why therefore, is the pentagon still standing?. Notice that the floors collapsed due to a hole at the bottom floors of the building and not the entire pentagon.

In 1993 the WTC was bombed and three floors were taken out. Section of the WTC was missing, it did not collapse despite the weight load being far higher than WTC7.

The Oklahoma bombing is exact evidence why a so called hole in 25% of the WTC7 would never in a million years have caused it to collapse, why? here is the proof why:

It still stands despite having half been blown away.

This building still stands - clearer pictures:

_________________
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:08 pm Post subject:

Serge wrote:

Study the entire collapse video and you would see clearly the roof centre collapsing downwards with the sides being pulled in.

So why are the explosives at the sides, if the centre collapses and pulls them inwards? You wouldn't need to blow up the side supports, because the centre is pulling those down.

Quote:

The physics of gravity on a building with a hole in the side would mean a partial collapse of the floors above, not the entire building which again was brought down with the use of explosives.

But the hole is in the middle of the building. It's not just the outer wall that's damaged. And there was the fire. A very large fire.

Quote:

Based on a so called hole or section of the building collapsing, why therefore, is the pentagon still standing?. Notice that the floors collapsed due to a hole at the bottom floors of the building and not the entire pentagon.

You are joking right?

The other 4 segments of the pentagon aren't held up by wedge 1. If they were all stacked on top of each other then yes. But they're not.

Quote:

In 1993 the WTC was bombed and three floors were taken out. Section of the WTC was missing, it did not collapse despite the weight load being far higher than WTC7.

Fire? Plane? Floors taken out, not perimeter and core supports. The floors don't hold the building up, the core and perimeter do. These were both damaged by the impact and subsequent fire.

Quote:

The Oklahoma bombing is exact evidence why a so called hole in 25% of the WTC7 would never in a million years have caused it to collapse, why? here is the proof why:

It still stands despite having half been blown away.

This building still stands - clearer pictures:

[/quote]

Fire? You missed the fire out that burned in WTC 7 for several hours.

And the building is of a completely different size, shape and design.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Serge
Moderate Poster

Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 188

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:36 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Serge wrote:

Study the entire collapse video and you would see clearly the roof centre collapsing downwards with the sides being pulled in.

So why are the explosives at the sides, if the centre collapses and pulls them inwards? You wouldn't need to blow up the side supports, because the centre is pulling those down.

Quote:

The physics of gravity on a building with a hole in the side would mean a partial collapse of the floors above, not the entire building which again was brought down with the use of explosives.

But the hole is in the middle of the building. It's not just the outer wall that's damaged. And there was the fire. A very large fire.

Quote:

You are joking right?

The other 4 segments of the pentagon aren't held up by wedge 1. If they were all stacked on top of each other then yes. But they're not.

Quote:

In 1993 the WTC was bombed and three floors were taken out. Section of the WTC was missing, it did not collapse despite the weight load being far higher than WTC7.

Fire? Plane? Floors taken out, not perimeter and core supports. The floors don't hold the building up, the core and perimeter do. These were both damaged by the impact and subsequent fire.

Quote:

The Oklahoma bombing is exact evidence why a so called hole in 25% of the WTC7 would never in a million years have caused it to collapse, why? here is the proof why:

It still stands despite having half been blown away.

This building still stands - clearer pictures:

Fire? You missed the fire out that burned in WTC 7 for several hours.

And the building is of a completely different size, shape and design.[/quote]

I have pictures the so called hole which is the clearest evidence of photoshoppery around, and if you call the corner section the middle, then you have given away what is obvious, you seeing or being told by someone else that the middle part missing proves you are making it up.

WTC7 Burnt out? are you getting this from an alien source? because it certainly never was burnt out. As for the explosions, no matter where they are seen, do you still deny, despite proof of explosive blasts being seen from the top area of the building? were proof of demolition being the sole cause of collapse?, because you certainly admit that you do see them.

Every point you have made is weak at best I'm afraid. Still, if you enjoy the torture of being debunked, fine.

I will set you a challenge. Find one single piece of evidence that WTC7 collapsed due to being burnt out and the additional hole you refer to which was hit by a big piece of masonary while the rest of the entire WTC1 and 2 were reduced to dust, and no masonary was elsewhere near the WTC7 building, WTC1 and 2 collapsed into it very own footprint. Your own photos which you posted prove this.
_________________
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:50 pm Post subject:

Quote:

I have pictures the so called hole which is the clearest evidence of photoshoppery around, and if you call the corner section the middle, then you have given away what is obvious, you seeing or being told by someone else that the middle part missing proves you are making it up.

WTC7 Burnt out? are you getting this from an alien source? because it certainly never was burnt out. As for the explosions, no matter where they are seen, do you still deny, despite proof of explosive blasts being seen from the top area of the building? were proof of demolition being the sole cause of collapse?, because you certainly admit that you do see them.

Every point you have made is weak at best I'm afraid. Still, if you enjoy the torture of being debunked, fine.

I will set you a challenge. Find one single piece of evidence that WTC7 collapsed due to being burnt out and the additional hole you refer to which was hit by a big piece of masonary while the rest of the entire WTC1 and 2 were reduced to dust, and no masonary was elsewhere near the WTC7 building, WTC1 and 2 collapsed into it very own footprint. Your own photos which you posted prove this.

Really?

WTC 1 & 2 collapsed in their own footprints eh?

So what destroyed WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6?
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

stateofgrace
Moderate Poster

Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 234

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:59 pm Post subject:

This is an arial view of the "footprint". http://wtc.logoto.com/ or here http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/wtc/images/wtc-photo.jpg

Steven Collins
Minor Poster

Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 85
Location: ESSEX

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:45 am Post subject:

WOW!! Cheers stateofgrace, there sure is an awful lot of unmelted steel in those pics. And many of the same size lengths as well hmmmmmm.... just long enough for those trucks as well, mightily handy. _________________ There's nothing wrong to adding to a conspiracy theory when there might be a conspiracy, in fact.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:19 am Post subject:

Steven Collins wrote:

WOW!! Cheers stateofgrace, there sure is an awful lot of unmelted steel in those pics. And many of the same size lengths as well hmmmmmm....
just long enough for those trucks as well, mightily handy.

So why did they have guys in there cutting the steel up into sections then?

_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Ally
Moderate Poster

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:45 am Post subject:

How did the aluminium plane penetrate the steel grill shill?

Serge
Moderate Poster

Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 188

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:24 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Steven Collins wrote:

WOW!! Cheers stateofgrace, there sure is an awful lot of unmelted steel in those pics. And many of the same size lengths as well hmmmmmm....
just long enough for those trucks as well, mightily handy.

So why did they have guys in there cutting the steel up into sections then?

Because obviously, that one section out of the many hundreds is too big to fit into the back of a lorry.
_________________
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.

Serge
Moderate Poster

Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 188

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:31 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Quote:

Really?

WTC 1 & 2 collapsed in their own footprints eh?

So what destroyed WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6?

Were those buildings still standing after the WTC1 and 2 demolition? yes they were and they were closer to the towers.

Was WTC7 still standing despite it being the least damaged of all the WTC buildings? no, it was 'pulled'.

There are many pics showing all the buildings still standing after the towers were demolished, only the 7 was the least damaged and collapsed as though it was hit by a plane.

Tell you what, When the creator of the axis of Evil is hauled before a judge, I bet you will be his lawyer, because he would love you to death. Rolling Eyes

_________________
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:02 pm Post subject:

Ally wrote:

How did the aluminium plane penetrate the steel grill shill?

550mph
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:03 pm Post subject:

Serge wrote:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Steven Collins wrote:

WOW!! Cheers stateofgrace, there sure is an awful lot of unmelted steel in those pics. And many of the same size lengths as well hmmmmmm....
just long enough for those trucks as well, mightily handy.

So why did they have guys in there cutting the steel up into sections then?

Because obviously, that one section out of the many hundreds is too big to fit into the back of a lorry.

Yes. That one and all of the ones behind it. Why don't you quit playing games and admit you're wrong?
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject:

Serge wrote:

Tell you what, When the creator of the axis of Evil is hauled before a judge, I bet you will be his lawyer, because he would love you to death. Rolling Eyes

What judge would that be? Couldn't be a federal judge, because they are part of the evil gubmint. So, a state judge? A county judge? Exactly how is this judge going to enforce his decision, when the Evil Ones control the military, the media, the community of structural engineers, the New York police and fire departments, the James Randi Educational Foundation, etc.?

At least try to be consistent in your fantasies.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:35 pm Post subject:

Ally wrote:

How did the aluminium plane penetrate the steel grill shill?

What's a steel grill shill?

realitybites
New Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 9

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:03 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

What's a steel grill shill?

It's a steel grill planted within the building during construction by government metalurgists. It's purpose is to give the false impression of a solid structure when in fact it's merely paper mache that LOOKS like solid steel. This way, the facade (or shill) will evaporate upon being struck by an object used by the government to faciliate a war on foreign soil.

In this case, a plane.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:31 pm Post subject:

realitybites wrote:

In this case, a plane.

Or not. Depends who you talk to.

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum