Loose Change Fans/Haters....

2007-05-14 05:12:07

#1

Cougar: Banned; +1,962|7210|Dallas

....I think Popular Mechanics just ripped the film apart. The following debate took place on a show called Democracy Now where the pitted the two creators of Loose Change against two editors of Popular Mechanics to discuss the Loose Change documentary and 9-11 itself.

Who's side do you take on this? Which side do you think proved it's point? Who do you think is more believable, 2 amateur documentary making conspiracy theorists or 2 editors at a well known and respected science magazine?

The Debate:

Discuss.

2007-05-14 05:21:04

#2

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|7095

The fact they have to act very unprofessionally like complete assholes doesn't really help their case much...

2007-05-14 05:27:34

#3

Cougar: Banned; +1,962|7210|Dallas

ghettoperson wrote:
The fact they have to act very unprofessionally like complete assholes doesn't really help their case much...

Yeah, I had the same feeling. They might have been able to actually hold some weight if they hadn't called the PM guys liars and government stooges every 5 minutes. Not to mention the best comeback I heard was a barrage of acronyms.

2007-05-14 06:00:02

#4

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|7095

Yeah, just watched the whole thing and had they not just jumped in and acted like assholes they would have been a lot better off. Then the was also the constant snickering you could hear whenever the PM guys were talking. I don't really have an opinion on it; I don't think either side of the story makes much sense, but the way they acted did not help their cause in any way, whereas the PM guys were polite, friendly and professional about the whole thing.

2007-05-14 07:34:50

#5

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6891|The Land of Scott Walker

The Loose Change guys are garden variety conspiracy theorists who have had their claims blown out of the water by the facts. The only response they can seem to muster when one of their points is proven false is to label the PM guys as tools of the government conspiracy. Pffff. Get a job. The book that the PM guys wrote smokes the Loose Change 9/11 theory.

2007-05-14 08:26:22

#6

Cerpin_Taxt: Member; +155|6649

I think we've already established that anyone who actually believes Loose Change is a fool or a tool

2007-05-14 08:29:47

#7

CC-Marley: Member; +407|7274

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:
I think we've already established that anyone who actually believes Loose Change is a fool or a tool

QFT

2007-05-14 08:34:11

#8

Flecco: iPod is broken.; +1,048|7111|NT, like Mick Dundee

I remember, back in the good old days when I were a young fool (about 3 years ago... )... Ashamed to say I bought that nonsense. Since reconsidered my views many times.

Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.

2007-05-14 09:03:46

#9

CC-Marley: Member; +407|7274

https://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/CC-Marley/13.jpg

Here is a picture of a part of the plane that never hit the Pentagon. Got more if you'd like..

2007-05-14 13:14:08

#10

Elamdri: The New Johnnie Cochran; +134|7092|Peoria

I love that you have these 2 punkass kids, vs. 2 old dudes in suits.

2007-05-14 13:53:41

#11

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7078|949

I love Amy Goodman!

2007-05-14 13:57:23

#12

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7207

CC-Marley wrote:
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/CC-Marley/13.jpg
Here is a picture of a part of the plane that never hit the Pentagon. Got more if you'd like..

Well golly gee, that looks like an American Airlines paint job.

2007-05-14 13:58:48

#13

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7256|Nårvei

usmarine2005 wrote:
CC-Marley wrote:
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/CC-Marley/13.jpg
Here is a picture of a part of the plane that never hit the Pentagon. Got more if you'd like..
Well golly gee, that looks like an American Airlines paint job.

It does ? ... i thought it looked more like an enlarged pack of Luckies

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2007-05-14 14:32:14

#14

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,993|7078|949

After watching all the clips, I can honestly say that neither side presented their case well. Both sides come off as arrogant, and really don't debate each other's views.

2007-05-14 14:40:05

#15

Hurricane: Banned; +1,153|7076|Washington, DC

usmarine2005 wrote:
CC-Marley wrote:
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/CC-Marley/13.jpg
Here is a picture of a part of the plane that never hit the Pentagon. Got more if you'd like..
Well golly gee, that looks like an American Airlines paint job.

No no, it's all a trick. It's part of the elaborate government mind control system! They're making you think you see that on the grass!

Hmm who's that at the doo-

*killed by CIA agents*

2007-05-14 16:51:02

#16

oug: Calmer than you are.; +380|6965|Πάϊ

Cougar wrote:
Who do you think is more believable, 2 amateur documentary making conspiracy theorists or 2 editors at a well known and respected science magazine?

Don't let their resumes do the talking. In fact, I expected a lot more from the suits on this one.

Apart from the fact that this discussion was a joke of a debate where nobody presented any real proof of their statements, I really can't help but wonder: why all this fuss about Loose Change?
Ok, so it was maybe the first movie to question the official explanation (or maybe it wasn't I don't know). But other than that, it doesn't really prove much, it just sets some doubts about things that don't really matter in the long run.
I mean, surely some of the things they've said don't make sense, same as some of the stuff the government supported (like the the one about the passports... that was funny!)

In the end, no matter which side you're on, Loose Change is just for show. If you want to refute something there's plenty of serious and informative documentaries about the background of this case with real evidence.

_ƒ³

2007-05-14 17:26:18

#17

HunterOfSkulls: Rated EC-10; +246|6725

Lemme preface this by saying I have no trouble believing that our government saw this coming or at least had an idea it was coming and did nothing.

That said, these Loose Change cultists I keep running into on the internet give me the shits. If you try to explain to them that steel only has to be heated to about half of its melting temperature to lose its structural hardness (I believe it's called "annealing", removing the tempering from steel through heat, Parker would know) then suddenly you're one of them, part of the eeeevil Masonic/Satanic/Illuminati-style conspiracy out to destroy America. If you point out that placing enough charges in that building to bring it down while not being spotted doing so and nobody involved talks is pretty much ludicrously impossible, same thing.

Personally, I think the whole Loose Change phenomenon is garden-variety disinformation. Put out there to make the rest of the people who have questions about what happened on 9/11 look like unbalanced cranks by proxy.

2007-05-14 22:04:10

#18

CC-Marley: Member; +407|7274

https://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/CC-Marley/rim1.jpg

Wheel of the plane that never hit the Pentagon.

2007-05-14 22:11:33

#19

theelviscerator: Member; +19|6734

what do you expect from kids just out of diapers.

2007-05-15 03:30:15

#20

Cougar: Banned; +1,962|7210|Dallas

oug wrote:
Cougar wrote:
Who do you think is more believable, 2 amateur documentary making conspiracy theorists or 2 editors at a well known and respected science magazine?
Apart from the fact that this discussion was a joke of a debate where nobody presented any real proof of their statements, I really can't help but wonder: why all this fuss about Loose Change?

The big deal is that, after 2 million views on the internet and talks of a Hollywood movie deal, a documentary that claims a plane never hit the pentagon, a plane never crashed in Shanksville and that the WTC buildings were demolished by explosives, needs to have some proof or at least be able to back up the facts they give.

For example, the guy they had on the documentary claiming that steel wouldn't weaken and was later fired......was actually a water testing expert.

2007-05-15 05:20:32

#21

Mason4Assassin444: retired; +552|7108|USA

Pop Mechanics gives the loose change guys more exposure and justifies thier cause by addressing them. Especially writing a whole book based on them. Its almost like they are both capitalizing on 9/11.

https://img521.imageshack.us/img521/1986/911lu1.png

They all win.

2007-05-15 05:44:02

#22

CC-Marley: Member; +407|7274

The book was not on them. It was debunking many Conspiracy theories.

2007-05-15 06:18:31

#23

Mason4Assassin444: retired; +552|7108|USA

CC-Marley wrote:
The book was not on them. It was debunking many Conspiracy theories.

And they still made money off of it (9-11). Its not like Pop Mechanics did this as closure for the people.

At this point Pop mechanics is no better than Alex Jones. They should have kept thier focus on Popular Mechanics. Not on "conspiracy theorists". It makes them look ridiculous in the science community and gives said conspiracy theorist the exposure they crave.

Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2007-05-15 06:24:24)

2007-05-15 13:51:06

#24

CoronadoSEAL: pics or it didn't happen; +207|6964|USA

(watched clips to entirety)
+1 pop mechanics for your poise and remarks
-1 loose change tools for your attitude, your closed minds, and the way you carry/present yourselves.

i am greatly disappointed that when i fight to defend the rights and freedom of this great country, punks like them will benefit from my actions.

2007-05-15 14:06:18

#25

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|7212|UK

Maddox already proved it wrong...

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … 911_morons

BF2S Forums Loose Change Fans/Haters....

ghettoperson wrote:

Cerpin_Taxt wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

Cougar wrote:

oug wrote:

Cougar wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

Board footer