It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jason Bermas/Dylan Avery vs. Mark Roberts/Robert Wick Debate Footage

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Part A

Part B

-----

I thought this was some very interesting stuff. The Loose Change guys do openly admit the faults behind their movie, but are very informative. Mark Roberts, the "professional debunker", also has good points. Robert Wick, who is the host of the show, also plays a part in the debate

Now, what bothers me is this - there is quite a bit of bickering from both sides but neither really get into the niddy griddy of the NIST report, the FEMA report, or anything of that nature. Mark Roberts, as always, has an answer for everything and really doesn't back up his sources besides stating who he's "talked to", or who he's "heard from".

I'd like to talk about the two videos, so let me know what you guys are thinkin'!!!




posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Debate?

That was FAR from a debate. Although I do agree, there was not enough brought up about the NIST report.

The Loose Changes guys offered ZERO... ZERO to that debate. The sat there and all they could say is "I disagree" without offering one bit of evidence.

Everything the brought up was quickly squashed by Mark Roberts or the moderator (Who was clearly biased).

I was hoping for a more heated argument, but I think the L.C. boys walked out of there and went home to lick their wounds.

I say, have Bsbray challange Mark to a debate to the NIST report. Those two clowns knew nothing and were totaly trumpped.



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Yeah, that's pretty embarrassing.

NIST arguments would probably fall back on what their tests/data actually showed or did not show, vs. what NIST claimed they had found, and something about all these NIST employees knowing what they're doing (ie that we should just trust their conclusions regardless of their information, because surely a report can't be whitewashed by higher-ups).



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   
I think, by the lack of responses this particlar thread received...that Jason and Dylan from the L.C. Crew are losing what little credibility they have left.



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
I think, by the lack of responses this particlar thread received...that Jason and Dylan from the L.C. Crew are losing what little credibility they have left.



Agreed. Almost 100%. The only thing I think that they really want to keep going for them is their idea of being the 'gateway' film to the 9|11 truth movement.

They have admitted openly the flaws in their video, but have commented many times for being the film that makes others open their eyes. They realize that 9|11: Press for Truth and/or 9|11 Mysteries are two better equipped documentaries.

I still respect them for helping to "open the gates" to alot of the youth's eyes with the movement.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 04:01 PM
link   
That debate sucked. Why did they bring in the LC kids to debate Mark Roberts? Those kids are bright, but they aren't skilled debaters and they do not ask Mark the tough irrefutable questions they could have. They are just too polite.

He should have debated David Ray Griffin or another expert.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
HAHAHA
paraphrased
Mark: "The whole 95 bombing is something thats discussed ALOT only on the internet"

At that moment, I was like, where is it supposed to be discussed supermarket checkout???

And for anyone who hasn't noticed, the host is very right wing, supporting the official story.



"it hit doing 580mph, of course there isn't going to be any large parts" - in reference to flight 93....

Uh.... has there never been any other plane crashes? yes. Were there large parts? yes.


[edit on 23-4-2009 by king9072]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by king9072




"it hit doing 580mph, of course there isn't going to be any large parts" - in reference to flight 93....

Uh.... has there never been any other plane crashes? yes.


Flight 1771



Were there large parts? yes.


No

Please watch this:




posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Very disappointing. I didn't even bother with the second half, I'm afraid.

A slightly more lively and even-handed debate can be seen in this thread, if anyone's interested.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 





Uh.... has there never been any other plane crashes? yes. Were there large parts? yes


Uh and in the case of every high speed impact they all look like Flight 93, big hole, lots of itty bitty pieces of wreckage, and a couple larger pieces....whats your point?



posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CameronFox
 


In my mind, Loose Change never had any real credibility. They took a few bits and pieces of different facts and interesting tidbits, and mixed them up into a collage of BS that really did a disservice to proving anything. And really, the information that was decent could have been found in better, more coherent and mature documentaries.

Not all people who question 9/11 support the same sources and documentaries. I thought Loose Change was rubbish the first time I watched it. There are far better, more interesting documentaries out there.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join