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.

 

Jesse ventura conspiracy theory episode two

page: 12
39
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
All right, I can't let this slide any longer. The definition of "eutectic mixture" is a mixture of substances that has a lower melting point than any of its individual substances (as per Wikipedia). Jones doesn't even mention anything about anything eutectic in his report. How is this even remotely relevent to what was found in the dust?


Because thermite is a type of eutectic reaction. Look that up. Jones is saying it's "thermitic," I'm saying eutectic. I would say either one is accurate but you were just criticizing the word "thermitic" earlier.


So in other words, Jones DID attempt to simulate the destruction of a vertical steel beam using thermite?


No, he tried to start a thermite reaction using molten aluminum and rust, and failed.

Click

Page 15 of the pdf shows the molten aluminum being dumped onto the rust to no effect.



All right, now you're just making stuff up. Jones did NOT establish that they created an eutectic reaction. He established it was a "highly energetic reaction" which he coined the term "thermitic reaction" as a description, when he placed it beneath a flame. He didn't investigate the melting points of anythign at all.


I already said thermite is a eutectic reaction. If you want to just call it exothermic, then fine, call it exothermic, but it's the exact same stuff.




Unless you have very extreme conditions, it only "burns" in powder form and even then the reaction is extremely rapid, like gunpowder.


Extreme condition as in an impact from a passenger jet?


You're going to have to explain to me how a passenger jet hitting the Twin Towers is going to change the way aluminum burns. Which is only in powder form and even then line gunpowder.


Are you honestly suggesting that the aluminum/iron oxide chips found in the dust were actually the remains of different metals molten together from the heat and separated/stuck together when the metals cooled? That throws the whole claim of thermite and sabotage into the garbage right there becuase it means it wasn't originally thermite. It means it WAS originally from the structure.


So you think there was explosive paint on the columns, then?



FYI I just looked this up- aluminum needs to be bonded with STAINLESS steel for it to be eutectic. The steel in the WTC wasn't stainless steel. You're making THAT up, too.


Wow, again in the middle of your posts you stop paying attention completely.


1) I didn't make the claim that this stuff was from the structural itself, YOU did.

2) I'd like to see where you "looked that up" because iron oxide and aluminum IS the classic thermite reaction:


Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time.

Thermites can be a diverse class of compositions. The fuels are often aluminium, magnesium, calcium, titanium, zinc, silicon, and boron. The oxidizers can be boron(III) oxide, silicon(IV) oxide, chromium(III) oxide, manganese(IV) oxide, iron(III) oxide, iron(II,III) oxide, copper(II) oxide, and lead(II,III,IV) oxide.[1]

The most common thermite is aluminium-iron(III) oxide.


en.wikipedia.org...



Yeah, whatever. Call it whatever you like. How about answering the question. DID Jones ever try to show proof of concept of thermite being able to destroy verical columns? If not, he might as well just have found a lot of cat hairs in the samples.


He didn't reproduce the stuff, so no.


WTF??? No it wasn't. It was in response to the claim that FEMA/NIST wasn't able to collect enough samples due to it being recycled so rapidly. I said that at least two times already. And you STILL didn't answer the question.


I'm just going to let this go because anyone can follow along with the posts and see where this part of our conversation leads back to.


First you use technical terms that don't have anything to do with anything, THEN you attribute claims to Jones that he never made, and NOW you're falsely putting words in my mouth...and your whole defense is- I'm drunk(?) Admit it, bsbray. You're simply repeating some sexy sounding fluff you found on some damned fool conspiracy web site and you haven't the foggiest of what any of it actually means, do you?


No, I think what you are describing is called "projection."




posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Because thermite is a type of eutectic reaction. Look that up. Jones is saying it's "thermitic," I'm saying eutectic. I would say either one is accurate but you were just criticizing the word "thermitic" earlier.


No, actually, I think *you* need to look that up. Eutectic reactions deal with the MELTING of materials, the CRYSTALIZATION of materials upon cooling, and the TEMPERATURE the crystalization occurs at. I have never seen anyone, on either side of the debate, nor in any entries on thermite, ever consider this to be what thermite does. You're coming up with that all on your own.


No, he tried to start a thermite reaction using molten aluminum and rust, and failed.


So we can safely discard any notion of thermite being able to cut vertical steel supports, as the proof of concept has failed. So what the heck are you arguing about thermite for when thermite couldn't have been the reason for the collapse?


I already said thermite is a eutectic reaction. If you want to just call it exothermic, then fine, call it exothermic, but it's the exact same stuff.


You really don't know when to abandon ship, do you...

Eutectic reaction: a three-phase reaction, by which, on cooling, a liquid transforms into two solid phases at the same time. For example: liquid alloy becomes a solid mixture of alpha and beta at a specific temperature (rather than over a temperature range). The eutectic solid is commonly lamellar (stripy) in form.

Exothermic reaction: a chemical reaction that is accompanied by the release of heat. In other words, the energy needed for the reaction to occur is less than the total energy released. As a result of this, the extra energy is released, usually in the form of heat.


The only way thermite can be a eutectic reaction is if the process of burning simultaneously causes a process of cooling, which I'm pretty sure is against the laws of thermodynamics.


1) I didn't make the claim that this stuff was from the structural itself, YOU did.


Good grief, you have to be doing this on purpose. If you believe the substance found in the dust was an eutectic mixture, unless you're inventing your own terms as you're going along like Jones does, you're necessarily saying the aluminum and iron oxide melted together and the resulting crystalization was the aluminum/iron oxide chips that Jones analyzed. The only documented and confirmed source of the large amounts of aluminum and iron oxide in the area necessary to produce the distribution Jones describes is from the structure itself. All other possible sources are speculative and heresay.

This is inviolate and cannot be debated, so if you're attempting to say anything other than this, then what you're actually saying is NOT what you think you're saying.


No, I think what you are describing is called "projection."


OR, it really could be the case that you had no flipping clue as to what "eutectic" actually meant or of anything else you're talking about for that matter, and now you're copping an attitude and making up stuff in order to weasel out of having to admit you're wrong. Weasel away, my friend, but at the end of the day, nothing you've posted even remotely resembles anything that Jones researched or attempted to document, which necessarily means you're producing nothing productive in this conversation.



posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
No, actually, I think *you* need to look that up. Eutectic reactions deal with the MELTING of materials, the CRYSTALIZATION of materials upon cooling, and the TEMPERATURE the crystalization occurs at. I have never seen anyone, on either side of the debate, nor in any entries on thermite, ever consider this to be what thermite does. You're coming up with that all on your own.


Thermite produces molten iron. Did you know that? By utilizing the aluminum which rips the oxygen molecule away from the iron oxide and becomes aluminum oxide.

And with the addition of sulfur, as reported in appendix C of FEMA's report:


Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.


wtc.nist.gov...

It IS a EUTECTIC reaction. Notice the exact same ingredients minus aluminum, which combines with oxygen to become a gas anyway. Also notice it DOES lower the melting point of the iron/steel, which is EXACTLY what a eutectic reaction does:


The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1000 C (1800 F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel.


Another source:


The addition of 2 percent sulfur to Thermite improves the steel-cutting properties by creating a eutectic that will melt steel at much lower temperatures.


www.rense.com...

So what don't you get that you would like to pick at now?

1) This is an extremely exothermic reaction.

2) It melts iron/steel.

3) It technically IS a eutectic reaction in the form suggested by Jones, et. al., and also established by FEMA in appendix C of their report.




No, he tried to start a thermite reaction using molten aluminum and rust, and failed.


So we can safely discard any notion of thermite being able to cut vertical steel supports, as the proof of concept has failed. So what the heck are you arguing about thermite for when thermite couldn't have been the reason for the collapse?


Re-read what I posted, genius. I said he FAILED to initiate a thermite reaction that way. It doesn't HAPPEN that way, despite what YOU were suggesting.



If you believe the substance found in the dust was an eutectic mixture, unless you're inventing your own terms as you're going along like Jones does, you're necessarily saying the aluminum and iron oxide melted together and the resulting crystalization was the aluminum/iron oxide chips that Jones analyzed. The only documented and confirmed source of the large amounts of aluminum and iron oxide in the area necessary to produce the distribution Jones describes is from the structure itself. All other possible sources are speculative and heresay.


Sorry but you are basically trying to say Jones could only have been studying iron/aluminum from the structural members and not from anything else. Which is speculative and not even based on heresay.


This is inviolate and cannot be debated, so if you're attempting to say anything other than this, then what you're actually saying is NOT what you think you're saying.


The only one of us who has no clue what they are saying is you.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.


Bait and switch games don't work on me, bsbray. I know full well what it is you're referring to. That was a chemical reaction of the surface of the steel from the fires. That had absolutely NOTHING to do with aluminum, and it still has NOTHING to do with anything Jones discussed in his report.



It IS a EUTECTIC reaction. Notice the exact same ingredients minus aluminum, which combines with oxygen to become a gas anyway. Also notice it DOES lower the melting point of the iron/steel, which is EXACTLY what a eutectic reaction does:


"The exact same ingredients MINUS aluminum"?!? Then it's not a thermite reaction. You're STILL wrong.

All right, look. I came here to discuss Venturas conspiracy theories and his usage of Jones paper, not to argue in circles with BS artists over nonsequitor crap and constantly go to physics dictionaries wondering how they're trying to pull a fast one on me. If the rest of your contributions are going to be as pointless as this, then please let me know now and I'll continue this discussion with the other posters here. You have no credibility whatsoever so I'll not waste any more of my time on you.

Good grief, did you even READ Jones' report?



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Bait and switch games don't work on me, bsbray.


I notice you're mirroring the terms I'm using, but you're not even applying it correctly even if you were right.


I know full well what it is you're referring to. That was a chemical reaction of the surface of the steel from the fires. That had absolutely NOTHING to do with aluminum, and it still has NOTHING to do with anything Jones discussed in his report.


Can you show me ONE source that says fire does that to steel? (Specifically, that fire causes the eutectic reaction FEMA described in appendix C, just so you don't get confused.)

I'll be waiting.



"The exact same ingredients MINUS aluminum"?!? Then it's not a thermite reaction. You're STILL wrong.


The aluminum bonds to oxygen and becomes aluminum oxygen, a gas. I already stated this. Where do you think a gas from a surface reaction that corroded the steel would be, SimpleolDave?

[edit on 18-12-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   
As I had said on page 1.. This program brought up some very good points!
While some of the other points where up in the air, and not something I had heard about before.. Such as the paint, (aka thermite).

However I would like to address one point about the black box.. Those black boxes are very tuff.. And for the first time in history the boxes where not found. Or so we are told..

Now why didn't the program bring up the fact that they found the passport..
A paper and plastic object is recovered.. Yet these tuff Black boxes where just gone, or destroyed..

How can a paper passport fall to the ground, and be recovered.. While the incased black boxes where not...
Thats fishy to me.. And I just wish Jesse Ventura's team would have connected those two dots..
Paper is recovered.. Yet no black box.. And we are suppose to belive that?

So I look forward to more Conspiracies shows..



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by mike dangerously
Ok,GoodOlDave are the first responders lying about hearing explosions?also,is Chief Tursi a lair as well?

No, Chief Tursi is not a liar. Anyone who insists that the explosions he heard were actual bombs is a liar, becuase HE never says they were actual bombs. That's coming entirely from the conspiracy mongers like Ventura.


If this isn't among the strongest evidence that Goodoldave is not only the real LIAR but also a Perp payrollee disinfo agent, then I don't know what is.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Props to golden fleece for his work and evidence exposing what most already know about Goodoldave. So far, goodole disinfo dave has completely failed to respond to the above posts and challenge.

Now of course if DAVE can offer more than just incoherent rambling, obfuscation, misdirection, and total evasion as he continues on below, or even an admission of being wrong along with an apology, I'd love to see it and might consider revising my assesement,,, but i won't hold my breath.


Originally posted by GoodOlDave
We know with absolute certainty that the WTC like every skyscraper on the face of the earth was chock full of things that go BOOM in a fire...fuel tanks for emergency backup generators, electrical transformers, pressurized pipes, fire extinguishers, etc, and we know with absolute certainty that there were multiple fires burning in WTC, some burning very close to the mechanical floors which we know with absolue certainty contained lots of those things that go BOOM in a fire.

The question therefore becomes, how could these explosions NOT be the flammable objects that exploded from the heat of the fires? If even one of the explosions we heard was an electrical transformer that blew up from the heat, your claims of explosives are shown to be rubbish right away.


one of the biggest problems with that theory is that such large EXPLOSIONS don't occur underneath the towers in the basement when the damage was almost 80 floors up and allegedly involving jet fuel.

Unless of course we're not really talking about JET FUEL, but rather PRE PLACED charges.

Your agenda and methods of disinfo are so beyond obvious and blatant, I wouldn't doubt you were in the pentagon perp meetings with cheney while they were planning 9/11 which has turned out to be the most BLATANT conspiracy of all time.

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Orion7911]



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
There are a couple other 'stand down' situations mainly the hit on the Pentagon where Cheney himself stated briskly to a soldier that his orders have not changed. This is in reference to intercepting the flight that was incoming.

That conversation was reported by Mineta, who in the very next sentence says that he found out later that it was a shoot down order, and in fact originally believed that flight 93 was shot down becuase of that shoot down order. These damned fool conspiracy web sites always always always snip that part out, which to me, is a de facto admission that they know they're lying.


hold on there disinfodave, if i didn't know better, i'd say you're mixing and twisting the facts again... but you're welcome to correct me... you seem to be mixing the two testimonies together... so are you talking about minetas testimony about FLIGHT 77, or 93? Can't wait to hear this one.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orion7911
hold on there disinfodave, if i didn't know better, i'd say you're mixing and twisting the facts again... but you're welcome to correct me... you seem to be mixing the two testimonies together... so are you talking about minetas testimony about FLIGHT 77, or 93? Can't wait to hear this one.


Well, then, I guess you don't know better, becuase if you had read Norm Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 commission you would have known his testimony was about both flight 77 *AND* 93. They weren't two separate testimonies. It was one continuous testimony, and he clearly said he didn't know what "the order still stands" was at the time but subsequently learned it was a shoot down order, and he clearly said that becuase of that order, he originally thought flight 93 had been shot down:

MR. [LEE] HAMILTON: We thank you for that. I wanted to focus just a moment on the
Presidential Emergency Operating Center. You were there for a good part of the day. I
think you were there with the vice president. And when you had that order given, I think it
was by the president, that authorized the shooting down of commercial aircraft that were
suspected to be controlled by terrorists, were you there when that order was given?

MR. [NORMAN] MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the
airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and
said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And
when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice
president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped
his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything
to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant. And --

MR. HAMILTON: The flight you're referring to is the --

MR. MINETA: The flight that came into the Pentagon.

MR. HAMILTON: The Pentagon, yeah.

MR. MINETA: And so I was not aware that that discussion had already taken
place. But in listening to the conversation between the young man and the vice president,
then at the time I didn't really recognize the significance of that. And then later I heard of
the fact that the airplanes had been scrambled from Langley to come up to DC, but those
planes were still about 10 minutes away. And so then, at the time we heard about the
airplane that went into Pennsylvania, then I thought, "Oh, my God, did we shoot it down?"
And then we had to, with the vice president, go through the Pentagon to check that out.

MR. HAMILTON: Let me see if I understand. The plane that was headed toward the
Pentagon and was some miles away, there was an order to shoot that plane down [?]

MR. MINETA: Well, I don't know that specifically, but I do know that the airplanes
were scrambled from Langley or from Norfolk, the Norfolk area. But I did not know about
the orders specifically other than listening to that other conversation.

MR. HAMILTON: But there very clearly was an order to shoot commercial aircraft
down.

MR. MINETA: Subsequently I found that out.



All you need to do is look at Mineta's testimony where he reports that fighters were scrambled from Langley to come to DC to put the "no fighters were scrambled" nonsense to rest. If you want to play these childish games and call me a disinformation agent in order to keep your conspriacy stories alive, go right ahead, becuase it doesn't bother me in the least. At the end of the day, you STILL need to show why anything I'm saying here is incorrect.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
##ATTENTION ALL 9/11 POSTERS##

Enhanced enforcement is underway.

All members are entitled to their own opinions on the topic and are welcome to express them.

Comments on anything else, especially personal commentary of any kind whatsoever directed toward other members, are subject to warnings or removal. Repeated behavior of this kind is subject to temporary post bans or permanent account bans.

Please stay focused on the topic, respect the rights of other members to express their own opinions, ALERT us to problems and do your best.


THIS IS A MODERATOR ADVISORY. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST. STAY ON TOPIC.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Like his wrestling days, Jesse the Body presents fiction on 911 for a dumbed downed audience that fails to be skeptical of the crazy ideas. It would be hard to present more delusions in one hour than Jesse did in his 40 minutes of fantasy, hearsay, and false information on 911.

Jesse’s show is made up of fictional conspiracy theories based on hearsay, lies and false information. I listed all the evidence to support Jesse's implication of whatever, it was short; zero evidence.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by iSunTzu
Like his wrestling days, Jesse the Body presents fiction on 911 for a dumbed downed audience that fails to be skeptical of the crazy ideas. It would be hard to present more delusions in one hour than Jesse did in his 40 minutes of fantasy, hearsay, and false information on 911.

Jesse’s show is made up of fictional conspiracy theories based on hearsay, lies and false information. I listed all the evidence to support Jesse's implication of whatever, it was short; zero evidence.


Did you have anything to add aside from your personal opinion of JV? You post offers nothing to refute anything. You offer no information to make us think more about anything else. You only offered up that you think very little of the man. This is what we get after the mods run around telling people to stick to facts and not attack people? What does your post say aside from that you do not like JV? Nothing.

[edit on 12/23/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
Did you have anything to add aside from your personal opinion of JV? You post offers nothing to refute anything. You offer no information to make us thing more about anything else. You only offered up that you think very little of the man. This is what we get after the mods run around telling people to stick to facts and not attack people? What does your post say aside from that you do not like JV? Nothing.


Then here's somethign to consider- Jesse Ventura is well known for subscribing to these 9/11 conspriacies long BEFORE his television show ever came out. He is NOT the fair and balanced journalist he would have you think he is.

Here is Ventura's interview on Howard Stern where he vents on his 9/11 conspriacies. I'm not certain when this was taped but it was some time between 2003 and 2008...

Jesse Ventura on Howard Stern

Personally, though I have nothing to back the claim up with, I think all these other conspriacy segments are just window dressing for getting his main 9/11 conspriacy segment on the air.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


Personally, though I have nothing to back the claim up with, I think all these other conspriacy segments are just window dressing for getting his main 9/11 conspriacy segment on the air.


This is something I didn't think I would ever say

I agree with you sir

I hope they actually just make this about 911 entirely, after they go

throught the usual Conspirices.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 

I do not attack Jesse. His show is fiction; this is why he does not have Pulitzer Prize for the tripe he dished out. There is nothing wrong with falling for fiction, no one is grading us. It is self critiquing when we fall for false ideas. Our friends usually let us make up fantasies about things because our friendships mean more than some stupid conspiracy theories that are false and we are not acting on anyway more than repeating the lies.

I was not attacking Jesse, just his implied delusional conspiracy ideas. If you think they are real and backed with tons of evidence go get the Pulitzer Prize; I checked and Jesse failed to apply for the Pulitzer Prize with all his super expert evidence. Why? Because he has no evidence. That makes you getting the Pulitzer Prize with Jesse’s evidence impossible. The ideas presented are opinions based on hearsay, lies and false information. After 8 years Jesse has nothing new, he is repeating those theories that fool the most people to make a show interesting to those who have not checked or tried to understand 911 using knowledge and science.

I do not attack Jesse, if I was not an engineer, a pilot with over 4,000 hours in heavy jets, and did not understand physics and have experience in investigating aircraft accidents for the USAF, I might be lazy and dumb enough to fall for the idiotic claims made on the show. All of the implied ideas are ridiculous, take any of the claims to someone you trust as an expert in engineering, physics, chemistry, or other fields the false claims relate to and discover the so called experts in Jesse's world of false information are 0.001 percent of people in their fields who don’t use science them make up lies and false information.

I can’t find anything of value in Jesse’s presentation. But for fiction and making up junk ideas on 911, it is great if you like fiction; like the wrestling Jesse the Body did; entertainment.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by iSunTzu
I do not attack Jesse, if I was not an engineer, a pilot with over 4,000 hours in heavy jets, and did not understand physics and have experience in investigating aircraft accidents for the USAF, I might be lazy and dumb enough to fall for the idiotic claims made on the show.


You realize there is an entire organization full of people with similar and even more flight time than you, as well as an organization full of people with science and engineering backgrounds, both of which disagree very strongly with you?

Do you have any specific issues or are you just going to keep claiming that he's just wrong and you're smarter than he is?



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Then here's somethign to consider- Jesse Ventura is well known for subscribing to these 9/11 conspriacies long BEFORE his television show ever came out.


Yup. I have heard him laughed off many a radio show. I mean what does he know compared to "BJ and the Fartmonster in the Morning Zoo." Thank god we have experts like Jim Norton around to correct and ignorant fool like Jesse.


He is NOT the fair and balanced journalist he would have you think he is.


Have you seen the promos for the show? Have you seen him promote it? Have seen the actual show? He does not even pretend to be interested in anything but getting to the bottom of the conspiracy. Obviously that is not fair and balanced. It is television. It is made to entertain. Sometimes some truth sneaks in.


Here is Ventura's interview on Howard Stern where he vents on his 9/11 conspriacies. I'm not certain when this was taped but it was some time between 2003 and 2008...


I know you debunkers really enjoy telling people that they ignore your sources so Merry Christmas. I will not listen to Howard Stern tell a doctor the only antivenom that could cure me. Call me biased or whatever you like but if the OS movement is going to hold up Howard Stern as any kind of pinnacle of anything then you lost already. Quote what you feel is of value and I will give that a read. Pick one of the other thousands of radio programs he ranted about 9/11. Anything but Howard Stern. I cannot have a serious conversation with anyone that refers to the guy who has a RADIO show based around LOOKING at women.




Personally, though I have nothing to back the claim up with, I think all these other conspriacy segments are just window dressing for getting his main 9/11 conspriacy segment on the air.


Ah, so you really do not know much of Jesse Ventura. Perhaps you should scan the channels in the car once in a while. It is well know, well I thought it was, that he is a conspiracy minded person and finds that sort of thing very interesting. You know he was governor once and that was long before 9/11. Read up on it some time.

[edit on 12/24/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by iSunTzu
I do not attack Jesse, if I was not an engineer, a pilot with over 4,000 hours in heavy jets, and did not understand physics and have experience in investigating aircraft accidents for the USAF, I might be lazy and dumb enough to fall for the idiotic claims made on the show.


You realize there is an entire organization full of people with similar and even more flight time than you, as well as an organization full of people with science and engineering backgrounds, both of which disagree very strongly with you?

Do you have any specific issues or are you just going to keep claiming that he's just wrong and you're smarter than he is?


There really are getting to be far too many experts on here. I mean, it is not enough that we have 'pilots' that cannot answer simple questions by other 'pilots' and 'engineers' that fail at basic physics. Now the pilots are the engineers.

So to the OSers:

Hey could we not make a "gentlemen's" pact here? No more bragging about how smart or educated or experienced you are unless you plant to back that up somehow.

Even the OSers must agree that claiming you are something here is worth as much as the hot 17 year old on AOL that really really really wants to meet a 56 year old overweight married father of 4 truck driver. Even when you go on and on and on with all this 'knowledge' it is still not good enough. There are enough people claiming to be experts as there are posts that read like a college textbook. Everyone this does NOT apply to will get that.

It just seems silly. Really when you have someone who claims that their posts hold water not because of the facts or the reality but because the poster is soooooooooooo educated that you should just shut up and believe it anyway...and they refuse to even say what their degree is in because it would reveal personal information. We all know it is pointless.

I am sure WW and his friends would fully agree that I rely on my ignorance far more than my expertise. That is probably why the simple question threads I started just died because they emptied of debunkers.

Happy Whatever you want to have a happy of
-Lil



[edit on 12/23/09 by Lillydale]

[edit on 12/23/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

You realize there is an entire organization full of people with similar and even more flight time than you, as well as an organization full of people with science and engineering backgrounds, both of which disagree very strongly with you?

Do you have any specific issues or are you just going to keep claiming that he's just wrong and you're smarter than he is?


Pilots for truth are lead by a non airline pilot who has never flown heavy jets. The hundreds of pilots I have worked with, trained, or met over the years, all flew left seat heavy jets, not one of them believes anything pilots for truth imply with their offer no theory talk of false information. Hundreds of pilots who fly heavy jets, left seat, vs. a few fringe pilots who claim they can’t hit a 207 foot wide (or the 900 plus foot wide pentagon) with a heavy jet in the safety of a simulator. I have taken kids into heavy jet simulators and they can hit targets without flight training. If you want go get all the evidence the pilots for truth have, it is the same as Jesse’s; zero.

Engineers? I know many engineers and never found one who agrees with the past 8 years of fantasy ideas, some of them presented by Jesse. If you check and make a list of evidence by all the so called truth engineers you will find the same list of evidence as the pilots for truth and Jesse; zero.

Oh, you don’t believe me; I graduated with 700 other engineers and my masters program were hundreds more. Not one of us engineers agrees with Jesse. There are millions of engineers and pilots who disagree with Jesse’s ideas. I don’t care if you fall for Jesse’s junk it is a fictional TV show and Jesse is doing it for money. I am not smarter than Jesse he has found a way to make money, kind of disrespectful to make the implications he does but there is an audience of people who don’t understand physics, engineering and flying who will accept the false information as the truth, and mistake the hearsay and lies as evidence. Who cares; I do but then it is self critiquing. In high school I never made a big deal when people spewed false ideas out of ignorance; I was going to college, it will be self critiquing. I was right, I was all over the world doing flying and engineering and to correct those who believe in false ideas was a waste of time because they lacked the education and the desire to understand and think for themselves; having me correct them was fruitless who believes a geek. It is self critiquing.

The truth is you have no evidence to support any of Jesse claims; if you like his show fine, it was fiction. You can’t prove Jesse is right due to the lack of evidence and there will be no Pulitzer Prize awarded for making up wild ideas on 911 unless you write a super fictional story, I think there is a Pulitzer for fiction; is there?

The Watergate was a conspiracy which earned a Pulitzer for exposing the president and he resigned. It has been 8 years and the only thing holding back the “truth” movement is evidence. 8 years evidence free big talk and now in the out years we have a show so all the conspiracy minded folk can have their glory days. All talk and no action, Jesse’s new show is fiction at it best for those who love CTs, but only a bunch of junk for those who are professional pilots, and engineers save a few fringe professionals who have let their paranoia override their rational knowledge base.

Go ahead pick you big Jesse thing that he got right and present the boat load of evidence. I can’t wait. Wait, I have waited 8 years… Jesse was funny, I can’t believe he is pushing this tripe. But he has me beat, he has a show making money off of junk ideas; now that is show biz; selling soap with crazy ideas. The show before was just as anti-intellectual as this 911 junk.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by iSunTzu
 


I see a big rant but no substance.

Just because you claim to have never met anyone who shares these organizations' opinions, obviously does not mean they don't exist. It just means you were never really looking.

So I asked you to qualify your opinions with something other than "I'm smarter than they are," but so far I've seen nothing. Is that the hallmark of intelligence, to not support anything you say with actual logic or evidence? Come on, for all those words you just wasted you can do better than that.




top topics



 
39
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join