IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags "SEVEN" , ae911truth , documentaries , dylan avery , richard gage , wtc7

Reply
Old 30th December 2020, 01:14 PM   #41
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post

Now, let me answer my own questions.
I seem to remember that there's a logical fallacy associated with the above...
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 01:20 PM   #42
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,136
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Unless they've managed to prove wtc7 was full of 2020 election ballots, I doubt anyone cares.
I think you're onto something. Thousands and thousands of ballots for Trump were put in a time machine and transported to Building 7 in 2001, just before it collapsed was pulled.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 03:17 PM   #43
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,881
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post
It's foolish to comment if you haven't watched the documentary, but that doesn't seem to prevent people from still commenting. That speaks volumes to what is really going on in this forum.
As I asked before, what does this film add to the report?

I am also a non-engineer and so cannot comment on the technical details of the report, but then again neither will the vast majority of the audience for this film. So how is it that they will be expected to draw any conclusions?
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 03:49 PM   #44
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,881
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post
This begs the question, what makes me so certain that I'm right and the reality deniers are wrong? Simple. The WTC7 study was public and peer-reviewed. The data is public. Their models match what was observed. They have no reason to lie. None. It's absurd to think that Hulsey conned AE911T out of $400K to create a fraudulent report. Any argument along those lines is foolish and with no basis whatsoever in reality.
Do you think that universities never produce reports that are what the client wants, rather than what the data suggests?

In general when research is paid for by a client who has a strong interest in getting a particular result then the research is viewed with suspicion.

It does not even have to be any kind of conscious dishonesty, rather an assumption here, a tweak there until the model comes out they way you want.

You say that the models match what was observed. How are you in a position to say this? Like me you are not an engineer and are unable to analyse the model, so you can't possibly be in a position to say if they really have a model which matches what was observed, you have only seen some animations which are like what we have seen. Even I could produce an animation that is like what we have seen.

I note that the signatories for their petition who are engineers, although they come from around the world, represent about 0.05% of the number of engineers in America. This from 20 years of advocacy.

I can see no reason why someone would choose to do a controlled demolition of this building. Even if someone had reason to bring it down, doing a controlled demolition would seem like a bizarre choice.

And they would have had to approached a series of experts and asked, or told, them to commit treason against their country and become accomplices to the mass murder of thousands of their fellow citizens. So all happily agreed to do so and never to tell a soul either before or in the two decades after? Or else they declined, but agreed to keep it quiet that they had been asked for the rest of their lives?

There is so much against the proposition that there was a controlled demolition of WTC7 and not very much at all in favour.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

Last edited by Robin; 30th December 2020 at 04:23 PM.
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 03:58 PM   #45
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,881
In short, the fact that a University department produced a computer model which showed what the people funding it really wanted to hear is not much evidence for anything.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 04:21 PM   #46
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12,881
Originally Posted by Hulsey Report
The lack of combustibles was critically examined, as was the idea that primary damage by fires could occur on floors where financial centers were located. The questions we addressed were: Would this type of business have paper lying around or would privacy be most important and therefore paper stock locked in a fireproof safe? Why was a fire in this building so significant?
OK, here is part of the report that I am qualified to comment on.

I worked for a large international financial company around that time and I led the project to move towards a paperless office. As part of that I made an audit of the paper based records, where and how they were stored. Previous to this I had been responsible for generating and distributing a large amount of their paper based records.

It was mind boggling how much prime city centre real estate was devoted to storing stacks of paper. I was able to justify the cost of the project easily just in the real estate cost savings. Each night batch jobs were run which produced dozens of reports, some quite large and these were printed out dozens of times and distributed around the office where they were stored in ring binders.

Most of these reports did not identify financial details of individuals and were not stored in fire proof safes.

And this was only a portion of the paper around the office. The output of the Y2K audit occupied a book shelf over an entire wall. Training manuals, procedure manuals, software manuals, tax manuals, security records, it goes on and on.

And of course this is in addition to the desks, partitions, bookshelves, etc

If these financial centres were anything like the offices where I worked then we would have expected an extraordinary amount of combustible materials.

In the report they say this was "critically examined" but I can't see where they mention any conclusion they came to or even mention it again in the report.

Why do they mention it at all, if not to suggest in the reader the conclusion that there would not be much combustible material?

So, a faulty assumption that favours the preferred conclusion. How many other similarly faulty assumptions are there in the technical part I wonder.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

Last edited by Robin; 30th December 2020 at 04:25 PM.
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 05:50 PM   #47
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
As I asked before, what does this film add to the report?

I am also a non-engineer and so cannot comment on the technical details of the report, but then again neither will the vast majority of the audience for this film. So how is it that they will be expected to draw any conclusions?
My take is that they couldn't get it accepted by any engineering journal, therefore they're trying the propaganda route (a mockumentary).
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 05:55 PM   #48
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by Jaytje46 View Post
omg.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/29/a-review-of-seven/

real independent review I am sure.
Originally Posted by article
It reviews the inexplicable “predictions” of WTC 7’s collapse by media giants CNN and BBC, both of which reported the collapse before it actually happened.
'nuff said.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 07:00 PM   #49
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 4,956
I forgot about Y2K. I recall everyone had their databases and important files backed up on paper. I wonder how much extra paper, in the form of files and binders, was inside of WTC1, 2, & 7 on 911 due to post Y2K?
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 07:00 PM   #50
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,661
Originally Posted by pgimeno
Originally Posted by Jaytje46 View Post
omg.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/29/a-review-of-seven/

real independent review I am sure.
Originally Posted by article
It reviews the inexplicable “predictions” of WTC 7’s collapse by media giants CNN and BBC, both of which reported the collapse before it actually happened.
'nuff said.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/offguardian/

mo' 'nuff.
__________________


Laughing my ass off as Trump's brown shirts are rounded up, one by one.
TJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2020, 08:25 PM   #51
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 38,800
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...301029854.html

https://canada.constructconnect.com/...to-fire-report

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/unive...180400328.html

http://www.newsminer.com/test3/unive...499b35ee6.html

https://www.c-span.org/video/?320748...eers-911-truth

Come on, beachnut. Quit pretending to have credibility when you can't do a quick Google search and find credible, mainstream links that clearly refute your claims.

AE911T constantly does press releases. They are just censored, which you can clearly see by the number of videos that get removed from YT.

Surely, you know this, right? Or, are you so delusional that the most obvious facts can't get through?
We all agree there are gullible news reporters and that there is something interesting about 9/11, and for some people, its buildings.

That's all those articles prove.

AE911T haven't proved anything.
__________________
"We stigmatize and send to the margins
people who trigger in us the feelings we want to avoid"
- Melinda Gates, "The Moment of Lift".
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 12:01 AM   #52
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
Heh, I see. I also realized later that the article was authored by Kevin Ryan.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 08:45 AM   #53
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,016
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
OK, here is part of the report that I am qualified to comment on.

I worked for a large international financial company around that time and [...]

It was mind boggling how much prime city centre real estate was devoted to storing stacks of paper. [...]

If these financial centres were anything like the offices where I worked then we would have expected an extraordinary amount of combustible materials.

In the report they say this was "critically examined" but I can't see where they mention any conclusion they came to or even mention it again in the report.

Why do they mention it at all, if not to suggest in the reader the conclusion that there would not be much combustible material?

So, a faulty assumption that favours the preferred conclusion. How many other similarly faulty assumptions are there in the technical part I wonder.
Let us QUOTE the passage in the report that you are so aptly and relevantly commenting upon - page 21f:

Originally Posted by Hulsey report
1.5 The UAF Team’s Approach to Examining the Structural Response of WTC 7

The UAF research team utilized three approaches for examining the structural response of WTC 7 to the conditions that may have occurred on September 11, 2001. The findings and conclusions of each approach are described in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 respectively.

1.5.1 Approach 1: Structural Response to Fire Loading

First, we modeled the structural framing and simulated the local structural response to fire loading that may have occurred below Floor 13. Several factors warranted extra technical examination:

a. WTC 7 was not symmetrical. Therefore, during collapse it would naturally sway towards the mass center for the floors. The mass center for the floors were initially evaluated and then used to examine the building’s response during collapse.

b. The lack of combustibles was critically examined, as was the idea that primary damage by fires could occur on floors where financial centers were located. The questions we addressed were: Would this type of business have paper lying around or would privacy be most important and therefore paper stock locked in a fireproof safe? Why was a fire in this building so significant?

c. We simulated fires in the building. [...]

d. We prepared a detailed simulation of the floor slab connection to the beams and floor slab connection to the girders. [...]
It bears keeping in mind that "The findings and conclusions of" this subsection "1.5.1 Approach 1: Structural Response to Fire Loading" supposedly "are described in [Chapter] 2".

a. is essentially a bare claim - an assumption not actually justified. Do they imply that a "symmetrical" building would not "sway towards the mass center for the floors"? More importantly, this "swaying" "towards the mass center for the floors" has nothing to do with "CHAPTER 2.0" which covers, supposedly, the "STRUCTURAL RESPONSE TO FIRE LOADING". And indeed, the string "symme" appears nowhere in Chapter 2 - Hulsey et al did not in fact subject the fact that "WTC 7 was not symmetrical" to any "extra technical examination". Why mention a bare fact, if it plays no role?

b. is the "paperless" claim Robin hitched upon.
Indeed, we again have a bare assertion at hand: No reference, not even appeal to personal experience - just idle musing and imagination and asking "Would this type of business have paper lying around...?" -> Notice: They do not answer this question, nor is the question of "paper lying around" brought up in any way, shape or form elsewhere in the report. The very word "paper" appears only one other time in the report - in the "References" appendix on page 112, where it has no discernible connection to Section 1.5.1 or Chapter 2.
Again, Hulsey et al did not in fact subject the idle question whether there would be any "paper lying around" to any "extra technical examination".

c. is a straight-up lie: They did NOT "simulate fires in the building". Period.

d. is the only "factor" brought up in 1.5.1 that they apparently did subject to any kind examiniation.


The entire section 1.5.1 is bunk. To confuse the gullible, if it wasn't indeed Hulsey himself who confused himself.


You can do the same with any section of the report - wherever you dig, you find that there is zero viable substance to it.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2020, 09:48 AM   #54
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,016
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post
...
This begs the question, what makes me so certain that I'm right and the reality deniers are wrong? Simple. The WTC7 study was public and peer-reviewed. ...
Two questions:
  1. Who were the peer reviewers?
  2. Who chose the peer reviewers?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2021, 06:10 PM   #55
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by PhotoMatt View Post
Simple. The WTC7 study was public and peer-reviewed.
I see you finally accepted the NIST report on WTC7
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd January 2021, 08:21 AM   #56
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 999
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I can't be the only person who saw the thread title not understanding how there could possibly be a conspiracy over the Brad Pitt / Morgan Freeman serial killer movie being on streaming...
Haha nope, you're not. I was wondering what the big deal was, a 20 odd year old film released on streaming sites
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 05:29 AM   #57
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,741
Seven has been posted to Youtube as well so one does not have to be a streaming service subscriber to view it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Dd...l=OnlytheTruth
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 05:55 AM   #58
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
Seven has been posted to Youtube as well so one does not have to be a streaming service subscriber to view it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0Dd...l=OnlytheTruth
Ed Asner litterally phoned it in
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 06:09 AM   #59
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
Ok, its weird when you have an independant investigation and Tony Szamboti is litterally telling Hulsey what happened according to AE911 truth, before the investigation started. so independant it was not
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 06:27 AM   #60
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Two questions:
  1. Who were the peer reviewers?
  2. Who chose the peer reviewers?
EXTERNAL PEER REVIEWERS
Gregory Szuladzinski, Ph.D
Chartered Consulting Engineer
Analytical Service Company

Robert Korol, Ph.D
Emeritus Professor of Civil Engineering
McMaster University

https://files.wtc7report.org/file/pu...-March2020.pdf

Korol and Gregory Szuladzinski have both worked with szamboti and Jones, so not sure how that counts as external peer reviewer.

https://experts.mcmaster.ca/display/publication1404588

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...lapse_Analysis

Last edited by Jaytje46; 3rd January 2021 at 06:38 AM.
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 12:05 PM   #61
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,016
Originally Posted by Jaytje46 View Post
EXTERNAL PEER REVIEWERS
Gregory Szuladzinski, Ph.D
Chartered Consulting Engineer
Analytical Service Company

Robert Korol, Ph.D
Emeritus Professor of Civil Engineering
McMaster University

https://files.wtc7report.org/file/pu...-March2020.pdf

Korol and Gregory Szuladzinski have both worked with szamboti and Jones, so not sure how that counts as external peer reviewer.

https://experts.mcmaster.ca/display/publication1404588

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...lapse_Analysis
The project page at the ae911t website says:
Originally Posted by ae911t
...independent experts external to UAF and AE911Truth also reviewed the report...
https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7

They call them not just "external" but "independent" there - which is a flat-out lie.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 12:16 PM   #62
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
When NIST came out with a computer modelled study, Truthers cried foul..but now is ok I guess.
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2021, 08:38 PM   #63
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
And let's not forget that NIST took into account criticisms by truthers (notably David Chandler) for the final report, while the UAF report has completely ignored criticisms.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2021, 03:22 AM   #64
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,016
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
And let's not forget that NIST took into account criticisms by truthers (notably David Chandler) for the final report, while the UAF report has completely ignored criticisms.
Not completely.
One Public Comment remarked that Hulsey had copied work (graphics, calculations, numbers down to five significant digits; amounting to almost three pages) from Tony Szamboti without crediting Tony's contribution (i.e.: plagiarized work).
The response was to do the calculations over with slightly different numbers for the final report - to avoid having to reference Tony.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 4th January 2021 at 03:24 AM.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2021, 10:31 AM   #65
Jaytje46
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 493
Prime video

Is it just me, or is the video not on Prime video, because when I search for Seven it does not show up, or is it just for the USA?

I guess that's why they need 50,000 dollars to advertise it for 2 million people.

https://action.ae911truth.org/donate...loggedOut=True

Not sure why they don't just put it on Youtube, much greater reach than Amazon Prime
Jaytje46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 02:03 PM   #66
Leftus
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,476
Originally Posted by Jaytje46 View Post
Not sure why they don't just put it on Youtube, much greater reach than Amazon Prime
Probably because it can get taken off the YouTube without warning or redress. With Prime, there is likely a contract.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 03:31 PM   #67
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,852
PhotoMatt has no evidence to back up the failed video -
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 31st March 2021 at 03:35 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 04:00 PM   #68
Dr.Sid
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 3,218
Who is this Gage ? I thought Pitt and Freeman played in that ..
Dr.Sid is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 09:37 PM   #69
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,661
To be fair, he might've had Gwyneth Paltrow's head in one the boxes.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


What's in the box Richard?! What's in the box!!?!
__________________


Laughing my ass off as Trump's brown shirts are rounded up, one by one.
TJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2021, 12:24 PM   #70
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 22,859
Gaming search results by naming this video the same as a Morgan Freeman / Brad Pitt movie from the 90s is innovative.

ETA - now that I see the box cover, ae911truth has through the years exhibited all seven of these in spades.


Last edited by carlitos; 2nd April 2021 at 12:29 PM. Reason: oops - wrong image
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2021, 12:39 PM   #71
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 22,859
too bad about Dylan Avery

Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
Seven has been posted to Youtube as well so one does not have to be a streaming service subscriber to view it.
Nope. Taken down for copyright violation.

Originally Posted by Jaytje46 View Post

Not sure why they don't just put it on Youtube, much greater reach than Amazon Prime
I'll give you a couple of hints:

carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2021, 12:59 PM   #72
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,307
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I can't be the only person who saw the thread title not understanding how there could possibly be a conspiracy over the Brad Pitt / Morgan Freeman serial killer movie being on streaming...
Suckered me in too! I should have known because the title wasn't stylized as SE7EN.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2021, 04:28 PM   #73
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,644
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Nope. Taken down for copyright violation.


I'll give you a couple of hints:

https://i.imgur.com/ecICv3n.png
Does that mean that they don't aim for maximum audience, but for maximum money?
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd April 2021, 08:09 PM   #74
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 22,859
Don’t think of it as grifting; think of it as a tax on stupidity. If you are dumb enough to fund Gage and his band of misfits by shelling out $12.99 for a 45 minute “ultra high definition” version of a “documentary” featuring 20-year old digitized Long-lens camera footage shot in glorious 29.94 FPS, then you probably don’t deserve that money. You’d just spend it on whoopee cushions or whatever.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 07:21 PM   #75
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,732
Good grief.. it's 20 years on from 9/11 and people still think there were bombs in the twin towers? By this stage you're just being deliberately fanciful.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
For my complete compilation of evidence showing AAL77 hit the Pentagon -http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
For my compilation of evidence for UAL93 - http://ual93.blogspot.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2021, 10:12 AM   #76
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,379
Originally Posted by cjnewson88 View Post
Good grief.. it's 20 years on from 9/11 and people still think there were bombs in the twin towers? By this stage you're just being deliberately fanciful.
Big disclaimer as I have not watched any SEVEN video, but isn't this thread concerning WTC7?
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2021, 06:50 PM   #77
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,732
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Big disclaimer as I have not watched any SEVEN video, but isn't this thread concerning WTC7?
Quite likely but by "proving" WTC7 was a controlled demolition they are also therefore implying that the twin towers must also have been.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
For my complete compilation of evidence showing AAL77 hit the Pentagon -http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
For my compilation of evidence for UAL93 - http://ual93.blogspot.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 05:26 AM   #78
bknight
Master Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,379
Originally Posted by cjnewson88 View Post
Quite likely but by "proving" WTC7 was a controlled demolition they are also therefore implying that the twin towers must also have been.
Lets see A equals B therefore A equals C, quite a logical fallacy.
bknight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.