The scary thing is the moms are! This picture is reminiscent of the Hitler Youth.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Rosie O'Donnell 9/11 Conspiracy Comments: Popular Mechanics Responds
I am here posting an article from Popular Mechanics answering Miss O’Donnell and her whacky conspiracy theories that have been made popular by “Loose Change” and other “documentaries”. You can find much of the info from this response in My Blog on Rosie’s craziness, as I used Pop Mech as one of a few resources on the response to other bloggers who wrote in about WTC #7. Enjoy:
Recently, Rosie O’Donnell, a co-host of ABC talk show The View, made comments on the show that renewed controversy over the collapse of World Trade Center 7.
While saying she didn’t know what to believe about the
government’s involvement in the attacks of Sept. 11, she said, “I do believe that it’s the first time in history that fire has ever melted steel. I do believe that it defies physics that World Trade Center tower 7—building 7, which collapsed in on itself—it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved. U.S. 7. World Trade [Center] 1 and 2 got hit by planes—7, miraculously, the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible.” World Trade Center
She continued: “To say that we don’t know that it imploded, that it was an implosion and a demolition, is beyond ignorant. Look at the films, get a physics expert here [on the show] from Yale, from Harvard, pick the school—[the collapse] defies reason.” (Watch the clip here)
For those interested in what physicist and demolition experts have said regarding WTC 7’s collapse, as detailed in our book Debunking 9/11 Myths, PM offers these notes:
1. Initial reports from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) misunderstood the amount of damage the 47-floor WTC7 sustained from the debris of the falling
—because in early photographs, WTC7 was obscured by smoke and debris. North Tower
Towers 1 and 7 were approximately 300 ft. apart, and pictures like the ones here and here offer a clear visual of how small that distance is for structures that large. After further studies, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) told PM that debris from the 110-floor
hit WTC7 with the force of a volcanic eruption. Nearly a quarter of the building was carved away over the bottom 10 stories on its south face, and significant damage was visible up to the 18th floor (see p. 24 of this report). North Tower
The unusual design of WTC7 is also crucial to the discussion, in that key columns supported extreme loads—as much as 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor—as the building straddled an electrical substation. “What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors,” NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told PM, “it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down.” The tower wasn’t hit by a plane, but it was severely wounded by the collapse of the
. Which is when the fires started. North Tower
2. The North and
South Towersof the weren’t knocked down by planes—they both stood for more than a half-hour after the impacts. But the crashes destroyed support columns and ignited infernos that ultimately weakened—not melted—the steel structures until the towers could no longer support their own weights (NIST offers a primer here). Ms. O’Donnell fundamentally misstates the case with her use of the word “melting”: Evidence currently points to WTC7 also collapsing because fires weakened its ravaged steel structure. World Trade Center
Tower 7 housed the city’s emergency command center, so there were a number of fuel tanks located throughout the building—including two 6000-gal. tanks in the basement that fed some generators in the building by pressurized lines. “Our working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time,” according to Sunder. Steel melts at about 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit—but it loses strength at temperatures as low as 400 F. When temperatures break 1000 degrees F, steel loses nearly 50 percent of its strength. It is unknown what temperatures were reached inside WTC7, but fires in the building raged for seven hours before the collapse.
3. Demolition experts tell PM that wiring a building the size of WTC7 for clandestine demolition would present insurmountable logistical challenges. That issue aside, there’s a clear-cut engineering explanation for why the building fell the way it did. Trusses on the fifth and seventh floors of the building were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another; with the south face heavily damaged, the other columns were likely overtaxed. In engineering terms, the “progressive collapse” began on the eastern side, when weakened columns failed from the damage and fire. The entire building fell in on itself as the slumping east side dragged down the west side in a diagonal pattern. Still, damage to the Verizon Building (see p. 21 of this report), directly west of WTC7, and to Fiterman Hall (see here) directly north, show that it was hardly an orderly collapse.
NIST is currently preparing its final report on the collapse of WTC7, which is expected to be released this spring. In order to address concerns of conspiracy theorists, the organization added “Hypothetical Blast Analysis” to its research, according to a December 2006 progress report. The report also points out that “NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition.”
Friday, March 30, 2007
A Belated R.I.P.
GOD BLESS THESE MEN AND WOMEN!
Democrats listen up! Cpl Chris Mason sent this video home to his father Mr. Mason who just posted this a few days ago. Cpl Chris Mason was killed in November of 2006 doing what all great men (and women) have done throughout history. Sacrificed their comfort to fight for the comforts of others.
Hot Air went on to point out that Cpl Mason was a believer in Jesus Christ. His belief mirrors the belief instilled in Lance Cpl. Richard P. Slocum, the first Iraqi death to occur from our home town. Slocum had an instilled belief in Jesus as well, and our church will forever miss his presence.
Where do we find such men? Indeed. The Answer? In the greatest nation on God’s green earth.
God bless both the Slocum and Mason family’s for allowing such honor and bravery to succeed in their son’s lives.
John Travolta on Global Warming
Scientology really warps the mind, and I think we can see this with Travolta speaking about how to fix Global Warming while owning five planes of his own. He says we should look at other planets and build domed cities. Weird. Following is a photo of Travolta’s home and then a quote or two from the article:
The article below has information in it relevant to both Young-Earth Creationists (carbon dating), as well as Global Warming critics. This is for the minuscule amount of young-earth creation scientists that visit my site from time-to-time. Yes, take note this is from the same Institution that Dr. Hansen heads up, and they are pumping out info that throws a “cog” into Hansen’s Global Warming “scare tactic” to get democrats into office.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Rosie O’Donnell & 9/11
Rosie has lost it! Bottom line. But she is merely displaying a metastasizing of the post-modern culture. Putting together stories that have no evidential backing or logic, and deciding they are true merely because they support your current feelings on the administration. Deplorable that someone would build a worldview and filter for truth based solely on feelings. Rosie gets to 9/11 near the end of this five minute video:
I have added something new to my regular response to the 9/11 Truthers that will ad some more weight to my counter-argument. So even for those who have read my stuff in the past, you will enjoy this new 3-minute video from
Enjoy the response to both the Pentagon issues raised in “Loose Change” and also the reader questions about Tower number seven.
Debunking 9/11 Myths
My Original Post
from an old post from my MySpace
The following is merely a quick rebuttal to a few items constantly brought up to me by my son's friends to professors I see on TV. Keep in mind that what is below is a conglomeration of multiple responses so the info may not be uniform in context. However, the point is made, and the conspiracy whacko's are proven to be just that, whacko's!
I have heard in debates and theories about the Pentagon that:
- an A-7 hit the pentagon with a pilot flying;
- without a pilot (remote control);
- an A-7 firing a missile just before it hit the Pentagon with a pilot;
- and an A-7 without a pilot firing a missile just before it hit the Pentagon;
- a cruise missile, three cruise missiles;
- and A-10 hitting the pentagon with a pilot;
- and A-10 hitting the Pentagon without a pilot;
- and A-10 hitting the Pentagon firing a missile with a pilot;
- an A-10 hitting the pentagon firing a missile without a pilot;
- a UAV hitting the Pentagon firing a missile;
- a remote control Boeing 757 without people on board;
- a Boeing 757 with pilots and no people;
- a Boeing 757 without pilots but with sedated passengers
. . . . etc., etc..
The problem is I have personally met two people that ACTUALLY saw a 757 fly into the Pentagon. There is also a photo of a large chunk of the [plane in front of the Pentagon, showing that Loose Change merely selected photos that do not show this (for propaganda purposes. . . which makes you ask why . . . maybe because they are connected to many anti-capitalist, anti-American groups that think an Illuminati conspiracy exists). And the other group of 9/11 doubters is headed and founded by a professor of economics. The problem is that his own universities engineering department has not signed on to his crazy theories about the
A good book on the matter is:
A Friend Once Told Me:
First off, no other building was built like the
Secondly, the building didn't drop straight down. Parts of the building fell sideways onto the roof and sides of other buildings causing fires, damage, and the like for blocks around. I really noticed this just this past 5-year anniversary with all the footage. I have many documentaries on 9/11, so I went back and watched them. And sure enough, debris from the buildings fell for at least a block in some cases.
Thirdly, no one has ever said that jet fuel will destroy metal. It was the combination of the impact, multiple fires of metals and other combustible materials in the building, the impact stripping off the fire proofing from the metal, and the like. I will now quote an expert:
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Fourth, there were secondary explosions when the electrical panels and boxes blew. This building was pumping huge amounts of electricity up to main points in the building. These blew. Also, elevators that finally gave way and came crashing down 30-to-forty stories allowing fuel and flames and smoke to the floors where these elevators ended up crashing to.
Fifth, I have seen the video of the fireman getting word that a bomb was found. This was the initial report. A car bomb was used in the 1993 attack and a police officer or fireman probably found what he thought was suspicious and word spread.
Just like when someone says he saw a UFO but later finds out it was an SR-71 (which glows green many times as it speeds down), or a meteor skipping across the earths atmosphere. Many times people say they saw X in a car crash, but other witnesses saw B, when the police investigators compile the evidence from all the witnesses a true story emerges. Some people swear their attackers had a mustache, when in fact they didn't. The conspiracy theorists use bits-and-pieces out of context, just like cult leaders.
(Without critical thinking it is easy to predict that if anyone believes this stuff now, they are a prime target for some cult, or New Age movement to entice them into believing really wild stuff. I study cults and crazy theories for a hobby, I know. . . if a person is this easily swayed without critically rethinking their position, wow!)
For instance: The Loose Change guys say no plane hit the Pentagon. Take note of the very large piece boxed off in red (below). Hello, McFly. There is a worldwide movement against freedom, and it isn't coming from Bush. It’s coming from Revolutionaries who use propaganda -- like the PROOF I just showed you Loose Change used -- to change a government they do not like.
The Loose Change people show the photo below, making it look like this was the biggest piece of the plane found. The photo they chose to use made it look like the piece was really small.
However, compare it to the one below with a truck right next to it. It is a bit bigger than the first photo of it. Why did they choose this photo over the others? They want the viewer to think only one way so they selectively used photos to make sure the viewer agrees with them. This is known as propaganda, and willingly and knowingly telling a lie by deselecting the truth.
Loose Change also neglects to show how a semi-truck sized generator was struck (skimmed) by the engine of the plane right before it struck the Pentagon. The photo below shows where the generator was by marking where it should have been with a yellow outline. It was moved 45-degrees by the engine of the 757, which is evidenced by the huge gouge mark in the generator itself (caused by the engine of the plane).
Another photo that irked me was one of the spools just sitting in front of the Pentagon nice and neat. The problem is that some of these spools had been stacked neatly by this fenced area. As you can see, one of the engines hanging closer to the ground ripped through this area and spread the spools you see pictured. I would be interested to know also if the firemen moved the spools out of the way later in the day fighting the fires. One should take note that in the right hand side of this photo is the semi-truck sized generator I have shown (giving more perspective to where it is/was located).
And finally, another thing that was so obviously a cover up by Loose Change to make the viewer sympathetic was the bit about the windows not being broken in the Pentagon right near where the wing of the plane hit. First of all, the only real strong part of a plane like the 757 is the underbelly (pictured below), and the structures of the wings can be clearly seen in the following two pictures after that:
Obviously if this wing hit our house the windows would shatter. But the Pentagon wouldn't have windows like yours or my house. Click on the thumbnail below (you can click once more to zoom even further) and read for yourself about these windows... and then ask yourself: how was I ever duped by such easily falsifiable rhetoric?:
Click on the thumbnail
Here I am going to ad (3-29-07) a video produced by
For many years I followed the New World Order stuff, reading many, many books on the subject, even going so far as to visit the local John Birch Society meeting once-in-awhile, and after many years I came to realize that if you critically looked into the evidences for this giant conspiracy to fool mankind knowingly, it is shown to be wanting.
Currently the conspiracy to fool mankind is backed by liberals, however, when
Let me point something out though. The difference between the lib/con views of the giant conspiracy to fool mankind is that no leading political figure in the Republican Party accepted these crazy conspiracy myths as real. Today however, you have a huge chunk of the Democratic base accepting many of these wild stories and blame
Its funny, I can show someone proof that "X" didn't happen, but "B" in fact did. They will simply respond that that too was a cover up meant to fool the general public, e.g., me. There is no debating such a person. In fact, this was the original reason for my creating a MySpace, was to challenge a few of my oldest sons friends on this exact matter.
As for us Christians . . . I use to think that this giant conspiracy would fool mankind into following the Anti-Christ. Now I think the delusion of this theory will drive many people to accept almost anything . . . even a messianic type figure. In other words, it's the conspiracy theory ITSELF that breaks down the critical thinking and road to truth that makes accepting incredible claims without evidence, logic, history, and the like, more common place. Which is why having a healthy eschatology as a Christian is very important.
Sorry for the rant, again, glad you enjoyed.
Thank you Mark for your interaction here, it is welcomed.
Actually, building seven was hit by a massive amount of debris from Tower 1 or 2 (I will look into which tower when I get the National Geographic DVD, since that has the best shots of falling debris I have seen yet). What you may not know is that building 7 housed the city's emergency command post. The building was designed to remain operational if power were to be lost. How was this building designed to keep running if power were to go out? This is the part we don't hear too much about:
Also note that trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed (similarly to WTC 1 and 2) to transfer loads from one set of columns to another.
(The following is added for my new readers):
I want the skeptic to look here at the damage caused by debris from the falling
SO SORRY GUYS... THE VIDEO BY STEVE SPAK WAS REMOVED... IT WAS REALLY GOOD! I WILL TRY AND FIND OUT WHY (3-30-07)
The above video (the first one) was from The Learning Channel documentary "The Anatomy of the Collapse", the second video is Steve Spak's video - for clarity. This site does a bang-up job to refute those who are misled with allegorical stories of conspiracies and dark secret smoke-filled rooms where the Patriot Act is a power grab.
The best bet is to buy The Learning Channel's video "
Also, the "Loose Change" people have strange bedfellows... something the conspiracists always try to make connections to in regards to Bush and the oil companies.... I would say for them to look at the log in their eye first: