The following is an excerpt from a recently filmed TED presentation (watch in full here) in which Bill Gates talks about how we humans can go about lowering our evil carbon footprint. Near the end he says...
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent!" [About 1 Billion People!]
WHAT?! Hang on a minute Mr Gates! Aren't vaccines etc. supposed to SAVE lives? So why would doing a "really great job" on these things LOWER the population by more than a billion?! Shouldn't it reduce deaths, thereby increasing global population? Is the evil Microsoft founder and his eugenicist buddies planning something?
In May of last year, Bill Gates attended a secret meeting with the likes of David Rockefeller and Ted Turner to discuss population control. As documented in the film ENDGAME, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is heavily involved in the eugenics agenda.
Here we have it from the horse's mouth. They want to reduce global population and apparently vaccines and quote "health care" will play a role in that. Make of that what you will!
Edit:
Some have suggested that "10 or 15 percent" probably meant of 9 billion, not 6.8 billion. And he was probably referring to limiting the population GROWTH by 10-15%, not reducing the CURRENT population by 10-15%. So instead of going up to 9 billion, it will only go up to about 7 billion. The point still stands though. Regardless of whether he's referring to reducing the current population or limiting population growth, he said vaccines and health care will play a role in it. That's the issue here.
See Also ...
Bill Gates: Use Vaccines To Lower Population
Refuting the Hollow Arguments of the So-called 9/11 Debunkers & Truthers
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Beam Yourself Up Curley!
So, one of the rare moments of speculation on this blog was not suprisingly seized upon by the 9/11 truth gossip artists. In my last post I talked about the possibility of man-made earthquakes and used a US Air Force document that discusses the physics of teleportation as evidence that technology is much more advanced than we think. Now of course Strawman Pat made out that I was claiming the government has teleportation machines, when I never said that, I was simply pointing out the existence of the document.
See that's what we do here, we read documents. We read scientific literature. We do research! We're not just some blogger parrots who act like we know what we're talking about while attacking people's character. And we're skeptical of both sides. We don't endorse Pentagon no-plane theories or fake phone call theories, and we're skeptical of the assumption that "pull it" was a confession. We stick to science.
Do I personally sometimes get annoyed when I see politicians and celebrities exploiting tragedies, like they did with Haiti, or throwing an agenda in our face, like when Beyoncé marched with stormtroopers at the Grammys, and feel compelled to rant about it? Sure. That's because I'm human.
Most of the time however I stick to the facts. And one fact I learned, and have referenced a number of times, is that Southcom was, just by coincidence, preparing for a drill based on the scenario of a natural disaster in Haiti, the day before the earthquake ... Fact! What people do with that fact is entirely up to them. I have never proposed a theory of what I think happened. I'll leave that to the experts in that field. Would it surprise me if it was man-made? No. Just like it wouldn't surprise me if the recent earthquake in Chile was man-made. It's called being skeptical (real skepticism, not "skeptic" skepticism) and open minded. There are lots of problems in the world that are rarely talked about in the mainstream such as poverty and depleted uranium, so as a general rule of thumb, if a crisis rapidly escalates into a global cultural phenomenon, there's probably an agenda.
As I said, they blew up skyscrapers with nanotechnology back in 2001. Another fact! You debunkers can deny it all you want but the fact is basic chemistry proves that the red material is thermitic. This stuff ignites when heated to 400-450°C and after ignition we find molten iron. Since iron doesn't melt until 1500°C, this ignition temperature of 400-450°C couldn't possibly melt iron. So the fact that we find molten iron is proof that some kind of chemical reaction has occurred. Anyone who has read the paper and watched the lectures by Jones and Harrit and still believes it's something innocent, is suffering from deep denialism! That's why I coined the term "thermite denier", because it really is that obvious.
Now of course our speculation is really the only thing ScrewLooseChange can comment on. They can't refute the existence of the thermite, so instead they just ridicule Steven Jones when he speculates about explosive paint/fireproofing or thermite matches. When it comes to actual evidence, they are ... well ... screwed. Well here are two evidence-filled videos of mine still waiting to be debunked. Come on Pat, let's see what you got!
Yet Another "9/11 Was An Inside Job" Song
Evidence
We do agree with OUR rebunkers on one thing ... Darwin may very well have been wrong.
Related Info:
Sometimes I Forget
We Don't Care For Free Speech...
See that's what we do here, we read documents. We read scientific literature. We do research! We're not just some blogger parrots who act like we know what we're talking about while attacking people's character. And we're skeptical of both sides. We don't endorse Pentagon no-plane theories or fake phone call theories, and we're skeptical of the assumption that "pull it" was a confession. We stick to science.
Do I personally sometimes get annoyed when I see politicians and celebrities exploiting tragedies, like they did with Haiti, or throwing an agenda in our face, like when Beyoncé marched with stormtroopers at the Grammys, and feel compelled to rant about it? Sure. That's because I'm human.
Most of the time however I stick to the facts. And one fact I learned, and have referenced a number of times, is that Southcom was, just by coincidence, preparing for a drill based on the scenario of a natural disaster in Haiti, the day before the earthquake ... Fact! What people do with that fact is entirely up to them. I have never proposed a theory of what I think happened. I'll leave that to the experts in that field. Would it surprise me if it was man-made? No. Just like it wouldn't surprise me if the recent earthquake in Chile was man-made. It's called being skeptical (real skepticism, not "skeptic" skepticism) and open minded. There are lots of problems in the world that are rarely talked about in the mainstream such as poverty and depleted uranium, so as a general rule of thumb, if a crisis rapidly escalates into a global cultural phenomenon, there's probably an agenda.
As I said, they blew up skyscrapers with nanotechnology back in 2001. Another fact! You debunkers can deny it all you want but the fact is basic chemistry proves that the red material is thermitic. This stuff ignites when heated to 400-450°C and after ignition we find molten iron. Since iron doesn't melt until 1500°C, this ignition temperature of 400-450°C couldn't possibly melt iron. So the fact that we find molten iron is proof that some kind of chemical reaction has occurred. Anyone who has read the paper and watched the lectures by Jones and Harrit and still believes it's something innocent, is suffering from deep denialism! That's why I coined the term "thermite denier", because it really is that obvious.
Now of course our speculation is really the only thing ScrewLooseChange can comment on. They can't refute the existence of the thermite, so instead they just ridicule Steven Jones when he speculates about explosive paint/fireproofing or thermite matches. When it comes to actual evidence, they are ... well ... screwed. Well here are two evidence-filled videos of mine still waiting to be debunked. Come on Pat, let's see what you got!
Yet Another "9/11 Was An Inside Job" Song
Evidence
We do agree with OUR rebunkers on one thing ... Darwin may very well have been wrong.
Related Info:
Sometimes I Forget
We Don't Care For Free Speech...
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Sounds of Explosions- How Much Do They Matter?
Looks like we don't actually need the "sounds" of explosions to warrent a new investigation after all. We got'm, but we don't really need'm. So, enough with the nit-picking debunkers.
Related Info:
WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions
NFPA 921-18.1 Chapter 18 Explosions
Friday, February 26, 2010
Anniversaries
So today is the 17th anniversary of 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center; an attack which killed 6 people, injured more than a thousand and was at least allowed to happen or at worst completely orchestrated by the FBI.
It is also the 16th anniversary of Bill Hicks' death. 16 years on and western governments continue to arm foreign nations with farming equipment and then bomb them, natural drugs continue to be demonized, so-called musicians continue to orally pleasure satan - while people in advertising and marketing continue do his bidding, "back-and-to-the-left" is still a hotly debated topic, the Pope continues to favour bullet proof plexiglass over the protection of god, my fellow non-smokers (here in the UK at least) have ruined nights out, and sadly there still isn't a TV show called "Let's Hunt and Kill Billy Ray Cyrus"!
*Sigh* ... RIP Bill.
It's also been about a year since I started contributing to this blog. This time last year I was making my "I Am Not A Conspiracy Theorist" video, which was the video that prompted JM to invite me to join this blog. Even though my video editing has improved quite a bit since then, that video is still one of my favourites, mostly because of the music. My next video which I've barely started is going to be about life, the universe and everything (I may even call it "42" haha!). Yesterday I downloaded an audiobook of Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", because I wanted to use a quote in the video, and I was bitterly disappointed to find that the audiobook isn't actually narrated by Stephen Hawking! I mean seriously, how hard would it have been to copy the text into his speech synthesizer and hit a button? An audio clip of his digital voice talking about how the universe appears to be finely-tuned for life would have been an awesome addition, but no :(. Maybe I can find a lecture clip or something of him talking about it. I refuse to do the typical YouTube thing and just use MicroSoft Sam.
Over at the 9/11 truth gossip blog there isn't really much to report. They seem to be excited about the fact that Steven Jones is now talking about Haiti, because it proves he's crazy apparently.
Haiti? A false flag? What kind of crazy person would think that?! A drill goes live and a bunch of mass murdering war criminals and celebrity whores beg the public to donate money to support the militarization of an oil rich island. Nothing suspicious there! I haven't seen such a sickening display of vampiric exploitation since Michael Jackson's funeral. And if they could blow up skyscrapers with nanotechnology back in 2001, the idea of them being able to create earthquakes in 2010 isn't much of a stretch. Hell, there's a publicly available US Air Force document that seriously discusses the prospect of teleportation! This is what's out in the open. Imagine the black projects going on in the ultra secret underground laboratories!
So, as the 9/11 truth movement continues it's battle for mainstream attention, and the global warming alarmists deny the scandals and continue to chant their pseudo-religious "settled science" mantra, and as Haiti is slowly forgotten about by the masses, the British tabloids are focusing on the important stuff. Apparently Cheryl Tweedy has split up with her husband! I've said it before and I'll say it again, I wonder what aliens would think of us! Here's a great song I found on YouTube on that subject...
Are The Aliens Like Us?
Well I never saw a UFO
But I wonder if it's true
If there's a race of alien critters out there
Just like me and you
Do they get uptight in traffic
Do they laugh and dance and sing
Do they pick their nose in private
And spray their friends with silly string
Yeah when I look up to the sky I wonder
Are the aliens like us?
Do they cry when hearts get broken
Do they drink to kill the pain
Do they lie about their sex life
Do they lie about their age
Do they hate the jobs their doing
Do they sneak out to get high
Do they pay too many taxes
To a government that lies
When I look up to the sky I wonder
Are the aliens like us?
Would they blow up their own buildings
Just so they could start a war
Do they brainwash their own citizens
Do their rich control their poor
Are they ruled by evil bankers
In a global police state
Are their constitutions crumbling
Is their education fake
When I look up to the sky I wonder
Are the aliens like us?
Yeah when I look up to the sky I wonder
Are they messed up just like us?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
The Loud Debunker-Not
Calling Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth "The Quiet Juggernaut," James B. of the Screw Loose Change blog states:
And having an article published about their group in The Washington Times is a big deal!
SpookyPunkos comment - March 4, 2010:
James B's position is obviously a poor attempt to belittle this important story. I would remind the debunkers that although the Washington Times printed this 911 story first, heaps of other papers have taken up the issue when they covered the Washington Times article.
The other papers didn't have to write their own substantial copy, they just repeated what was already there, largely without ridiculing it !
If the 911 story was so bad why did other papers take it up ? Plus why did they not wholesale deride the copy when they presented it ?
I just googled the story and there was a lot of good coverage:
http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enAU311AU311&q=Washington+Times+911+story
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIC_enAU311AU311&q=Washington+Times+911+story&start=10&sa=N
On February 25, the Swiss paper The Daily Bell also published an original article inspired by the Washinton Times piece.
They state:
Related Info:
AE911Truth.org Press Conference Video and Media Coverage
AE911Truth held their series of 47 press conferences yesterday, but apparently the press failed to show up. From searching Google news it appears they actually managed to make it into 1 actual newspaper...They also got some TV coverage James.
And having an article published about their group in The Washington Times is a big deal!
SpookyPunkos comment - March 4, 2010:
James B's position is obviously a poor attempt to belittle this important story. I would remind the debunkers that although the Washington Times printed this 911 story first, heaps of other papers have taken up the issue when they covered the Washington Times article.
The other papers didn't have to write their own substantial copy, they just repeated what was already there, largely without ridiculing it !
If the 911 story was so bad why did other papers take it up ? Plus why did they not wholesale deride the copy when they presented it ?
I just googled the story and there was a lot of good coverage:
http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enAU311AU311&q=Washington+Times+911+story
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIC_enAU311AU311&q=Washington+Times+911+story&start=10&sa=N
On February 25, the Swiss paper The Daily Bell also published an original article inspired by the Washinton Times piece.
They state:
The Washington Times, a mainstream, beltway newspaper, is seemingly opening up the issue again. There was no need to cover yet another 'trufers' story and yet the Times has done so - to the astonishment of the alternative blogosphere. We think, not to make a pun, that this is in fact a sign of the times. The pressure to understand what really happened on 9/11 simply won't go away. It is all over the 'Net and is in fact gaining momentum in our opinion.Concluding:
Yesterday, the Washington Times covered an important 9/11 story once again. It was supposed to be dead by now. As dead as Jack Kennedy. Yet articles and research regarding 9/11 are posted to the Internet every day. They are like drops of water that erode the hard shell of the established government narrative.Those Debunkers will say anything to water down or whitewash any significant 911 truth developments. It's very transparent disinfo tactics considering their position juxtaposed to reality ...
Related Info:
AE911Truth.org Press Conference Video and Media Coverage
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
1000 "Moonbat Crazy" Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
By Spookypunkos
Right now there's more than 1000 crazy, but nevertheless credentialed, architects and engineers who have signed up with the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth group. These people are obviously ALL deluded. I mean they madly point to ridiculous evidence such as the laws of physics, peer reviewed papers and the obvious flaws in the official account of the World Trade Centre destruction to back their arguments. Crazy.
I'm sure everything these experts claim is completely false. Structural engineers, ex-NASA engineers, professors and experienced architects obviously don't understand the case being made by the official NIST investigation. Their detailed claims of scientific fraud, enacted on behalf of corrupt elements within the US Government, must obviously be groundless. Nothing to see here, move along ...
Of course the public, including many very intelligent people, have correctly ASSUMED that they know all they need to know about 911. No fact checking is required. I'm sure they're right- that accepting the official story at face value, while overlooking the controversy and the details of the attacks (especially ignoring the informed criticisms of more than a thousand engineering and building professionals), is the most logical position to take.
After all, we MUST accept the War on Terror. No one would take advantage of the tensions between the West and Islam to stage an "impossible" false attack in 2001. That'd be tin-foil hat wearing crazy ! Scientific evidence of foul play be damned !!
Let's look forward to endless war against those irrational fundamentalists. We'll gladly sacrifice everything so that the terrorists won't get us "again." There is no alternative !
Please, no one look into the details here. There is no deception. We are not living a lie. Thousands have not died for nothing. Exposing the truth about 911 is NOT the most important thing you can do !
Here is something else not worthy to consider: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth interviewed in the mainstream media - Victoria, BC
Related Info:
1,000 Architectural and Engineering Professionals Chasing a Moving Goalpost
The Loud Debunker-Not
Right now there's more than 1000 crazy, but nevertheless credentialed, architects and engineers who have signed up with the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth group. These people are obviously ALL deluded. I mean they madly point to ridiculous evidence such as the laws of physics, peer reviewed papers and the obvious flaws in the official account of the World Trade Centre destruction to back their arguments. Crazy.
I'm sure everything these experts claim is completely false. Structural engineers, ex-NASA engineers, professors and experienced architects obviously don't understand the case being made by the official NIST investigation. Their detailed claims of scientific fraud, enacted on behalf of corrupt elements within the US Government, must obviously be groundless. Nothing to see here, move along ...
Of course the public, including many very intelligent people, have correctly ASSUMED that they know all they need to know about 911. No fact checking is required. I'm sure they're right- that accepting the official story at face value, while overlooking the controversy and the details of the attacks (especially ignoring the informed criticisms of more than a thousand engineering and building professionals), is the most logical position to take.
After all, we MUST accept the War on Terror. No one would take advantage of the tensions between the West and Islam to stage an "impossible" false attack in 2001. That'd be tin-foil hat wearing crazy ! Scientific evidence of foul play be damned !!
Let's look forward to endless war against those irrational fundamentalists. We'll gladly sacrifice everything so that the terrorists won't get us "again." There is no alternative !
Please, no one look into the details here. There is no deception. We are not living a lie. Thousands have not died for nothing. Exposing the truth about 911 is NOT the most important thing you can do !
Here is something else not worthy to consider: Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth interviewed in the mainstream media - Victoria, BC
Related Info:
1,000 Architectural and Engineering Professionals Chasing a Moving Goalpost
The Loud Debunker-Not
Saturday, February 20, 2010
I have seen the light! [Satire]
 |
| My new idol, James Randi! |
1) All conspiracy theories are BS. Rich and powerful people do not conspire to further their own selfish agenda. Most historical events defy enormous improbabilities and always seem to benefit the rich. But that is just a coincidence.
2) The world is warming and 0.04% of the atmosphere is the primary cause. Never mind the giant nuclear furnace in the center of our solar system. Never mind cosmic radiation from nearby exploding stars. A life giving gas which plants breathe and animals have been exhaling for hundreds of millions of years is the greatest threat to our planet. Anyone who says otherwise is with the oil companies that are making money off of man-made global warming. [/Baseless conspiracy theory]. We have peer-reviewed studies, the science is settled!
3) Sodium fluoride in tap water is good for you! The fact that it was used by the Nazis in the concentration camps to sterilize inmates and keep them in a docile and apathetic state is not suspicious at all. Neither is the fact that Obama's science czar, John P. Holdren, wrote a book in the 70s advocating putting chemicals in the water to reduce population. We have peer-reviewed studies, the science is settled!
4) Anything natural is bad. The greatest way to prevent against a disease is not to simply load your body up with healthy vitamins, but to have mercury, heavy metals, live viruses and other crap injected in your body more than 25 times before the age of two. There are no natural cancer treatments. The best way to fight a disease that's primarily caused by tissue damage is with tissue destroying radiation. Anyone who freely recommends you eat the seeds of apricots, which can be bought at your local supermarket for virtually nothing at all, to prevent cancer, is trying to con you out of all of your money. [/Baseless conspiracy theory]. We have peer-reviewed studies, the science is settled!
"First there were plants ... and then a miracle occured ... and then there were plants with this complex reproductive system we call a flower ... Makes perfect sense! ... What? ... You want me to be more specific? ... A step by step transition? ... Errrm ... Shut up creationist!!!"
5) Despite the fact that even the simplest theoretically conceivable single-celled life form is more complex than a computer circuit board, early life arose from nothing just by chance, in an atmosphere with no ozone layer. And even though there are numerous things in nature which are simply too strange or complex to have evolved gradually; such as the long, sticky, barbed tongue of the woodpecker, or the engineering skill of the beaver, or the feeding mechanism of carnivorous plants like the venus flytrap, or the fact that in seahorses it's the male that gets pregnant, evolution is 100% scientifically proven fact! And even though our current leading theory for the formation of the solar system violates the law of conservation of angular momentum, that's how it happened. There was no creator/designer. Anyone who disagrees is a religious nut who is committing blasphemy against the prophet Darwin and Pope Dawkins. We have peer-reviewed studies, the science is settled!
6) The collapse of WTC7 can be explained thanks to a recently discovered physical property of the universe that causes fire to intelligently seek out and destroy the one vital column that stops a building from imploding in on itself at the rate of gravity. This discovery of intelligent malevolent fire will change the demolition industry forever! We DON'T have peer-reviewed studies, but the science is still settled!
7) Despite the fact that elitists like David Rockefeller brag in their own books about their desire to destroy the sovereignty of nations and create a world government, and despite the fact that leaked Bilderberg documents from the 50s discuss "European Unity" and "a common currency", and even Bilderbeg chairmen have admitted that they helped set up the European Union, there is no globalist "new world order" conspiracy.
8) The five sense world is all there is. All paranormal phenomena have a perfectly rational explanation. Crop circles are not made by an extraterrestrial / interdimensional force or by advanced government technology, instead there is a perfectly simple explanation. Even though you couldn't draw most of these things out on a piece of paper free hand, never mind a thousand foot wide in a field, they are made by a group of highly artistic pranksters with planks of wood, creeping around at night. They could probably use their incredible artistic talent to make a lot of money, but instead they just like screwing with people. [/Baseless conspiracy theory].
So there you have it folks, reality! No longer will I blindly put my faith in independent scientists like Steven Jones. Instead I will blindly put my faith in credible scientific bodies, such as NIST or the East Anglia CRU. After all, which group is less likely to be politically motivated?!
"DO IT TO JULIAAAAA!!!!!"
I have learned to accept that whenever a major event fits a certain MO that's occurred time and time again before - simultaneous drills (9/11, 7/7, Haiti), intelligence assets (Oswald, McVeigh, Henri Paul, Osama Bin Laden, Mohamed Atta, Haroon Rashid Aswat, Abdul Mutallab's accomplice), indestructible ID (9/11, 7/7) and conveniently switched-off cameras (The Pentagon, Tavistock Square, the Pont de l'Alma tunnel) - that it must be just a coincidence. It's the only logical conclusion!
So see you around twoofers! I hope one day you will come to your senses too!
Signed, Scootle the
Related Info:
Debunking PseudoSkeptics - CSICOP, James Randi, Michael Shermer, etc
Why James Randi, Michael Shermer and other Pseudoskeptics are NOT real skeptics!
How Pseudoskeptics hijack "Skepticism" to mean its opposite: Disinformation, Mind Control and Suppression
They Are the Ones Who Are Not Skeptics
I have seen the light! [Satire]
JREF Forum posts: "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic"
911 Truth: Michael Shermer's Amateur Disinformation Attempt Fails (again!)
Debunking Myths on Conspiracy Theories
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Austin Plane Crash - Where have we seen this before?
On the Prison Planet forum, we've been following this Austin plane crash since the story broke, and and we came across this interesting clip. According to eyewitness Megan Riley, firetrucks and Hazmat teams "just happened to be" in the area when the plane crashed.
On its own, not really suspicious. But when you consider that this sort of thing happens time and time again, it's a little suspicious. On the morning of 9/11, FEMA was in New York City preparing for a terrorist attack drill. On 7/7 there were drills eerily like the attacks taking place as the attacks happened, and according to Daniel Obachike, a passenger on the bus, there were police waiting in Tavistock square when the bus blew up. Witnesses to the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing stated on record that that they had seen Bomb Squad officials in the area before the blast. Even with natural disasters we see these coincidences.
Were these firefighters and Hazmat teams preparing for some kind of drill? If so then that's pretty strong evidence that this was a staged event. Either way this is clearly a psyop and the media is undoubtedly going to use this to demonize truthers and activists.
Related Info:
Source: FBI Knew Austin Attack Was Coming
Attack in Austin: Outraged “Lone Wolf” or False Flag Op?
Post-Avatar Depression
So I watched the movie Avatar yesterday, and I can't decide whether the movie is on our side, or whether its an anti-human, eugenics propaganda film. Since it was a quarter of a billion dollar investment by Murdoch's Twentieth Century Fox, I'm guessing probably the latter. Anyway I'm now suffering from a slight case of Post-Avatar Depression. No seriously, it's a real condition! Thousands of people are coming out of that movie feeling depressed (some even suicidal) that the planet Pandora and the eight foot tall warrior smurfs aren't real! How pathetic is that?! I sometimes wonder if there's an alien race looking down on us, and what they must think of us, looking at our culture. Probably something along the lines of this... .
Anyway to cheer myself up I thought I'd read through the hundred plus YouTube comments I've received the last few days. Here are some of my favourites...
Positive Feedback
LordHewing [Re:Evidence]
As irony has it I am both impressed and appalled, happy and yet angry.
Impressed by such a well made presentation of the facts, and appalled at the evidence of these despicable deeds, false hoods and atrocities. Happy that we have another good tool that may be used to turn the tables on these tyrannical lowlife and angry that once again I see the same old smug faces of the perpetrators that are STILL getting away with it. WTF are we going to do about these subhuman scum?????.
Uinvestigate911 writes [Re:Evidence]:
One of the best videos I have seen. The proof of Thermite used in the towers is proof it was an Inside Job
We got them now. Down with their New World Order Agenda
RESIST
n00bslayer0014 writes [Re:Evidence]:
I'm downloading this one (hope you don't mind, I will not re-post it on you or claim it).
I have seen my share of videos touting "Evidence" but lack in substance, production value and reliable documentation... and THIS is how it should be done!
Finally! A useful batch of information and a phenomenally well produced video not plagued with personal conjecture.
5 Stars man, You deserve it. Keep fighting the good fight.
o0oKilluminatio0o writes [Channel comment]:
dude that evidence video hit the nail on the head,really opened my eyes again,you know how it is ? you start to forget the truh for asec...anyways..you should have like a million subs !
You Put In Work !!!
keep it,Peace !
Thanks guys :). And yeah if anyone wants to download it off YouTube go ahead. It's high enough resolution to look good on a DVD if you know how to burn it.
Hate Fail
dlockcarr writes [Re:Evidence]:
this is a load of crapp
That's what we call cognitive dissonance!
littloered writes [Channel comment]:
go fucking kill your self and do the world a favor of one less drug abuser
Thank you for sharing that with me!
littloered writes [Re:Yet Another "9/11 was an Inside Job" Song]:
you do realize the people making these stories are the same ones you call slave owners or you would have never even figured out any of the few things you call proof
you know i didn't sit here and make a song or another movie trying prove something that will never be determined as true i didnt sit here and claim like i knew these things or watched them all day like i was gonna die from some crazed government plot to rid the usa of freedom which hence show me a place that has more freedom than
the united states of America pls ill wait
... still waiting
you say i don't care about this i live in America
and you say he DOES CARE? ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED? American slobs? stating it like he knows the American people and its government those glasses must be hiding your brain because its not in your skull saying people dont care about what i think lol the only reason your even getting attention from this poor excuse at fame is because your insulting a nation
Yeah OK, your country is free, go back to sleep! The line "Wake Up American Slobs" was referring to the stereotype. I'm not saying all Americans are slobs. In fact, there are many people here in Britain who fit the American slob stereotype. There seems to be this thing in the mainstream media where they accuse anyone who believes 9/11 was a false flag of believing 9/11 was done by America. I guess its to enforce the phony patriotism - as if to say "Our government did it!" is akin to saying "We did it!". Well no, I don't hate America, I hate your government ... and my government ... and my Royal family!
kkirT writes [Re:Evidence]:
This video is hilarious when you consider that people actually think this is "evidence".
Sorry, I'll stick to science over some guy blogging his feelings about global warming or whatever.
Yeah okay, you do that. Believe the lying scientists. This is another thing I notice with global warmists, debunkers, skeptics and evolutionists. They seem to think scientific authority = scientific method. So if you question the scientific authority, you are going against the scientific method. No, no. I trust the scientific method, what I don't trust is scientists. All the quote "credible sources" most of you people cite have been caught using the reverse scientific method.
Disinfo
shrunkensimon writes [Re:Evidence]:
Nuclear Demolition..
Thermite is complete misdirection
shrunkensimon writes [Re:Evidence]:
Yes lets all stick within the confines of an obviously corrupted "truth movement", which probably was controlled from the very beginning if not planned for in tandem with the actual attacks themselves..
I don't trust S. Jones, nor do i trust the general view held by "truthers". It's clear to me everyone is being played, given that the planes were clearly fabrications and "truthers" still refuse to accept the obviousness of that and outright ridicule it (because AJ and others say to do so)
chunkyboy100 writes [Re:Evidence]:
good point simon.
there seems to be a lot of distrust in the truth movement.
i believe the fabrcated planes are avoided because its just so hard to convince people of it.
though to be honest ive got a lot more people intrested in doing reserch by showing them september clues than i have papers on nano thermite..... if u know what i mean!
You know you've made a good truth video when trolls come and post disinfo comments on it. I don't rule out the possibility that other explosives were used as well as thermite, either conventional explosives or something else we don't even know about. In fact, I think it's quite likely since I find it hard to believe thermite alone can account for the observed destruction. However since there's no forensic proof of anything else, I'm not going to speculate. We should stick to what we can prove, speculation gets us nowhere. As for the "fabricated planes", I'm not even gonna dignify that with a response.
Demolition Theories - Theories of the Twin Towers' Destruction Rejecting Gravity-Driven Collapse
Miscellaneous
joey3469 writes [Re:Evidence]:
Interesting video but was ashamed to hear Nick Griffin at 2:38
This racist doesn't deserve a place in the video...
I take you are anarchists?
For those in the US who may not know who Nick Griffin is, he's the head of the British National Party (BNP) in the UK. He's anti-globalist and speaks out against the global warming fraud, but he's also a racist nazi holocaust denier. I don't like him, although I was impressed by a speech he gave to the EU about climate change and used some snippets in my video just because they sum things up quite well. Since my videos are crash courses composed of audio clips from all over the place, I tend not to care who says something. What's being said is what's important. If it's clear and concise and I agree with it, I'll put it in, regardless of who says it.
NWOtruthNOW writes [Re:Evidence]:
Damn man this video is exactly like the video im making right now. Im going to have to change it all now lol
Haha! :)
Glenmead writes [Re:Evidence]:
GREAT VIDEO...Megan Fox is so hot
... Errr ... Yeh! I'm probably the only person who includes clips of things like Megan Fox in a bathtub and even pornography in my truth videos haha. I keep doing it in the hope that one day YouTube will select one of those video frames as the thumbnail image for the video, then I would imagine it would get much more views!
Anyway to cheer myself up I thought I'd read through the hundred plus YouTube comments I've received the last few days. Here are some of my favourites...
Positive Feedback
LordHewing [Re:Evidence]
As irony has it I am both impressed and appalled, happy and yet angry.
Impressed by such a well made presentation of the facts, and appalled at the evidence of these despicable deeds, false hoods and atrocities. Happy that we have another good tool that may be used to turn the tables on these tyrannical lowlife and angry that once again I see the same old smug faces of the perpetrators that are STILL getting away with it. WTF are we going to do about these subhuman scum?????.
Uinvestigate911 writes [Re:Evidence]:
One of the best videos I have seen. The proof of Thermite used in the towers is proof it was an Inside Job
We got them now. Down with their New World Order Agenda
RESIST
n00bslayer0014 writes [Re:Evidence]:
I'm downloading this one (hope you don't mind, I will not re-post it on you or claim it).
I have seen my share of videos touting "Evidence" but lack in substance, production value and reliable documentation... and THIS is how it should be done!
Finally! A useful batch of information and a phenomenally well produced video not plagued with personal conjecture.
5 Stars man, You deserve it. Keep fighting the good fight.
o0oKilluminatio0o writes [Channel comment]:
dude that evidence video hit the nail on the head,really opened my eyes again,you know how it is ? you start to forget the truh for asec...anyways..you should have like a million subs !
You Put In Work !!!
keep it,Peace !
Thanks guys :). And yeah if anyone wants to download it off YouTube go ahead. It's high enough resolution to look good on a DVD if you know how to burn it.
Hate Fail
dlockcarr writes [Re:Evidence]:
this is a load of crapp
That's what we call cognitive dissonance!
littloered writes [Channel comment]:
go fucking kill your self and do the world a favor of one less drug abuser
Thank you for sharing that with me!
littloered writes [Re:Yet Another "9/11 was an Inside Job" Song]:
you do realize the people making these stories are the same ones you call slave owners or you would have never even figured out any of the few things you call proof
you know i didn't sit here and make a song or another movie trying prove something that will never be determined as true i didnt sit here and claim like i knew these things or watched them all day like i was gonna die from some crazed government plot to rid the usa of freedom which hence show me a place that has more freedom than
the united states of America pls ill wait
... still waiting
you say i don't care about this i live in America
and you say he DOES CARE? ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED? American slobs? stating it like he knows the American people and its government those glasses must be hiding your brain because its not in your skull saying people dont care about what i think lol the only reason your even getting attention from this poor excuse at fame is because your insulting a nation
Yeah OK, your country is free, go back to sleep! The line "Wake Up American Slobs" was referring to the stereotype. I'm not saying all Americans are slobs. In fact, there are many people here in Britain who fit the American slob stereotype. There seems to be this thing in the mainstream media where they accuse anyone who believes 9/11 was a false flag of believing 9/11 was done by America. I guess its to enforce the phony patriotism - as if to say "Our government did it!" is akin to saying "We did it!". Well no, I don't hate America, I hate your government ... and my government ... and my Royal family!
kkirT writes [Re:Evidence]:
This video is hilarious when you consider that people actually think this is "evidence".
Sorry, I'll stick to science over some guy blogging his feelings about global warming or whatever.
Yeah okay, you do that. Believe the lying scientists. This is another thing I notice with global warmists, debunkers, skeptics and evolutionists. They seem to think scientific authority = scientific method. So if you question the scientific authority, you are going against the scientific method. No, no. I trust the scientific method, what I don't trust is scientists. All the quote "credible sources" most of you people cite have been caught using the reverse scientific method.
Disinfo
shrunkensimon writes [Re:Evidence]:
Nuclear Demolition..
Thermite is complete misdirection
shrunkensimon writes [Re:Evidence]:
Yes lets all stick within the confines of an obviously corrupted "truth movement", which probably was controlled from the very beginning if not planned for in tandem with the actual attacks themselves..
I don't trust S. Jones, nor do i trust the general view held by "truthers". It's clear to me everyone is being played, given that the planes were clearly fabrications and "truthers" still refuse to accept the obviousness of that and outright ridicule it (because AJ and others say to do so)
chunkyboy100 writes [Re:Evidence]:
good point simon.
there seems to be a lot of distrust in the truth movement.
i believe the fabrcated planes are avoided because its just so hard to convince people of it.
though to be honest ive got a lot more people intrested in doing reserch by showing them september clues than i have papers on nano thermite..... if u know what i mean!
You know you've made a good truth video when trolls come and post disinfo comments on it. I don't rule out the possibility that other explosives were used as well as thermite, either conventional explosives or something else we don't even know about. In fact, I think it's quite likely since I find it hard to believe thermite alone can account for the observed destruction. However since there's no forensic proof of anything else, I'm not going to speculate. We should stick to what we can prove, speculation gets us nowhere. As for the "fabricated planes", I'm not even gonna dignify that with a response.
Demolition Theories - Theories of the Twin Towers' Destruction Rejecting Gravity-Driven Collapse
Miscellaneous
joey3469 writes [Re:Evidence]:
Interesting video but was ashamed to hear Nick Griffin at 2:38
This racist doesn't deserve a place in the video...
I take you are anarchists?
For those in the US who may not know who Nick Griffin is, he's the head of the British National Party (BNP) in the UK. He's anti-globalist and speaks out against the global warming fraud, but he's also a racist nazi holocaust denier. I don't like him, although I was impressed by a speech he gave to the EU about climate change and used some snippets in my video just because they sum things up quite well. Since my videos are crash courses composed of audio clips from all over the place, I tend not to care who says something. What's being said is what's important. If it's clear and concise and I agree with it, I'll put it in, regardless of who says it.
NWOtruthNOW writes [Re:Evidence]:
Damn man this video is exactly like the video im making right now. Im going to have to change it all now lol
Haha! :)
Glenmead writes [Re:Evidence]:
GREAT VIDEO...Megan Fox is so hot
... Errr ... Yeh! I'm probably the only person who includes clips of things like Megan Fox in a bathtub and even pornography in my truth videos haha. I keep doing it in the hope that one day YouTube will select one of those video frames as the thumbnail image for the video, then I would imagine it would get much more views!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
NIST's Admission of Freefall - Does It Matter?
A debunker on YouTube sent me the above graphic in a message response to my song, presumably to debunk the line "Tower 7 Falls At Freefall Speed". It shows the alleged buckling of floors 7 to 14 during the collapse. Debunkers claim it proves that eight floors of freefall is possible in this case because the buckled floors wouldn't offer any significant resistance.
The amount of hoops that debunkers and skeptics have to jump through in order to get their theories to work is ridiculous. Two sections of building can't slam into each other without there being a jolt ... but the collapse of the North Tower was a special case! Look, a slight tilt! For more than 120 years, Arctic temperatures appear to correlate perfectly with solar cycles ... but the last decade was a special case! Look, warming! Pay no attention to the lying scientists! And a building can't fall at freefall ... but WTC7 was a special case! Look, CGI buckling!
I'm not convinced that even buckled floors like that would behave as if they were turned to air, as freefall implies, but let's assume they would. Note that this is a computer model, and the thing about computers is - BS in, BS out! And since this is NIST we're talking about (or my new name for them, NIMMTCD - The Nanothermite Institute of Molten Metal and Thermal Conductivity Deniers), I don't have much confidence in this model! Since the parameters of their models have never been released to the public, despite numerous FOIA requests, there's really no way of knowing whether or not this model is realistic.
NIST clearly knew admitting freefall would be a problem. In fact, in their list of changes that accompanied their final report, they never actually mentioned their revised analysis! So it's obvious they didn't want to draw attention to it.
Is freefall important? Yes. Is it our strongest evidence WTC7 was demolished? No. Freefall tells us something strange is going on, but the proof comes from the forensics. The strongest evidence in my opinion is the extreme corrosion of the steel, documented by FEMA. Which by the way, NIMMTCD completely ignored... So maybe there should be an extra C in that acronym.
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Ultimate proof NIST is lying about WTC7
WarCrime911
YouTube.com
February 15, 2010
Over 1,000 Professional Architects and Engineers agree that the mysterious collapses of WTC Building 7 and the Twin Towers on 9/11/01 need to be re-examined and investigated. The NIST report is proven to be unscientific and false, using evidence NIST either ignored or gathered and used itself.
I used the public domain video created by NIST, available here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/usnistgov
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_iBYSqEsc
NIST in their own words admits free fall speed:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html
"Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)"
The NIST WTC Investigation -- How Real Was The Simulation? by Eric Douglas, Architect
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200612/NIST-WTC-Investigation.pdf
FireFighters for 9/11 Truth:
NFPA 921 on High Order Damage:
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/?p=221
Shear Studs: A Case Study:
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/sixty-state-street/construction.htm
Van Ramiro's SuperThermite experiment was courtesy of Jesse Ventura's "Conspiracy Theory" TV Show on TruTv (formerly CourtTV) from Episode 2 on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.
Physical Chemistry of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Alum-Rich Microspheres at Demise of WTC 1 & 2 Jerry Lobdill 6/15/2007
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JLobdillThermiteChemistryWTC
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
NIST Report on WTC 7 dissected by Engineers:
http://www.ae911truth.org/docs/J_Cole_NIST_WTC7_PUBLIC_COMMENTS_FINAL_PKG_9-11-08-SUBMITTED.pdf
Related Info:
Re: NIST Report on WTC7 debunked and exposed!
The Mysterious Collapse of WTC Seven - Why NIST’s Final 9/11 Report is Unscientific and False
1000 "Moonbat Crazy" Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
TruTV's 'Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura' - 9/11
YouTube.com
February 15, 2010
Over 1,000 Professional Architects and Engineers agree that the mysterious collapses of WTC Building 7 and the Twin Towers on 9/11/01 need to be re-examined and investigated. The NIST report is proven to be unscientific and false, using evidence NIST either ignored or gathered and used itself.
I used the public domain video created by NIST, available here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/usnistgov
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_iBYSqEsc
NIST in their own words admits free fall speed:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html
"Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)"
The NIST WTC Investigation -- How Real Was The Simulation? by Eric Douglas, Architect
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200612/NIST-WTC-Investigation.pdf
FireFighters for 9/11 Truth:
NFPA 921 on High Order Damage:
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/?p=221
Shear Studs: A Case Study:
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/sixty-state-street/construction.htm
Van Ramiro's SuperThermite experiment was courtesy of Jesse Ventura's "Conspiracy Theory" TV Show on TruTv (formerly CourtTV) from Episode 2 on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories.
Physical Chemistry of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Alum-Rich Microspheres at Demise of WTC 1 & 2 Jerry Lobdill 6/15/2007
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JLobdillThermiteChemistryWTC
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
NIST Report on WTC 7 dissected by Engineers:
http://www.ae911truth.org/docs/J_Cole_NIST_WTC7_PUBLIC_COMMENTS_FINAL_PKG_9-11-08-SUBMITTED.pdf
Related Info:
Re: NIST Report on WTC7 debunked and exposed!
The Mysterious Collapse of WTC Seven - Why NIST’s Final 9/11 Report is Unscientific and False
1000 "Moonbat Crazy" Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
TruTV's 'Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura' - 9/11
Sunday, February 14, 2010
New Video: Evidence
[Some of the text is quite small, watch full size]
Factual back-up, sources, and further research materials:
I got tired of my friends saying things like "Lol you and your theories" and "Omg you're obsessed with conspiracy theories". Theories this, theories that. Beliefs this, beliefs that. One word that never comes up is evidence. So I thought I'd make a video simply called "Evidence", loaded with documented facts.
Music: Marilyn Manson - Evidence (Instrumental)
World Trade Center Forensics
EarthData Thermal Images
Molten Steel & Extreme Temperatures at WTC
FEMA: World Trade Center Building Performance Study (Appendix C)
(Documenting the corrosion of WTC7 steel)
Investigate NIST Officials Shyam Sunder and John Gross
(An outline of NIST's frauds)
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Energetic Nanocomposites with Sol-gel Chemistry: Synthesis, Safety, and Characterization
(LLNL study of "hybrid inorganic/organic energetic nanocomposites")
Climate Change
Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory
(The science is not settled!)
Lord Monckton on Climate Change - Melbourne Highlights clip (1 of 2)
Lord Monckton on Climate Change - Melbourne Highlights clip (2 of 2)
ClimateGate For Dummies
Guide To The Climate Scandals
Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception?
(How the cooler temperature stations were deleted to fabricate an exaggerated warming trend)
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
The Globalist Conspiracy
House Select Comittee Concludes JFK and MLK Probably Killed by Conspiracies
De-Classified Document Admits Oswald Was CIA
Bilderberg-chairman: ‘Bilderberg helped create the Euro’
Leaked 1955 Bilderberg Docs Outline Plan For Single European Currency
Download the document: http://www.mediafire.com/?oz1wjn4j1mz
Tucker Confirms Geithner Presence at Bilderberg Meeting
(Geither violating the Logan Act)
Bilderberg Appointee Van Rompuy Is First EU President
EU President Herman Van Rompuy - 2009 is "the first year of global governance"
David Rockefeller's Confession:
"Memoirs" (2002), Page 405.
Recent Events
Flight 253: Bomber Had No Passport, Helped To Board Plane By Sharp-Dressed Man
The Sharp Dressed Man Who Aided Mutallab Onto Flight 253 Was a U.S. Government Agent
Scannergate: Facts Contradict Heathrow Claim That Naked Images Can’t Be Printed
Government prepared for Haiti relief drill the day before the earthquake!
Popular Mechanics and others were "enlisted" by the government.
Brave New World
"Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so."
- Bertrand Russell, "The Impact of Science on Society" (1952), Page 62.
Obama Science Advisor Called For “Planetary Regime” To Enforce Totalitarian Population Control Measures
Obama Science Czar’s Plan To Sterilize Population Through Water Supply Already Happening
NASA Global Warming Alarmist Endorses Book That Calls For Mass Genocide
Nazis used Sodium Fluoride
Aldous Huxley - The Ultimate Revolution
Saturday, February 13, 2010
There are civilized debunkers out there. Just gotta know where to look!
This is a debate I had with a debunker awhile back. This discussion I had is total proof that it is possible to have a rational and intellectual debate with a debunker. (The tone of this debate, as you will see, is completely in contrast with my previous debate.) Here is my discussion with debunker Gunny467, regarding the thermite theory and nano-thermite paper. It's a short debate, but a refreshing one:
AdamT:
Hello Gunny. I wanted to pick up from where we left off in our discussion. I see from your channel that you are open to a civil debate that you would like to finish. And that's fine, just keep the debate civil on your end as well. Now, to pick up from where we left off on the chain of custody issue, I have a few questions. The claim I keep hearing from many is that there is no proper chain of custody for the four samples Dr. Jones has obtained, therby the samples are possibly contaminated. However, the one thing I have yet to hear explained is what this alleged contamination is supposed to have done to the samples. What exactly do you think happened to the samples that caused Dr. Jones and the others to come to the conclusions that they did? Because as far as I know, other studies by other groups such as the RJ Lee group and the USGS group have found similar elements in their own samples, particularly finding the iron-rich spheres. I would really like to hear your input. Thank you.
Gunny:
Well, with no clear chain of custody it can't be proven that the samples he tested were from ground zero. It's possible they were substituted en route to a destination. Another possibility is that they were contaminated by improper handling. The motive for tampering is easy, money. He's made a substantial dollar amount doing lectures and tours about his findings. Money he wouldn't have made if there wasn't a paper. If a chain of custody issue had been raised with the official samples most conspiracy theorists would have said it indicated proof of a conspiracy. I see no reason to hold Dr. Jones to the same standards. Iron rich spheres by themselves aren't indicative of a thermite reaction. His paper starts with the answer he wants and devises questions to get there. He ignores any data that doesn't fit his theory. It's bad science.
AT:
The first thing I should point out is that you're right, the samples didn't come from Ground Zero. They came from areas away from Ground Zero such as the Brooklyn Bridge and other buildings in the city. That proves that they were not contaminated by the cleanup efforts. Second, I really doubt he is doing this for money. He basically gave up his job to investigate 9/11. And I see no evidence what so ever that Dr. Jones is just lying about the dust. Again, other studies have essentially found the same things. Also, didn't NIST start with a conclusion and tried to find evidence that supported their conclusion? I do think the iron spheres are extremely important because their presence implies that iron had melted. Iron does not melt until temperatures of 2800 degrees F. I can't think of anything that could cause that except thermite.
Gunny:
Well not necessarily. Acetylene torches welding steel can have that effect, so someone collecting a sample that had been contaminated from cast of near a construction site not in the immediate vicinity of Ground Zero. Specifically, if a sample was collected from the Brookline bridge, the amount of contamination from vehicle cast of would be enormous. Any truck carrying welded scraps to or from a dump could have left iron sphere contaminated dust on the bridge. The samples weren't collected by professionals, but by supposedly by random people who wanted some of the dust. He didn't then test the samples for four years after they were collected by people with no experience in handling evidence. This casts considerable doubt on the initial integrity of his samples. In addition certain types of paint (specifically rust preventative paints) have varying levels of them as a byproduct of their manufacturing process. College professors don't really make a lot of money, unless they publish an important paper. I've read the NIST report. It doesn't have a specific conclusion at all. It's presented facts indicate to an almost certain degree of probability that events happened in a manner consistent with a catastrophic failure due to an impact with a jetliner. The steel didn't melt. It was weakened by several hours of exposure to a high intensity fire caused by burning fuel. The already massive damage to the superstructure resulted in a systemic failure of the support structure resulting in collapse. In addition to the information already sent, I would like to note that the molten metal pouring from the building is suspected to be from the remains of the Jetliner itself, as it's aluminum body melted from the intense heat.
AT:
To address the iron sphere issue, I would agree with you about them except for the fact that they were also found by the RJ Lee group and the USGS group. Particularly the RJ Lee group who obtained their samples from the Deutchse Bank building for environmental studies. They found the exact same type of iron spheres across the street from the WTC, so the cleanup could not possibly have produced the spheres at least there anyway. The USGS also found these spheres in their own dust analysis. The acetylene torches have been raised as a possibility, but they are a highly unlikely cause since spheres from thermite and spheres from torches have distinct differences. This is a good video that addresses this issue:
Also, the material flowing out of the South Tower does not appear to be from the plane. I have made a video addressing this issue:
Gunny:
Well, I really want you to understand that this is not a brush off, but instead me gathering my files and taking some time to address those points in turn from the second video. This response might take a while. Perhaps by Sunday I'll have a list of compiled statements and counter theories. Is this acceptable? The amount of time needed to address all these points is something I'm going to have to juggle in my off time between retraining from injury, redeployment and continuing education. If things go well I should be out of the hospital by Saturday which will give me enough time to put a proper counter-argument together.
AT:
That's fine. Whenever you get around to it is fine with me. I'm in no rush.
Gunny:
Thank you for your generosity! In case you hadn't noticed you've made my Cool Wall in my profile for your continued good natured debating, in addition to your well articulated and presented arguments.
AT:
I did notice, and thank you. I am always open to a civil debate.
___________________________________________________________
Since then, Gunny has not responded back, but it was quite nice to have a rational debate for a change(I don't get many). You can get a good conversation out of Gunny467. As long as you're civil with him, he'll be civil with you. Which, of course, is how it always should be.
AdamT:
Hello Gunny. I wanted to pick up from where we left off in our discussion. I see from your channel that you are open to a civil debate that you would like to finish. And that's fine, just keep the debate civil on your end as well. Now, to pick up from where we left off on the chain of custody issue, I have a few questions. The claim I keep hearing from many is that there is no proper chain of custody for the four samples Dr. Jones has obtained, therby the samples are possibly contaminated. However, the one thing I have yet to hear explained is what this alleged contamination is supposed to have done to the samples. What exactly do you think happened to the samples that caused Dr. Jones and the others to come to the conclusions that they did? Because as far as I know, other studies by other groups such as the RJ Lee group and the USGS group have found similar elements in their own samples, particularly finding the iron-rich spheres. I would really like to hear your input. Thank you.
Gunny:
Well, with no clear chain of custody it can't be proven that the samples he tested were from ground zero. It's possible they were substituted en route to a destination. Another possibility is that they were contaminated by improper handling. The motive for tampering is easy, money. He's made a substantial dollar amount doing lectures and tours about his findings. Money he wouldn't have made if there wasn't a paper. If a chain of custody issue had been raised with the official samples most conspiracy theorists would have said it indicated proof of a conspiracy. I see no reason to hold Dr. Jones to the same standards. Iron rich spheres by themselves aren't indicative of a thermite reaction. His paper starts with the answer he wants and devises questions to get there. He ignores any data that doesn't fit his theory. It's bad science.
AT:
The first thing I should point out is that you're right, the samples didn't come from Ground Zero. They came from areas away from Ground Zero such as the Brooklyn Bridge and other buildings in the city. That proves that they were not contaminated by the cleanup efforts. Second, I really doubt he is doing this for money. He basically gave up his job to investigate 9/11. And I see no evidence what so ever that Dr. Jones is just lying about the dust. Again, other studies have essentially found the same things. Also, didn't NIST start with a conclusion and tried to find evidence that supported their conclusion? I do think the iron spheres are extremely important because their presence implies that iron had melted. Iron does not melt until temperatures of 2800 degrees F. I can't think of anything that could cause that except thermite.
Gunny:
Well not necessarily. Acetylene torches welding steel can have that effect, so someone collecting a sample that had been contaminated from cast of near a construction site not in the immediate vicinity of Ground Zero. Specifically, if a sample was collected from the Brookline bridge, the amount of contamination from vehicle cast of would be enormous. Any truck carrying welded scraps to or from a dump could have left iron sphere contaminated dust on the bridge. The samples weren't collected by professionals, but by supposedly by random people who wanted some of the dust. He didn't then test the samples for four years after they were collected by people with no experience in handling evidence. This casts considerable doubt on the initial integrity of his samples. In addition certain types of paint (specifically rust preventative paints) have varying levels of them as a byproduct of their manufacturing process. College professors don't really make a lot of money, unless they publish an important paper. I've read the NIST report. It doesn't have a specific conclusion at all. It's presented facts indicate to an almost certain degree of probability that events happened in a manner consistent with a catastrophic failure due to an impact with a jetliner. The steel didn't melt. It was weakened by several hours of exposure to a high intensity fire caused by burning fuel. The already massive damage to the superstructure resulted in a systemic failure of the support structure resulting in collapse. In addition to the information already sent, I would like to note that the molten metal pouring from the building is suspected to be from the remains of the Jetliner itself, as it's aluminum body melted from the intense heat.
AT:
To address the iron sphere issue, I would agree with you about them except for the fact that they were also found by the RJ Lee group and the USGS group. Particularly the RJ Lee group who obtained their samples from the Deutchse Bank building for environmental studies. They found the exact same type of iron spheres across the street from the WTC, so the cleanup could not possibly have produced the spheres at least there anyway. The USGS also found these spheres in their own dust analysis. The acetylene torches have been raised as a possibility, but they are a highly unlikely cause since spheres from thermite and spheres from torches have distinct differences. This is a good video that addresses this issue:
Also, the material flowing out of the South Tower does not appear to be from the plane. I have made a video addressing this issue:
Gunny:
Well, I really want you to understand that this is not a brush off, but instead me gathering my files and taking some time to address those points in turn from the second video. This response might take a while. Perhaps by Sunday I'll have a list of compiled statements and counter theories. Is this acceptable? The amount of time needed to address all these points is something I'm going to have to juggle in my off time between retraining from injury, redeployment and continuing education. If things go well I should be out of the hospital by Saturday which will give me enough time to put a proper counter-argument together.
AT:
That's fine. Whenever you get around to it is fine with me. I'm in no rush.
Gunny:
Thank you for your generosity! In case you hadn't noticed you've made my Cool Wall in my profile for your continued good natured debating, in addition to your well articulated and presented arguments.
AT:
I did notice, and thank you. I am always open to a civil debate.
___________________________________________________________
Since then, Gunny has not responded back, but it was quite nice to have a rational debate for a change(I don't get many). You can get a good conversation out of Gunny467. As long as you're civil with him, he'll be civil with you. Which, of course, is how it always should be.
New 9/11 photos 'prove WTC exploded from inside'
RussiaToday
YouTube.com
February 11, 2010
YouTube.com
February 11, 2010
___________________________________________________________
James B. from the ScrewLooseChange blog states:
"Not surprisingly the nutters are now claiming that this is some sort of success for them. And here I thought the mainstream media was part of the coverup."
Well James, the Associated Press did point out that:
Glenn Corbett, a fire science expert who sat on an advisory committee during the NIST probe, said the photos did not yield any new information for investigators.
"I don't see anything here that's new," he said. "These are common photos. ... It just reinforces things we know, that debris spread over a large area and the resultant dispersion of toxins and human remains."
We don't see anything new here either actually. It just reinforces things we know:
The photographs compiled here, taken as a whole, provide a detailed body of evidence documenting the global features of the explosive collapses of the Twin Towers.
And don't forget that the mainstream media has reported a ton of things that prove the official story is bunk, as documented in The Complete 9/11 Timeline, they just don't often connect the dots.
Related Info:
NYPD World Trade Center 9/11 Aerials
Manny Badillo Talks with RT About the New Photos
Manufactured Controversy Backfires As Vast Majority Back Medina, Attack Glenn Beck
Paul Joseph Watson February 13, 2010
Corporate Media Smears Medina For Expressing View Shared By Majority Of Americans
The attack dog corporate media, in cahoots with loathsome phony neo-con crybaby Glenn Beck, are once again attempting to manufacture reality by smearing Debra Medina for expressing a view shared by the vast majority of Americans in an effort to purge her from the Texas gubernatorial race.
Fox News blowhard Glenn Beck attempted to set up Medina on his radio show yesterday by asking her if she believed the U.S. government was involved in 9/11.
“I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard,” Medina said. “There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that.”
Medina’s response was measured and even less vehement that than six of the ten 9/11 commissioners, who have all gone on the record to discuss how the government lied about the official story.
Furthermore, in merely refusing to completely accept the official version of events, Medina stands firmly with the majority of Americans. An October 2006 CBS/New York Times poll found that only 16% of Americans thought the government told the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks. Medina is in agreement with no less than 84% of Americans who do not readily accept the official story as true.
Callers to 570 KLIF were unanimous in their response to the non-issue, agreeing that Medina’s answer was perfectly acceptable, accurate, and that they wouldn’t change their vote for her.
The following clip is astounding in the fact that it completely unveils how the establishment media has once again brazenly tried, but failed, to dictate reality by claiming that Medina’s campaign is now over, despite the fact that the vast majority of Texans completely agree with her position on 9/11.
Watch the clip.
However, Medina’s statements were immediately seized upon by a political establishment transparently desperate to derail her accelerating poll numbers as she closes in on globalist stooges Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchinson.
Corporate Media Smears Medina For Expressing View Shared By Majority Of Americans
The attack dog corporate media, in cahoots with loathsome phony neo-con crybaby Glenn Beck, are once again attempting to manufacture reality by smearing Debra Medina for expressing a view shared by the vast majority of Americans in an effort to purge her from the Texas gubernatorial race.
Fox News blowhard Glenn Beck attempted to set up Medina on his radio show yesterday by asking her if she believed the U.S. government was involved in 9/11.
“I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard,” Medina said. “There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all the evidence there, so I have not taken a position on that.”
Medina’s response was measured and even less vehement that than six of the ten 9/11 commissioners, who have all gone on the record to discuss how the government lied about the official story.
Furthermore, in merely refusing to completely accept the official version of events, Medina stands firmly with the majority of Americans. An October 2006 CBS/New York Times poll found that only 16% of Americans thought the government told the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks. Medina is in agreement with no less than 84% of Americans who do not readily accept the official story as true.
Callers to 570 KLIF were unanimous in their response to the non-issue, agreeing that Medina’s answer was perfectly acceptable, accurate, and that they wouldn’t change their vote for her.
The following clip is astounding in the fact that it completely unveils how the establishment media has once again brazenly tried, but failed, to dictate reality by claiming that Medina’s campaign is now over, despite the fact that the vast majority of Texans completely agree with her position on 9/11.
Watch the clip.
However, Medina’s statements were immediately seized upon by a political establishment transparently desperate to derail her accelerating poll numbers as she closes in on globalist stooges Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchinson.
All of a sudden, every viewpoint and every opinion of every individual Medina had talked to suddenly became attributed to her as the media aggressively tried to shift the debate away from the issues that have made her so popular in an attempt to tear her down. Beck subsequently expressed his desire to “french kiss” Rick Perry and the fix was in.
Medina has never even talked about 9/11 as part of her platform, but that didn’t stop Hutchinson and Perry operatives flooding Twitter with hoax controversies about her supposed mental instability for daring to say that Americans have the right to question their government.
Within an hour of her appearance on Beck’s show, robo-calls from the Perry and Hutchinson campaigns went out attacking Medina as a “9/11 truther”.
“Wow!! Isn’t that interesting,” wrote one respondent to an Austin-American Statesman story. “How was Mr. Perry’s team so ready to start a massive robo blitz with this new Truther news so quick? Looks like someone is getting scared, and that he had a little help from a friend.”
Indeed, for such calls to be launched so soon after Medina’s appearance, it’s blatant that Beck’s ambush journalism was carefully planned from the very beginning. Perry and Hutchinson were primed to capitalize upon the fake controversy before it even happened.
But unfortunately for the establishment, it seems like the people are not buying the hoax. Just like the KLIF callers, the majority of respondents to the Statesman story expressed their support for Medina and denounced the cheap shots pulled by Glenn Beck.
“Medina raised more than $50,000 yesterday. I doubt that she has “nullified herself”. Her popularity is actually soaring and Beck is receiving thousands of angry emails,” wrote one.
“I just donated $350 to her campaign,” added another, pointing out that Medina has never wavered from her campaign which is based on states’ rights, securing the border, gun owners’ rights and replacing the unconstitutional property tax – all issues which both Perry and Hutchinson have completely abandoned in favor of toadying up to the political elite that owns them.
“The real travesty is the hatchet job perpetrated by this reporter and the rest of the pack of corporate owned media running dogs who pose as journalists,” added another, highlighting the fact that a candidate in the mould of Medina poses a threat to both Democrats and Republicans across the country and the entire two party monopoly that Glenn Beck shills for on a routine basis.
“What Medina said is that there are unanswered questions posed to the government about 911,” states another. “This is 100% true and accurate. The 911 Commission’s report stated that the government withheld evidence and therefore the report was incomplete with unanswered questions.”
For taking a stance similar to six of the ten 9/11 Commissioners, who have all publicly stated that the official story surrounding the attacks is impossible, Medina is being witch hunted by the establishment in a savage McCarthyesque purge.
Medina was gaining on both Perry and Hutchinson at a rate of several points a week. The establishment was straining at the leash to find some mud to sling at her and since they could come up with nothing, they had to engineer a fake spectacle by way of the nationally despised slime ball turncoat Glenn Beck, the neo-con who poses as a libertarian, the man who supported the bailout under Bush and then claimed he had opposed it all along when Obama got in office, the man who ceaselessly calls for more taxes on the American people while posing as a demagogue of the Tea Party movement which is supposed to stand against new taxes.
As little as seven months ago, Rick Perry and John Cornyn were being booed in Texas at Tea Party events. Now Perry has learned to don a cowboy hat and pretend to be a grass roots populist while selling out Texas’ very infrastructure to foreign companies that Texans will pay tolls to. The Tea Party movement has been hijacked by phony neo-cons like Sarah Palin who endorse Perry while the only real Constitutionalist in the race, Debra Medina, is the victim of an organized smear campaign.
Fine, if Republicans want to continue to pay rising property taxes and fees on toll roads to foreign-owned companies, if they want the border to continue to be wide open, then go ahead and and vote for Bilderberger Rick Perry – you deserve everything you get.
In the meantime, true Constitutionalists, true conservatives and true patriots will continue to support the people’s candidate – Debra Medina – redoubling our efforts in order to expose this entire farce for what it really is – an artificially engineered hatchet job conducted by one of the most loathsome, un-American, big government worshipping corporate media whores ever to open his big mouth – Glenn Beck – the man who fakes crying on demand for photo shoots and proclaims his love for America while selling out every single idea that made America great, the right to dissent, the right to question, and the right to exercise the liberties enshrined in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, all things that Debra Medina stands for, and all things that Perry and Hutchinson have abandoned.
Related Info:
Medina's flip-flop
Operative Beck Says 9/11 Truthers Are A Threat To Obama's Safety!
JREF Forum posts: "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic"
Richard Gage
911blogger.com
February 12, 2010
Here is the excellent post on the JREF forum (Feb 6th) that actually exposes all of their 9/11 Debunking tactics in one convenient tidy package - from their own master. It can be seen as the bible of the true skeptic - by the ultimate skeptic, Proff Truzi. Use this to expose the debunkers with their own "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic and the skeptic". (I have added the numbers for your future use). Use it liberally!
(Thanks go to Dan Noel)
RG
Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic and the skeptic
I have noticed that there appears to be two main types of skeptics. One an admirable role, one quite the opposite.
Therefore we have a skeptic, and a pseudoskeptic.
Points courtesy of Proff Truzi,
Characteristics of a pseudoskeptic:
1. The tendency to deny, rather than doubt.
2. Double standards in the application of criticism.
3. The making of judgments without full inquiry.
4. Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.
5. Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments.
6. Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.
7. Presenting insufficient evidence or proof.
8. Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof.
9. Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.
10. Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
11. Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.
12. Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims.
13. Asserting that claims which have not been proven false must be true, and vice versa (Argument from ignorance).
14. They speak down to their audience using 'arguments from authority'.
15. They put forward their assumptions as if they were universal truths.
16. No references to reputable journal material.
17. If the pseudo-skeptic has a monetary interest (such as maintaining a funding stream or a salary) his criticisms often become vituperative.
True Skeptics / Open-Minded Skeptics
A. Does not show any of the characteristics of a pseudoskeptic.
B. Inquires and asks questions to try to understand things
C. Applies open inquiry and investigation of both sides
D. Is nonjudgmental, doesn't jump to rash conclusions
E. Has honest doubt and questions all beliefs, including their own
F. Seeks the truth, considers it the highest aim
G. Fairly and objectively weighs evidence on all sides
H. Acknowledges valid convincing evidence
I. Possesses solid sharp common sense and reason
J. Is able to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence
Just a nice guide to fall back on, the skeptics bible in a way. Its not amazingly consistent (ie, skeptics should not give people a stereotype and dismiss them due to that, so immediately labelling the pseudoskeptic, so has an early issue)
Related Info:
Gordon Ross is pretty sure he exists.
Debunking PseudoSkeptics - CSICOP, James Randi, Michael Shermer, etc
How Pseudoskeptics hijack "Skepticism" to mean its opposite: Disinformation, Mind Control and Suppression
They Are the Ones Who Are Not Skeptics
I have seen the light! [Satire]
Circular Rationalism
JREF Forum posts: "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic"
911 Truth: Michael Shermer's Amateur Disinformation Attempt Fails (again!)
Debunking Myths on Conspiracy Theories
911blogger.com
February 12, 2010
Here is the excellent post on the JREF forum (Feb 6th) that actually exposes all of their 9/11 Debunking tactics in one convenient tidy package - from their own master. It can be seen as the bible of the true skeptic - by the ultimate skeptic, Proff Truzi. Use this to expose the debunkers with their own "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic and the skeptic". (I have added the numbers for your future use). Use it liberally!
(Thanks go to Dan Noel)
RG
Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic and the skeptic
I have noticed that there appears to be two main types of skeptics. One an admirable role, one quite the opposite.
Therefore we have a skeptic, and a pseudoskeptic.
Points courtesy of Proff Truzi,
Characteristics of a pseudoskeptic:
1. The tendency to deny, rather than doubt.
2. Double standards in the application of criticism.
3. The making of judgments without full inquiry.
4. Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.
5. Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments.
6. Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.
7. Presenting insufficient evidence or proof.
8. Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof.
9. Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.
10. Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
11. Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.
12. Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims.
13. Asserting that claims which have not been proven false must be true, and vice versa (Argument from ignorance).
14. They speak down to their audience using 'arguments from authority'.
15. They put forward their assumptions as if they were universal truths.
16. No references to reputable journal material.
17. If the pseudo-skeptic has a monetary interest (such as maintaining a funding stream or a salary) his criticisms often become vituperative.
True Skeptics / Open-Minded Skeptics
A. Does not show any of the characteristics of a pseudoskeptic.
B. Inquires and asks questions to try to understand things
C. Applies open inquiry and investigation of both sides
D. Is nonjudgmental, doesn't jump to rash conclusions
E. Has honest doubt and questions all beliefs, including their own
F. Seeks the truth, considers it the highest aim
G. Fairly and objectively weighs evidence on all sides
H. Acknowledges valid convincing evidence
I. Possesses solid sharp common sense and reason
J. Is able to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence
Just a nice guide to fall back on, the skeptics bible in a way. Its not amazingly consistent (ie, skeptics should not give people a stereotype and dismiss them due to that, so immediately labelling the pseudoskeptic, so has an early issue)
Related Info:
Gordon Ross is pretty sure he exists.
Debunking PseudoSkeptics - CSICOP, James Randi, Michael Shermer, etc
How Pseudoskeptics hijack "Skepticism" to mean its opposite: Disinformation, Mind Control and Suppression
They Are the Ones Who Are Not Skeptics
I have seen the light! [Satire]
Circular Rationalism
JREF Forum posts: "Comprehensive characteristics of the pseudoskeptic"
911 Truth: Michael Shermer's Amateur Disinformation Attempt Fails (again!)
Debunking Myths on Conspiracy Theories
Thursday, February 11, 2010
An Insight Into Scootle's Vids
So I noticed earlier it's been one year exactly since I uploaded my first first 9/11 video... my skyscraper fires video. It's been a year already?! I still remember making that. I remember how I had the whole thing made by Febrary 9th, and just as I was about to upload it to YouTube, the Beijing fire happened! (I guess sometimes coincidences do happen!) So I decided to go back and extend it, which was alot harder than it sounds. It took me about 20 times to recite the new lines in a way that didn't sound completely different from the other lines.
My next video is going to simply be called "Evidence". I'm tired of my friends saying things like "Lol you and your theories!" and "You're obsessed with conspiracy theories". Theories this, theories that ... one word that never seems to come up is evidence. So I thought I'd make a video loaded with documented evidence. It will be about a number of different subjects, including 9/11, climate change and the Bilderberg Group. It's about 80% done, all that's left for me to do is about a minute and a half on the demolition of the World Trade Center. Which shouldn't take long.
The problem is, since that's my area of expertise, and since there's literally so much evidence, I can't decide what to put in! I want to include one of NIST's blatant frauds in there but can't decide whether to include their denial of molten metal or their admission of freefall. I'm definately going to include a bit about the unreacted nanothermite but can't decide how much detail I should go into. I can't decide whether or not to include a mention of the coroded piece of steel from WTC7 and how NIST ignored it. I swear you could probably make a feature length film out of just the forensics of 9/11 and NIST's frauds.
I have so many compilation video ideas. I want to do a video on depleted uranium, poverty and other ways our world leaders and "child services" are killing and abusing children, I'll probably call it "Think of the Children!". I want to do a general video on how society is being engineered through TV, social sites, video games, and other technology that's sold to us as ways of bringing people together, while really just physically seperating us and brainwashing us, and how younger and younger children are being turned into whores through the hellspawns of Disney and Billy Ray Cyrus. I want to do a video on how all the major parties in the UK are controlled, I want to do a video on crop circles, geometry in nature and the flaws in the theory of evolution. I want to do a satirical video of "what I have learned from skeptics", and I want to do comedic music videos set to We Want Your Soul by Adam Freeland and F*ck You by Lily Allen (the latter of which I will probably dedicate to the debunkers). Sadly I don't think I'm going to be able to make all of them, sometimes I wish I had a whole team of people.
New Video: Evidence
My next video is going to simply be called "Evidence". I'm tired of my friends saying things like "Lol you and your theories!" and "You're obsessed with conspiracy theories". Theories this, theories that ... one word that never seems to come up is evidence. So I thought I'd make a video loaded with documented evidence. It will be about a number of different subjects, including 9/11, climate change and the Bilderberg Group. It's about 80% done, all that's left for me to do is about a minute and a half on the demolition of the World Trade Center. Which shouldn't take long.
The problem is, since that's my area of expertise, and since there's literally so much evidence, I can't decide what to put in! I want to include one of NIST's blatant frauds in there but can't decide whether to include their denial of molten metal or their admission of freefall. I'm definately going to include a bit about the unreacted nanothermite but can't decide how much detail I should go into. I can't decide whether or not to include a mention of the coroded piece of steel from WTC7 and how NIST ignored it. I swear you could probably make a feature length film out of just the forensics of 9/11 and NIST's frauds.
I have so many compilation video ideas. I want to do a video on depleted uranium, poverty and other ways our world leaders and "child services" are killing and abusing children, I'll probably call it "Think of the Children!". I want to do a general video on how society is being engineered through TV, social sites, video games, and other technology that's sold to us as ways of bringing people together, while really just physically seperating us and brainwashing us, and how younger and younger children are being turned into whores through the hellspawns of Disney and Billy Ray Cyrus. I want to do a video on how all the major parties in the UK are controlled, I want to do a video on crop circles, geometry in nature and the flaws in the theory of evolution. I want to do a satirical video of "what I have learned from skeptics", and I want to do comedic music videos set to We Want Your Soul by Adam Freeland and F*ck You by Lily Allen (the latter of which I will probably dedicate to the debunkers). Sadly I don't think I'm going to be able to make all of them, sometimes I wish I had a whole team of people.
New Video: Evidence