Altron
Well-Known Member
Please take the survey before reading this, so your results aren't influenced by my opinions
As for JFK, it's pretty much been scientifically proven that he was killed from the book depository. Whether it was Oswald that did it, or just someone that set him up, or if he knew Jack Ruby beforehand, or if he was involved in a conspiracy, or why he did it, we probably won't know, since he's dead.
Once experts established that there were three shots, and they all came from the book depository, and they were all fired from Oswald's rifle, you can pretty much throw out all the grassy knoll, picket fence, and overpass gunmen. They proved that any shots coming from the opposite side of the square would have to pass through the windshield, which wasn't damaged. They also proved that any shot from the grassy knoll or picket fence would have hit Jackie, and she was fine.
Records from Oswald's time in the Marines indicated that he was perfectly capable of making those shots, and the "You can't do 3 shots in 5.6 seconds" myth was disproven when you realize that there is 5.6 seconds between shot 2 and shot 3, not between shot 1 and shot 3. FBI weapons experts were able to fire 3 shots in 4.5 seconds with Oswald's gun, so considering that he was a USMC sharpshooter, 3 shots in 7-8 seconds is not improbable. Oliver Stone also doesn't show you that the magic bullet was forensically matched to Oswald's gun.
The "magic bullet" myth got disproven when they used computer modeling to build the limo exactly the way it was, and place all the occupants in the same position they were as shown in the Zapruder film. Oliver Stone and most Conspiracy Theory crazies like to assume that JFK was directly behind Connolly, seated at the exact same level, and bot were facing forward. In this situation there is no way the bullet could have made all 7 of those wounds. However, if you actually look at the limo, the back seat was a little higher up than the front seat, and closer to the center line of the car. When the seating is done properly, and the dummies are the right size (not just Newman from Seinfeld), and positioned exactly as they appear in the Zapruder film, the bullet trajectory is a straight line.
Don't even get me started on 911. JFK is a little easier to make myths about, because it was some deadbeat who killed him just to make a name for himself, and he was killed very shortly after by Jack Ruby, so there's no way to pinpoint exactly what motivated Oswald to do it. Most experts think he just wanted the attention and infamy, and only planned it the week before (once he realized the parade was going right past the building he worked in). Occam's Razor would suggest that that is in fact the case, but it's at least open to interpretation.
911, OTOH, is pretty clear cut. You don't have some depressed outcast trying to make a name for himself, you have a terrorist who hates America and already made an unsuccessful attack on the World Trade Center. Every "scientific" point in Loose Change is utter bullshit. There is scientific evidence presented by credible experts in each field as to why the claims made in Loose Change are completely wrong. They constantly make comparisons to different situations.
Like, for instance, they say "Well, in most plane crashes, there is much more wreckage" without mentioning the obvious fact that in most plane crashes, the pilot is trying his best to slow the plane down. He's trying to glide in for a soft landing, with all his flaps deployed to slow the plane down, and is trying to hit the ground slowly and at a narrow angle to the horizontal, in order to smoothly come to a stop. He's not diving into a concrete building at full throttle.
Or "Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel, and no steel frame buildings have completely collapsed due to fires" while completely ignoring the fact that a jumbo jet crashed into it first, so the structure was badly damaged even as the fires were just beginning. Not to mention, steel looses a lot of rigidity as temperatures increases before actually 'melting', so the fact that the crashes were near the middle of the building meant that the steel structure was under a lot of stress already from supporting the top half of the building, then a plane crashed into it and messed it up badly, and then a fire weakened it.
Everything those two jackasses say is a lie. They constantly answer complex questions pertaining to avionics and structural engineering by saying "Well, use common sense" - because every qualified expert in that field disagrees with them. If a structural engineer says "The building is going to fall down!" do you listen to them, or do you say "Well, common sense says the building is made out of metal, and metal is strong, so it won't fall down"? You do if you're the kind of blathering idiot that makes a film like Loose Change.
The TV interview with the Loose Change guys talking to the Popular Mechanics editors really shows you what it's all about. PM did in-depth researched and talked to credible experts, and the Loose Change pair acted like angry teenagers, insulting PM at every turn.
Again, I suppose it's possible to make an argument for "Bush let it happen", but it's been scientifically proven without a shred of doubt that it was 4 passenger planes that crashed, not cruise missles or fighter jets or any of that bullshit.
As for JFK, it's pretty much been scientifically proven that he was killed from the book depository. Whether it was Oswald that did it, or just someone that set him up, or if he knew Jack Ruby beforehand, or if he was involved in a conspiracy, or why he did it, we probably won't know, since he's dead.
Once experts established that there were three shots, and they all came from the book depository, and they were all fired from Oswald's rifle, you can pretty much throw out all the grassy knoll, picket fence, and overpass gunmen. They proved that any shots coming from the opposite side of the square would have to pass through the windshield, which wasn't damaged. They also proved that any shot from the grassy knoll or picket fence would have hit Jackie, and she was fine.
Records from Oswald's time in the Marines indicated that he was perfectly capable of making those shots, and the "You can't do 3 shots in 5.6 seconds" myth was disproven when you realize that there is 5.6 seconds between shot 2 and shot 3, not between shot 1 and shot 3. FBI weapons experts were able to fire 3 shots in 4.5 seconds with Oswald's gun, so considering that he was a USMC sharpshooter, 3 shots in 7-8 seconds is not improbable. Oliver Stone also doesn't show you that the magic bullet was forensically matched to Oswald's gun.
The "magic bullet" myth got disproven when they used computer modeling to build the limo exactly the way it was, and place all the occupants in the same position they were as shown in the Zapruder film. Oliver Stone and most Conspiracy Theory crazies like to assume that JFK was directly behind Connolly, seated at the exact same level, and bot were facing forward. In this situation there is no way the bullet could have made all 7 of those wounds. However, if you actually look at the limo, the back seat was a little higher up than the front seat, and closer to the center line of the car. When the seating is done properly, and the dummies are the right size (not just Newman from Seinfeld), and positioned exactly as they appear in the Zapruder film, the bullet trajectory is a straight line.
Don't even get me started on 911. JFK is a little easier to make myths about, because it was some deadbeat who killed him just to make a name for himself, and he was killed very shortly after by Jack Ruby, so there's no way to pinpoint exactly what motivated Oswald to do it. Most experts think he just wanted the attention and infamy, and only planned it the week before (once he realized the parade was going right past the building he worked in). Occam's Razor would suggest that that is in fact the case, but it's at least open to interpretation.
911, OTOH, is pretty clear cut. You don't have some depressed outcast trying to make a name for himself, you have a terrorist who hates America and already made an unsuccessful attack on the World Trade Center. Every "scientific" point in Loose Change is utter bullshit. There is scientific evidence presented by credible experts in each field as to why the claims made in Loose Change are completely wrong. They constantly make comparisons to different situations.
Like, for instance, they say "Well, in most plane crashes, there is much more wreckage" without mentioning the obvious fact that in most plane crashes, the pilot is trying his best to slow the plane down. He's trying to glide in for a soft landing, with all his flaps deployed to slow the plane down, and is trying to hit the ground slowly and at a narrow angle to the horizontal, in order to smoothly come to a stop. He's not diving into a concrete building at full throttle.
Or "Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel, and no steel frame buildings have completely collapsed due to fires" while completely ignoring the fact that a jumbo jet crashed into it first, so the structure was badly damaged even as the fires were just beginning. Not to mention, steel looses a lot of rigidity as temperatures increases before actually 'melting', so the fact that the crashes were near the middle of the building meant that the steel structure was under a lot of stress already from supporting the top half of the building, then a plane crashed into it and messed it up badly, and then a fire weakened it.
Everything those two jackasses say is a lie. They constantly answer complex questions pertaining to avionics and structural engineering by saying "Well, use common sense" - because every qualified expert in that field disagrees with them. If a structural engineer says "The building is going to fall down!" do you listen to them, or do you say "Well, common sense says the building is made out of metal, and metal is strong, so it won't fall down"? You do if you're the kind of blathering idiot that makes a film like Loose Change.
The TV interview with the Loose Change guys talking to the Popular Mechanics editors really shows you what it's all about. PM did in-depth researched and talked to credible experts, and the Loose Change pair acted like angry teenagers, insulting PM at every turn.
Again, I suppose it's possible to make an argument for "Bush let it happen", but it's been scientifically proven without a shred of doubt that it was 4 passenger planes that crashed, not cruise missles or fighter jets or any of that bullshit.
