# Conspiracy theories are bullshit



## Mastodon (Aug 22, 2006)

nws

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3143048862360929736&q=penn+and+teller+bullshit

This one's for you david.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 22, 2006)

holy crap, OWNED.


----------



## Regor (Aug 23, 2006)

They can't be bullshit! I _know_ they're after me!!


----------



## Leon (Aug 23, 2006)

Mastodon said:


> Conspiracy theories are bullshit


of course, that's what you'd like for us to believe  [/mulder]


----------



## Desecrated (Aug 23, 2006)

penn and teller are kinda bullshitty to .


----------



## DelfinoPie (Aug 23, 2006)

Pff thats a load of bollocks, the government are OBVIOUSLY using Penn and Teller to cover their tracks!


----------



## David (Aug 23, 2006)

Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.


You all are like sheep in a field. If I were famous, or had a high position, I would tell you all that metal causes brain cancer, and I bet all of you would quit listening to metal.


Oh, and congrats. What does this video show against conspiracy videos? All that he fucking says is, "conspiracies are bullshit." He doesn't disprove a single fucking theory! If it's so easy, show us that the government is right. Congrats, he can't!

I heard him say that conspiracy theories have no basis and fact... I could talk for 6 hours on the phone with any one of you stating fact after fact.


----------



## rogue (Aug 23, 2006)

David said:


> Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.
> 
> 
> You all are like sheep in a field. If I were famous, or had a high position, I would tell you all that metal causes brain cancer, and I bet all of you would quit listening to metal.
> ...



im with you  

*hides behind big scary david*


----------



## Mykie (Aug 23, 2006)

I think I should order a deep dish pizza for lunch.


----------



## Jason (Aug 23, 2006)

Mykie said:


> I think I should order a deep dish pizza for lunch.



best idea in the thread.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 23, 2006)

David said:


> Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.
> 
> 
> You all are like sheep in a field. If I were famous, or had a high position, I would tell you all that metal causes brain cancer, and I bet all of you would quit listening to metal.
> ...




you're just upset cause one of the dudes that made loose change got sad after he watched that episode ;p


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 23, 2006)

David said:


> Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.
> 
> 
> You all are like sheep in a field. If I were famous, or had a high position, I would tell you all that metal causes brain cancer, and I bet all of you would quit listening to metal.
> ...




There's the response I was looking for!


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 23, 2006)

Mastodon said:


> There's the response I was looking for!



Dude, its obvious. all the passengers had their names changed by the government and they flew DRONES into the buildings, jeez!


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 23, 2006)

What?

Ken I thought you were smarter then that.


Anyone who takes 3 minutes to browse wikipedia knows that the planes were really UFO's flown by aliens under the command of the great Xenu. They stole cloaking devices from the Death Star so that it would APPEAR to be a real plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. You know that flash of light in the videos of the crash? That wasn't glare from the sun, that was actually a brainwashing beam to trick us into thinking we just saw planes fly into the Twin Towers.

In actuallity they were two UFO's. Oh and the reason no one sees a plane in the Pentagon footage is because, there was no plane, there were really photon torpedos. 


The reason Xenu ordered them to do this was because EARTH was loosing ratings and they needed to gain back viewers.

Damn you capitalism! 


DAAAAMN YOOOOOOU!


----------



## noodles (Aug 23, 2006)

I MADE THE PLANES HIT THE BUILDINGS!!! 

Ken told me to do it.


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 23, 2006)

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

voila


read the links at the bottom


----------



## Scott (Aug 23, 2006)

David said:


> Oh, and congrats. What does this video show against conspiracy videos? All that he fucking says is, "conspiracies are bullshit." He doesn't disprove a single fucking theory! If it's so easy, show us that the government is right. Congrats, he can't!




Are you fucking kidding me? Pretty much every conspiracy that was mentionned, was countered in that video.

And it's not like the conspiracy nuts had proof either...
Bald Guy: Planes did crash, people did die. Government ran a fake terrorist attack."
And his proof?
&#8220;Why? I don&#8217;t know&#8221; &#8220;possibly remote airplane&#8221;-No PROOF

Sorry, I forgot to get this idots name, so bald guy will have to suffice. Im sure you can point him out in the vid easily enough.

And then there is the guy in the suit, who ends up putting the jumpsuit and helmet on..

"Evidence we have indicates that the aircraft landed in a military base, remote planes took off, struck all 3 buildings. "

Great, but one thing, he didn't show any evidence. He continues..

"I firmly *believe* that passengers are still alive. All working for the government."

Awesome! Proof? None? Sit down then.

And he continues about the WTC's being rigged with explosives. That it didn't collapse, it was blown up.

2 firefighters that were shown after the nut in the jumpsuit, both said that the fire brought the buildings down. Jet fuel+computers+furniture=lots of fire. The metal started to warp, and then the weight of the rest of the building was too much, and it collapsed. If you know anything about heating metal, you would know that this is enough to disprove the Explosive Theory.

I could go on. With the moon landing and JFK and crap. But all im saying, is that for the theory's that were mentionned, they were disproven, or if that's too strong a word for you.. They were given a counter argument. If they weren't countered, then it was because it was just that persons opinion. 

Like the guy in the bar with the glasses and hat saying that there are 12 corporate guys showing the JFK assasination to the presidents to put them in their place. That's one guys belief. You can't prove or disprove it either way.

So if you still think that they didn't disprove them. Then you clearly weren't paying attention with an open mind. Penn and Teller didn't really disprove anything themselves no, but they interviewed experts who did it for them.


This just really gets to me man. Im tired of you always ranting about your bullshit that you can't fucking prove. You have been asked to show proof, and all you say is "Show me proof that im wrong" Or something along those fucking lines. And then this vid comes up, and you say they didn't disprove anything. The conspiracy nuts in the video couldn't even prove anything. Everything was countered unless it was thier own baseless opinion on the matter.

If you can talk on the phone for 6 hours stating facts, then it shouldn't be too hard for you to type it up and post it here. Until you do show facts that you're right, please, shut the fuck up.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 23, 2006)

Scott said:


> 2 firefighters that were shown after the nut in the jumpsuit, both said that the fire brought the buildings down. Jet fuel+computers+furniture=lots of fire. The metal started to warp, and then the weight of the rest of the building was too much, and it collapsed. If you know anything about heating metal, you would know that this is enough to disprove the Explosive Theory.
> .



Exactly. They like to say that "A Skycraper in europe burned for 4 days with a much stronger fire and didnt collapse"..

That skyscraper didnt have a 737 and thousands of pounds of jetfuel in it, and it also wasnt 100+ stories tall. Like on Maddox's page, steel looses like, a huge majority of its strength around HALF the melting point. Ontop of the fact that the weight of the building should be enough to force a collapse. on top of the fact there's a big fucking burning plane inside of it.

Edit: Scott is the coolest lefty evar.


----------



## D-EJ915 (Aug 23, 2006)

Jet fuel also burns at a much higher temperature than pretty much anything else that's in any 'usual' fire.


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 23, 2006)

David said:


> Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.
> 
> 
> You all are like sheep in a field. If I were famous, or had a high position, I would tell you all that metal causes brain cancer, and I bet all of you would quit listening to metal.
> ...



Man David, will you fuck off already? I'm starting to miss IbanezFanBoy.


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 23, 2006)

sometihng i love about the demolition theory on the wtc

they say people heard explosions randomly throughout the entire incident from jet crashing into it to it falling down, yet none were heard when it fell down

now im no expert but im sure when things are demolished from what i've seen and read, it takes a series of precision timed explosions to demolish it, going floor by floor so it falls down in a nice neat pile of rubble...

not random explosions on random floors at random times causing the building to fall down half hour or so later.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 24, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> Man David, will you fuck off already? I'm starting to miss IbanezFanBoy.



Come on dude, not so harsh. David's way cooler than Ibanez fanboy. No need to say things we cant take back. 

cool off.


----------



## Naren (Aug 24, 2006)

Scott said:


> Are you fucking kidding me? Pretty much every conspiracy that was mentionned, was countered in that video.
> ...
> 
> So if you still think that they didn't disprove them. Then you clearly weren't paying attention with an open mind. Penn and Teller didn't really disprove anything themselves no, but they interviewed experts who did it for them.
> ...



Scott, awesome post.


----------



## zimbloth (Aug 24, 2006)

I'm calm as can be bro. I meant what I said. At least IbanezFanBoy was comical, David's smug pseudo-intellectual schtick is tired for me. I'll try to keep it to myself next time. 

Well said Scott.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Aug 24, 2006)

Personally, I think some of these responses seemed a bit harsh. "Please, shut the fuck up." It's just stupid conspiracy theories. What the fuck? Why the vitriol? Who cares if Dave posts that shit? It's entertaining, even if it happens to be silly at times. A little courtesy goes a long ways.

I could give a shit about any of it, and certainly not enough to get worked up over it. I just don't see it, sorry.





I will say, as relates to the topic, P&T present a convincing case. But these _are_ masters in the art of decieving people. (FTR, I'm a consipracy theory agnostic. Some perhaps may be possible, but I generally don't believe them. Occam's Razor, y'know. The theories presented in this episode of Bullshit, I don't support or adhere to, either.)


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> I'm calm as can be bro. I meant what I said. At least IbanezFanBoy was comical, David's smug pseudo-intellectual schtick is tired for me. I'll try to keep it to myself next time.
> 
> Well said Scott.


I'll be the bigger man. 


To be fair with the video, they chose some real wack-jobs to interview.

Please note, that when I actually talk about 9/11, or anything, I'll state facts. If it's not a fact, I pose it in the form of a question, becuase it's unanswered. Saying remote controlled planes were flown into these places, the passengers were gassed, there's no proof for that, and I don't believe it. Unless they show me some evidence this is true, I won't believe it either. I don't know what happened, and I'll never tell any of you what happened, because I don't know. I for one... would like to find out.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 24, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Personally, I think some of these responses seemed a bit harsh. "Please, shut the fuck up." It's just stupid conspiracy theories. What the fuck? Why the vitriol? Who cares if Dave posts that shit? It's entertaining, even if it happens to be silly at times. A little courtesy goes a long ways.




Thats what i was getting at. Thats the kind of stuff chris was trying to avoid in the P&CE Forum


----------



## Drew (Aug 24, 2006)

Scott said:


> Sorry, I forgot to get this idots name, so bald guy will have to suffice. Im sure you can point him out in the vid easily enough.



Please, Scott, that's a disservice to bald guys everywhere. Like noodles. 


Also, Scott for Prime Minister! h canada:


----------



## Dive-Baum (Aug 24, 2006)

There are inconsistancies (Drew...did I spell that right oh master of grammer, punctuation and spelling? ) in the 9/11 attacks, the JFK assasination, The Roswell sightings etc..but the fact is that all beliefs should at least be respected. Hell most theories have holes in them. I think the fact that this is being debated is a good thing. That has been a huge problem with this country in the Bush era. People are affraid to ask the big questions. They don't question authority and information that is given. If people had done this about the WMD's in Iraq more than we wouldn't be stuck in this shit now. David can be a stubborn guy but he is well informed when it comes to this topic. You just can't link every conspiracy theorist in with the whack jobs that wear tin foil on their heads to keep the government out of their heads at night. I personally think there was quite a bit more to the attacks than we will ever know. However I do think that if our government can't keep a secret about secret prisons, CIA opperatives or their warantless wire taps, I do not think they could keep such a large secret as 9/11 under wraps if they had something to do with it.


----------



## Drew (Aug 24, 2006)

Dive-Baum said:


> (Drew...did I spell that right oh master of grammer, punctuation and spelling? )



 We both know I can't spell for shit, dude, and my typing's a proper shitstorm. 


*ahem* That said, when you're making a list like that, there really needs to be a comma after the item immediately before the "and."


----------



## nitelightboy (Aug 24, 2006)

And grammar doesn't have an "e" in it


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> I heard him say that conspiracy theories have no basis and fact... I could talk for 6 hours on the phone with any one of you stating fact after fact.



This has to be one of the silliest things I've heard on here. I was gonna say something about that stupid ass link you posted where they claim explosives were in the WTC but I held back. But if you *really* believe any of that crap you need your head examined.


Rev.


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

Rev2010 said:


> This has to be one of the silliest things I've heard on here. I was gonna say something about that stupid ass link you posted where they claim explosives were in the WTC but I held back. But if you *really* believe any of that crap you need your head examined.
> 
> 
> Rev.


Funny that I need my head examined, considering that I'm not the one who posted a link about the explosives in this thread. 

BUT, since you really want to know about explosives in the towers...

...there just happens to be no evidence that we can examine, considering that FEMA and CDI (a leading demolition team), were there to take away the rubble. That was an obvious crime scene, and we could have examined it if it were left there. How could they have made that assumption that the steel beams were heated, warped, and caused the collapse, with no physical examination, and no video evidence. At least for the conspiracy theorists, we have the video to examine. You can see squids going out the sides, which to some, are proof of explosives, to others, it could be debris flying out a window, so I won't use that as part of my arguement. When you watch the towers collapse, you can actually see the corner of the tower. For 30 feet at a time, the towers are intact and exploding at once, where as it would be a mere 5-10 feet if it was caving in on itself. Also, it doesn't go straight down, you can see debris going [edit]up to 63 meters[edit] away from the building high up. People say that there would have been loud bangs... well yes... there were, to many many fire fighters there that day, and police officers. Many also say that the explosions would be more visual, if they were destroying the main support beams on the outside... they're wrong. The main supports for the WTT were located in the center of the building, as opposed to the 4 corner pillars as most buildings are constructed. It would be much easier to plant something on the inside, and hide it's visual and sound than a pillar. Video evidence also shows, a molten metal flowing out of the towers just before the collapse. Since we haven't been able to analyze the metals from the rubble, those could be the metals that were molten for weeks in the rubble as crews reported. What we can conclude, is that it was a thermite reaction, which creates molten iron, and is fairly easy to assemble. A thermite reaction releases a yellow smoke, which can be seen for weeks coming out of the rubble. One could easily argue that it was just from the rubble and fuck, a building fell down. But, that would be a brown-black-grey-white dust and smoke cloud, not the distinctive yellow. There is visual proof of a thermite reaction, and trust us, we certainly would have loved to take a sample of the molten metal that was under the rubble for so long.

I should probably add, that there are to solid, concrete portions of the towers, for stability and incase of a collapse, it should stop it. I can't find the good video of it... or the picture, but you can see the lower concrete layer, exploding a good 10-15 floors before the implosion area even hits it.


Dave - Thanks! Finally someone who's open to asking questions! I ask questions 24/7, it's the only way to learn. Whenever my questions don't get answered, I get into it. Nobody can give me a full proof answer on my questions for 9/11.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

David, just shut up, please. The towers did NOT have explosives in them. there was no fucking thermite bullshit. The problem with people that believe this shit is they have no real science knowledge. The buildings stood for some time before collapsing. It was ALREADY explained why they collapsed. The fireproofing used in the 70's wasn't designed to withstand an explosion. When the planes hit they literally wiped the fireproofing right off the metal which is why the metal heated, buckled, and the buildings collapsed. They even say modern day fireproofing is designed to withstand explosions so as to not be blown off.

Secondly, for crews of workers to go in there, wire up explosives, and not be seen or come forward out of guilt also shows what fucking BULLSHIT this conspiracy crap is. Lastly, arab terrorists have *TRIED TO BLOW UP THE TRADE CENTERS TWICE BEFORE!!!!* Wake up man. If the US government wanted them down there are faaaar easier ways to have done it. Sooo, bullshit bullshit bullshit. People that believe any of this 9/11 crap are even more retarded than those that believe the moon landing was faked. People that believe all that need to go to science class and maybe take a yoga class to relieve the blocked beta channels feeding the brain.

By the way... I was here in Manhattan on 9/11. I saw the shit first hand and had a friend at work in the WTC that day - luckily he got out early and without injury. Where were you? Have you even been to the WTC when they stood?? I was there everyday for lunch for 3 1/2 years. Video analysis by amateurs with no physics knowledge  

Rev.


----------



## Drew (Aug 24, 2006)

Guys, drop it.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

Drew said:


> Guys, drop it.



No problem, dropped.



Rev.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Aug 24, 2006)

Drew said:


> Guys, drop it.


And a little civility, too. Debate each other on the merits (or lack thereof) of positions, without the harshness. That kinda stuff only leads to big flamefests.


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> And a little civility, too. Debate each other on the merits (or lack thereof) of positions, without the harshness. That kinda stuff only leads to big flamefests.


Please note, that I didn't dis, in my last post. I was civil.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> Please note, that I didn't dis, in my last post. I was civil.


I actually had a bit added to that that praised your restraint, but I didn't want to add fuel to the fire. 

Personally, I thought you handled yourself well.


----------



## Dive-Baum (Aug 24, 2006)

David likes to "handle" himself well...


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

Well sorry guys but I have a very hard time dealing with hearing insanely absurd things about such a tragedy. Especially being I was there and witnessed it first hand. It's a mockery what some of these people claim. And as much as I may try to hold back I can't be very respectful to people that would tout such craziness especially as "fact". But again, either way, dropped.


Rev.


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

Rev2010 said:


> Well sorry guys but I have a very hard time dealing with hearing insanely absurd things about such a tragedy. Especially being I was there and witnessed it first hand. It's a mockery what some of these people claim. And as much as I may try to hold back I can't be very respectful to people that would tout such craziness especially as "fact". But again, either way, dropped.
> 
> 
> Rev.


Theories aren't facts. If I'm preaching a theory, then I'm not preaching facts. Facts... are things that are a definate, and can not be debated. The fact that George Bush Senior was with the head of the Bin Laden family in Washington the morning of 9/11, is a fact.


And yes, thank you guys! This forum is appeasing my anger problems.


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 24, 2006)

My threads rock the fucking house

Oh and theories are used to prove facts.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> Theories aren't facts.



No shit. But you said this



David said:


> I could talk for 6 hours on the phone with any one of you stating fact after fact



And my point was a number of things you will say you will think are fact but are not fact. Like your BS about the buildings rate of fall vs. what the real rate of fall should be.


Rev.


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> Theories aren't facts. If I'm preaching a theory, then I'm not preaching facts. Facts... are things that are a definate, and can not be debated. The fact that George Bush Senior was with the head of the Bin Laden family in Washington the morning of 9/11, is a fact.
> 
> 
> And yes, thank you guys! This forum is appeasing my anger problems.




except it wasnt the head of the bin laden family it was osama's brother


and please note the only site i found to mention this was a conspiracy theory website which couldnt even get the name of the paper they linked out to correct  

anyway whats suspicious about a investor meeting with a company who handle investments? that would be like forming a consipracy about a office bum ordering some blue ink pens instead of black ink ones  "oh em gee the horror HE MUST BE A TERRORIST HE ORDERED THE WRONG PENS!!!!"

anyway this thread is about conspiracy theories right????

i have one for ya


Flat Earth Theory 

the people who think the earth is flat and that the moon landing and all space exploration is to try to make us think the world is round


----------



## Vince (Aug 24, 2006)

I watched the whole Penn & Teller show, and I think they hit the nail on the head psychologically. People want to find reason why something happened, and it gives them an awareness of the self to question authority on the issues at hand.

The people in the video were clearly wack jobs in the clearest sense of the term. They were a bad representation of some of the more intelligent dissenters, but unfortunately were exactly the type of stereotypical conspiracy theorists you can find anywhere on the internet, en masse no less.

Penn & Teller did a great job with the Kennedy assasination & the moon landing IMO. I have no doubt we've been on the moon, and their ballistics example on the bullet that killed Kennedy is spot-on in my opinion.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but there have always been small slivers of doubt in my mind about the Kennedy assasination & 9/11. The thing that always stuck out in my mind about the Kennedy assasination was that Oswald never got a chance to really explain himself, he was killed by Jack Ruby before he could confess or rat out anyone. The motorcade did not have to go down that street, it should've turned right instead of left, because it left Kennedy exposed greatly & an easy target.

Those things always stuck out in my mind.

As for 9/11, I have this week off of work, and I decided to go back & watch the raw feeds from CNN & ABC from the day of the attacks. Man, it brought back painful memories, I was sitting at my computer at 5 am this morning practically in tears watching these events again.

I have no doubt the WTC attack was a terror attack by a foreign entity. I have very little doubt the Pentagon attack was also a terror attack by a foreign entity. I do not believe our government is competent enough to have pulled off such a huge attack with no one talking. I do not believe any planes could've been taken to secret bases & fake planes used. That's fucking asinine.

The only questions in my mind about 9/11 are in relation to the location of the President, the Vice President, and the cameras at the Pentagon. It's a lucky coincidence that Bush & Cheney were both out of Washington, but in fairness, the president & VP do a lot of travelling.

The Pentagon has several cameras all over it, there's cameras on the freeway next to the pentagon, and I've heard reports (unsubstantiated of course) that there were a few gas stations & local businesses nearby that may have had cameras that could've picked up the attack. Why then did we only get one grainy frame-by-frame awful shot of the Pentagon attack?

I'm not saying there was a US government conspiracy on 9/11, I honestly don't think there was. I'd just like to see some other camera shots from the Pentagon that morning. That's all. At the same time, no credible eye witnesses have reported anything other than a plane hitting the pentagon. I live in Phoenix, and the I-10 passes right by Sky Harbor Airport. When you drive along the I-10, you have planes sometimes pass right over you, only a couple hundred or so feet up because the runway is only about 50-100 yards from the freeway. I'm 100% positive that if something other than an airliner hit the Pentagon, someone credible driving on the DC freeway near it that day would've come out by now saying it wasn't an airliner.


----------



## Dive-Baum (Aug 24, 2006)

The one thing about the Pentagan attack...well 2 things that bother me are:

1) Why is the entry hole so small in the building? Where did the wings go through at? I have seen a video showing how big the plane that supposedly hit it was and showed it in comparison to the hole. Also...there was no plane found at all in the rubble.

2) I also saw footage where they showed part of the turbine from the plane that hit. It should have been a Mercedes engine on that particular type of plane. They interviewed 2 Mercedes engineers and they said that the part they showed has never been on any engine that they have ever built. One thing that that particular piece of the turbine DOES go to you ask?? A Tomahawk Cruise Missile. Hmmmmm.
Maybe that is why we have never seen any additional footage except for the grainy ass version from the Pentagon.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

The plane was said to have vaporized on impact due to the fuel in the wings. Same thing happened to Flight 93 and we all know that was real. You have to remember these planes didn't breakup in midair they actually crashed into something (the Pentagon and 93 went down into a field) and were full on fuel. As for the tomahawk missle... well then where did all the passengers go? There are clearly and publicly families that lost loved ones on that flight. And there are cell phone records and call recordings.


Rev.


----------



## Vince (Aug 24, 2006)

even some conspiracy theory sites admit it was definitely an American Airlines jet that hit the Pentagon...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 24, 2006)

i remember seeing a video on itv in the uk ages ago when i was maybe 6 from a show with carol vorderman on it where they filmed the us government testing out the reinforced concrete they make nuclear power stations out of by hitting a fighter jet travelling at 500mph into it head on...

i didnt even dent the wall it just vapourised on impact the only bit that survived was 2 bits from the wings where it was too wide for it 


btw you should really read the links at the bottom of the maddox page especially the loose change readers guide one 



Dive-Baum said:


> The one thing about the Pentagan attack...well 2 things that bother me are:
> 
> 1) Why is the entry hole so small in the building? Where did the wings go through at? I have seen a video showing how big the plane that supposedly hit it was and showed it in comparison to the hole. Also...there was no plane found at all in the rubble.
> 
> ...




erm mercedes dont make jet engines  on a bit of further research it was a rolls royce engineer and the reason he hadnt seen any part like that is because the interviewer was talking to guys from the factory that make engines for cessna's, 

wonder why he spoke to guys from the small engine factory instead of where the actual engine would have been made aka the factory in derby england??

another theory on that one is that its a "JT8D turbojet engine from a A3 skywarrior" which would be convincing if they used those engines

but they dont... nor have they ever 


another thing i love about that whole theory is the air traffic guys quote ""The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane" i love how they got the bit they wanted and conviently missed the ending of what he said  the full quote is ""The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane, you don't fly a 757 in that manner it's unsafe" 

 gotta love die hard CT'ists willing to talk abosolute rubbish to try to convince people they're not crazy


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

Rev2010 said:


> The plane was said to have vaporized on impact due to the fuel in the wings. Same thing happened to Flight 93 and we all know that was real. You have to remember these planes didn't breakup in midair they actually crashed into something (the Pentagon and 93 went down into a field) and were full on fuel. As for the tomahawk missle... well then where did all the passengers go? There are clearly and publicly families that lost loved ones on that flight. And there are cell phone records and call recordings.
> 
> 
> Rev.


You're contradicting yourself by believing in the official story.

Yes, the official story was it vaporized on impact. Considering that the rate of which jet fuel burns, and how hot it burns at, it is physically impossible to actually vaporize a plane... that's false. Not only is it false, but they said the plane was vaporized. If it was vaporized, then why are there TONS of parts lying around all over the place? If it was vaporized, hence, no pieces, no parts.
No parts on the lawn:
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentagon911/pentagon.jpg
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/rosebud/pictures/pentagon2.jpg
Now there's parts on the lawn:
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

Also, why are there parts not to a 757 at the Pentagon?
http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/debris/wheelRim.jpg
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentagon/spencer/photorotor.jpg

Please note again, there's tons of parts there... but yet... no. The OFFICIAL STORY is that the plane was vaporized. Which is it? Vaporized, or blown into a billion pieces?

Although, this is a great debunking thread... They answer questions that many of us had... although not all.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> You're contradicting yourself by believing in the official story.
> 
> Yes, the official story was it vaporized on impact. Considering that the rate of which jet fuel burns, and how hot it burns at, it is physically impossible to actually vaporize a plane... that's false. Not only is it false, but they said the plane was vaporized. If it was vaporized, then why are there TONS of parts lying around all over the place? If it was vaporized, hence, no pieces, no parts.
> No parts on the lawn:
> ...




have you ever seen a jet hit a reinforced concrete wall at high speed??

http://youtube.com/watch?v=T5XTsQ-9vvo voila


----------



## Vince (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> You're contradicting yourself by believing in the official story.
> 
> Yes, the official story was it vaporized on impact. Considering that the rate of which jet fuel burns, and how hot it burns at, it is physically impossible to actually vaporize a plane...



o rly?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8


----------



## David (Aug 24, 2006)

desertdweller said:


> o rly?
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8


ok, great, you proved that a plane hit the pentagon and vaporized, yippee. Now you have to explain to my why the hell there's so many parts scattered all over the place, if the plane is only dust.

The official story is both, and many of you believe both. They don't work together!


----------



## cadenhead (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> You're contradicting yourself by believing in the official story.
> 
> Yes, the official story was it vaporized on impact. Considering that the rate of which jet fuel burns, and how hot it burns at, it is physically impossible to actually vaporize a plane... that's false. Not only is it false, but they said the plane was vaporized. If it was vaporized, then why are there TONS of parts lying around all over the place? If it was vaporized, hence, no pieces, no parts....



You know as well as I do, that the government and media have a bad habbit of using words incorrectly.

That's all I have to say about that.


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 24, 2006)

curiously the only things i can find on the jet vapourising on impact are on ct websites


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> ok, great, you proved that a plane hit the pentagon and vaporized, yippee.



Yippee? So now you're ticked you were proven wrong. Look, you keep misconstruing words here. First, when it's said the plane "vaporized" it doesn't mean there's not a single shred of it left whatsoever. You can now see how a plane would pretty much vaporize when it hit the wall. The question all along was always "where's the debris?". Now people can actually see *why* there's so little debris. You talk about fuel temperatures, rate of burn, etc like you yourself are a rocket scientist but you're probably reading most of your "facts" off of websites that kooks make and are believing it all. That's what I'm trying to point out to you. Unless you are a scientist with real working in depth knowledge of this stuff you really can't say your examination of photos, videos, etc have any real basis.


Rev.


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 24, 2006)

Don't go getting my thread closed now.


----------



## Rev2010 (Aug 24, 2006)

Mastodon said:


> Don't go getting my thread closed now.



Whoa, hold on... I was civil in that last post. I was just pointing out how he got an explanation of the lack of debris and how a plane can indeed vaporize while he said it was "impossible" and "false" and rather than be excited to have an answer and have learned something he says yippee. Oh and rocket scientist wasn't meant as an insult. To examine an explosion of this nature the one who would likely be most experienced would be a rocket scientist, dealing with that type of fuel and all.


Rev.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 24, 2006)

David said:


> ok, great, you proved that a plane hit the pentagon and vaporized, yippee. Now you have to explain to my why the hell there's so many parts scattered all over the place, if the plane is only dust.
> 
> The official story is both, and many of you believe both. They don't work together!


The answer is in the video they posted. parts of it survived (IE, Wingtips) but the plane was decimated. So you have the plane being vaporzied (the body, most of the wings) and debris (wingtips).


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 24, 2006)

Rev2010 said:


> Whoa, hold on... I was civil in that last post. I was just pointing out how he got an explanation of the lack of debris and how a plane can indeed vaporize while he said it was "impossible" and "false" and rather than be excited to have an answer and have learned something he says yippee. Oh and rocket scientist wasn't meant as an insult. To examine an explosion of this nature the one who would likely be most experienced would be a rocket scientist, dealing with that type of fuel and all.
> 
> 
> Rev.



I was referring to everyone, not you specifically. Things are getting all warm and toasty in here.


----------



## Popsyche (Aug 24, 2006)

Now you have finally said something to rile me up! 




David said:


> Penn and Teller are as dumb as the southern Republicans who barely graduated from the Texas school system.



Have you ever met Penn Gillette and Teller? You are so talking out of your poopoo hole about those guys! Where are your facts about them? I'll give you some. Those guys are brilliant! I have talked to them. You would not believe the places their brains could take you! They choose to present their feelings in a rather flamboyant manner, because, after all, they are Vegas entertainers. But trust me, they can't get too in depth on that show, as it would fly right over most of the audience's heads.



David said:


> You all are like sheep in a field.


David, the term is "Sheeple". We're Sheeple", all being lead to a government ordered slaughter by the friendly folks from Tel Aviv, the Secret society of Freemasons, the Knights of the Templar, The Rosicrucians, and the ever popular Illuminati. I'm old. I've heard it all!

I appreciate your fervor in pursuing facts, but please, spend an equal amount of time trying to disprove them as you do prove them! Always consider the motive of the source!

You know I think you are an incredible example of what good can come out of a bad situation  so please remember that your only 16(?) and don't get too serious! And, whatever you do, don't give our current government credit for having that much intelligence!


----------



## XEN (Aug 25, 2006)

Popsyche said:


> You know I think you are an incredible example of what good can come out of a bad situation  so please remember that your only 16(?) and don't get too serious! And, whatever you do, don't give our current government credit for having that much intelligence!



A couple of us here actually work for the government, some of us with top secret clearances as well. We know the incompetence of the system. The main reason that most of these theories are completely ludicrous to me is because I work for the people who supposedly conjure up these schemes, and I can tell you all first hand that unless 342 iterations of a PowerPoint presentation delineating the plan in infinite detail go through 27 layers of revision, denial, correction, and ultimately signature and approval by an O7 or above, providing the format is all in capital letters and the accompanying Staff Action Summary is no more than 12 lines of text, a proper message number is assigned to it, all pertinent email traffic is attached to it, and it is submitted through the automated messaging system no later than 90 days prior to the initiation of the action, nothing ever gets done, EVER! 

It takes a lot less planning, bureaucracy, and red tape to accomplish a stunt like the 9/11 attacks. That's something the American Government is entirely incapable of. We have to provide justification for the action, apply the proper fund cite to ensure the money comes from the right pot, especially the GWOT (Global War on Terror) pot, since it is unlimited, and we need to plan, train, and execute over a period of months, maybe years, using the most expensive and up-to-date technologies and best trained personnel. Why? *Because no one in America believes in America the way a radical Al-Qaeda militant believes in their cause.* Americans want their beliefs handed to them on a silver platter. "Make me believe in America," they say to their government, "give me a reason to love my country!"

It is perfectly fine to question what really is going on in this world when we see things that just don't add up. It's the right thing to do. But if you search for answers for the sole purpose of proving your point without offering a solution, you are part of the problem.


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

David said:


> ok, great, you proved that a plane hit the pentagon and vaporized, yippee. Now you have to explain to my why the hell there's so many parts scattered all over the place, if the plane is only dust.
> 
> The official story is both, and many of you believe both. They don't work together!



David, with all due respect... I love you, bro, but you're a moron. 

You're totally basing your argument here on the _language_ of the "official story" and not the meaning. The plane "vaporized on impact," thus it hit the building and immediately turned into fairy-dust. So, why are there parts everywhere? Hmmm? Hmm? HMMMM? 

Forget the exact way the "official story" is worded, and look at what they're saying - they're saying that an airplane hit the building (something even most conspiracy theorists won't deny), and was prettymuch destroyed upon impact. Not turned to dust, necessarily, but more or less demolished when it slammed into a steel-reinforced concrete building with multiple reinforced rings at high speed. There's not much left of it because the shock of the impact, combined with the explosion caused by a nearly full tank of jet fuel, absolutely destroyed most of the airplane. 

A plane, remember, is designed to have a frame engineered for maximum structural rigidity along a certain axis (i.e- the wings have to be able to withstand the weight of the center of the plane pushing one way and thrust from their aerodynamic design pushing up the other), while at the same time being as light as possible to maximize fuel efficiency and airspeed at a given engine thrust. So, what you have is a frame designed to survive high stresses in a vertical (but NOT horizontal - remember, the whole thing is designed to minimize wind resistance,thus minimizing lateral stresses on the frame) direction, covered in a thin skin of aluminum to smooth airflow but not do much else. Also keep in mind that a passenger airplane of this size stores fuel in its wings. 

Now, picture a large passanger airplane slamming into a reinforced wall at, what, 200-something miles an hour? I forget the exact impact speed, but it was accellerating pretty quickly the last straightaway according to eyewitnesses. You've got this huge airliner loaded up with gasoline that suddenly smashes into a building, and in an instant is suddenly subjected to all sorts of forces that it wasn't designed to. The central hull does manage to punch through the outer two laters apparently, bt breaks apart in the process and doesn't make it throug the third. The wings, designed to deal with up-and-down forces and sddenly subjected to a massive horizontal force, simply crumple and snap backwards. The jet fuel ignites and explodes. Remember that aluminum has a VERY low melting point and does in fact burn - you've seen aluminum cans tossed in a fire before, right? Sure, they're awfully thin, but a wood fire isn't that hot - aluminum airplain siding is still pretty thin and jet fuel burns incredibly hot. What isn't torn apart by impact simply melts and burns. 

Now, there's the size of the impact... "It's too small for a 747." Well, ignoring the fact that every physical analysis supports the fact that it is about what you'd expect a 747 coming in at moderately high speed at a slight angle to leave, let's pretend for a moment that the analysis DIDN'T back it up. Pretending for a moment the hole was too small, and that because it was because it was actually caused by a Tomahawk missile and not an airplane, look at it from the government's perspective - if you were trying to convince the general public that an airplane hit the Pentagon and not a cruise missile, I don't know abotu you but I'd make DAMNED sure that the impact hole was plane-sized. You want us to believe on one hand our gorvernment is intelligent enough to convince all but a few conspiracy nuts that an airplane hit the Pentagon, but on the other hand too stupid to fake the crash correctly? Let's be realistic, David. 

Why isn't there more debris on the front lawn? Frankly, I'm surprised there's as much as there is. Keep in mind this was a massive object travelling at a high rate of speed that managed to penetrate two walls before breaking apart on the third (or was it the fourth). You remember your Newtonian physics, right? Inertia. All debris would be moving VERY raidly in towards the center of the building, and the vast majority of anything that survived the impact and the resulting fireball would be within the outer wall of the pentagon. Again, if you're the government and trying to fake this, if anything you'd expect them to have large peices of very recognizeable aircraft parts outside in plain sight so there could be no question. However, the more logical and physically sound answer is that anything that DID survive the impact (and due to the high heat and forces slamming into the thing from a direction it wasn't designed to take, very little of it would be visually recognizebale as part of an airplane) would be carried well inside the walls by the inertia of the impact. 

Of course, that begs the question - if everyone's so worked up aout the size of the hole and lack of airplane debris at the pentagon, why aren't the same questions being asked at the World Trade Center? Hell, the airplanes hit an office building and quickly exploded and crumpled - they didn't even break out the other side, and we know that the WTC WASN'T designed to withstand impact the same way as the Pentagon. Arguing that it wasn't an airplane because there should be more of it left when it hit the reinforced building, but not arguing the same thing for the building composed mostly of glass and steel, is frankly absurd. 

There's only one "conspiracy" that makes any sense to me here, and it touches on what Vince said about how little video evidence has been released - by not actually going out of their way to prove that airplanes really DID hit the WTC/Pentagon, the government has been able to keep debate on whether or not 9/11 actually happened and whether or not we attacked ourselves to justify starting a war, and has kept the real issue completely out of public discourse - just how much DID we know aout the attacks before they happened, could the government have stopped them had they been a little more on top of their game, or even worse, did they allow them to happen to justify starting a war in the middle east? All the evidence I've seen leaves me with no doubt that airplanes were hijacked and crashed into buildings on 9/11/2001. My only remaining questions are could it have been stopped, and who knew just what. 

If you weren't so hung up on the term "vaporized" then maybe you could see this. You're totally missing the point, and getting hung up on the 'how" to the exclusion of the "why," and my experience is that the "why" is always the only question that matters.

I'm sorry dude, I've tried to let this slide as long as I could, but finally your combination of cockiness and misinformation paraded as "facts" became too much for me.


----------



## Dive-Baum (Aug 25, 2006)

I have never seen someone love the sound of their own voice as much as this guy does. BUT you do occasionally make decent points and you have a knack for answering / rebuffing statements line for line so at least you are organized in your tirades.


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

Dive-Baum said:


> I have never seen someone love the sound of their own voice as much as this guy does. BUT you do occasionally make decent points and you have a knack for answering / rebuffing statements line for line so at least you are organized in your tirades.



 I'm a lit major, bro - I'm used to 40-page term papers. I'm just getting warmed up.


----------



## Naren (Aug 25, 2006)

^Drew, great explanation and great post. You really have a knack for explaining things.


----------



## streathervsgodzilla (Aug 25, 2006)

urklvt said:


> A couple of us here actually work for the government, some of us with top secret clearances as well. We know the incompetence of the system. The main reason that most of these theories are completely ludicrous to me is because I work for the people who supposedly conjure up these schemes, and I can tell you all first hand that unless 342 iterations of a PowerPoint presentation delineating the plan in infinite detail go through 27 layers of revision, denial, correction, and ultimately signature and approval by an O7 or above, providing the format is all in capital letters and the accompanying Staff Action Summary is no more than 12 lines of text, a proper message number is assigned to it, all pertinent email traffic is attached to it, and it is submitted through the automated messaging system no later than 90 days prior to the initiation of the action, nothing ever gets done, EVER!
> 
> It takes a lot less planning, bureaucracy, and red tape to accomplish a stunt like the 9/11 attacks. That's something the American Government is entirely incapable of. We have to provide justification for the action, apply the proper fund cite to ensure the money comes from the right pot, especially the GWOT (Global War on Terror) pot, since it is unlimited, and we need to plan, train, and execute over a period of months, maybe years, using the most expensive and up-to-date technologies and best trained personnel. Why? *Because no one in America believes in America the way a radical Al-Qaeda militant believes in their cause.* Americans want their beliefs handed to them on a silver platter. "Make me believe in America," they say to their government, "give me a reason to love my country!"
> 
> It is perfectly fine to question what really is going on in this world when we see things that just don't add up. It's the right thing to do. But if you search for answers for the sole purpose of proving your point without offering a solution, you are part of the problem.



thank you 


i've often wondered why people are willing to accept that various religious and political extremists believe in their cause so much they are willing to strap several pounds of high explosive go into a crowded area and detonate themselves, but not willing to accept that they are willing enough to hijack a plane and crash it into a building.


anyway the sheer numbers of people who would have to be bought off to be quiet is mind boggling and personally i dont think it would be possible to make everyone involve be completely quiet about it.


----------



## David (Aug 25, 2006)

ok... holy fuck. I'm seriously not even going to debate if a *757* hit the pentagon or not. Really, it doesn't, matter. That's one part, of literally thousands of pieces to the puzzle. 

I do look at both sides, quite often actually. I even posted a thread from the abovetopsecret.com forum which explains how a plane did hit the pentagon, in perfect detail.

And yes, *I'm aware of the fact that I'm 16*. It's not like I forgot or anything. I would prefer more respect, than a 16 year old, due to what I've done in my life, but I think that's not going to happen.


----------



## XEN (Aug 25, 2006)

Respect is neither earned nor deserved. It is a voluntary gift. If you receive it, be grateful. If you do not, don't think any less of yourself or the people you think should give it to you. If you ask for it you are nothing more than a beggar. If you expect it, you are a fool.


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 25, 2006)

Lol. But hey, at least you're doing something, I don't even do shit, haha.


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

Was it a 747 or a 757? I forget. Either way, the impact site was perfectly consistant with an airplane of the model of the hijacked airplane hitting a building constructed in the manner of the Pentagon at the approximate angle the plane was reported to have struck by eyewitnesses - I'm sold. 

David, I have plenty respect for you. When you're not talking about 9/11, you're a pretty cool guy, a hell of a guitarist, and haircut aside rather a decent chap. It's just you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when you get on the subject of 9/11, and you keep bringing up these oft-disproven theories about the crashes and calling them inarguable "facts" and then calling us all sheep for not agreeing with us. 

And honestly, is that the best defense you can do? "I've had a hard life, I deserve more respect than your average sixteen year old." Seriously, dude, this isn't about your age, this is about the fact you're being completely illogical and turning this into an article of faith and not a empirically-sound argument. You can believe anything you want - that's your right. However, you haven't posted a single bit of solid evidence that a terrorist-hijacked passenger airplane DIDN'T hit the two towers and pentagon, just a bunch of speculations and distorted observations you've chosen to call "facts." I've given you a couple opportunities to plead your case now and present solid, empirical evidence that you're not just chasing shadows. So far, you have not done so. I'd suggest that you either hurry up and build a case that CAN'T be ripped to shreds in about fifteen minutes, or drop it and take it up with the rest of the kooks over at www.abovetopsecret.com and just talk guitar with us, something you know a fuck of a lot more about.


----------



## David (Aug 25, 2006)

urklvt said:


> Respect is neither earned nor deserved. It is a voluntary gift. If you receive it, be grateful. If you do not, don't think any less of yourself or the people you think should give it to you. If you ask for it you are nothing more than a beggar. If you expect it, you are a fool.


Keywords to point out that I used are prefer and think. There was no asking.


There's a reason why kids who weren't hugged enough as a child turn out to be killers, no love, and no respect. Luckily for me, I can live without both, although I would much *prefer* to have them of course.


----------



## Mykie (Aug 25, 2006)

Mastodon said:


>



OWNED


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

David said:


> There's a reason why kids who weren't hugged enough as a child turn out to be killers, no love, and no respect. Luckily for me, I can live without both, although I would much *prefer* to have them of course.



David, don't try to turn this into a thread about feeling bad for yourself. It's about the 9/11 attack conspiracy theories, not you.


----------



## Metal Ken (Aug 25, 2006)

David said:


> ok... holy fuck. I'm seriously not even going to debate if a *757* hit the pentagon or not. Really, it doesn't, matter. That's one part, of literally thousands of pieces to the puzzle.



I Thought we were debating what happened on the 'official report' regarding the crash, the semantics of what happened. I think the only reason drew mentioned the cruise missle thing was to point out the lack of government invovlement.


----------



## David (Aug 25, 2006)

Drew said:


> David, don't try to turn this into a thread about feeling bad for yourself. It's about the 9/11 attack conspiracy theories, not you.


I'm not, I'm trying to tell people not to use my age, because that doesn't necessarily apply to me.


----------



## Mastodon (Aug 25, 2006)

Actually, they've found that illiteracy turns people into murders.

The majority of men in prison for violent crimes are or were illiterate, admit to having trouble conveying their feelings as a youth, and had a history of acting out for attention.

They also found that the majority of these males have a chemical imbalance that causes them to be more hostile, so where someone else would rationalize a situation they act with violence.

So, it's not so much that they weren't hugged as much as it was that they weren't given books and taught properly.


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

Near enough, Ken - partly that, but mostly because if the government was sneaky enough to get everyone to believe a cruise missle hit the building instead of a plane, and CT's (conspiracy theororists - I see this going on forever, so Im abbreviating 'em from now on) caught onto it and expect us to see through the ruse because they think the impact site should be bigger, then I'd think that the government would also be sneaky enough to make the impact site believable enough to fool even the CT's - i.e, there'd be TOO much evidence of an airplane, as opposed to not enough. 

It's a lot like Bush. Everyone claims he's an idiot, then postulates all these incredibly sneaky things he does. I'm sorry, it's either one or the other. I don't believe in angels dancing on pins pulling a cruise-missile bait-and-swap, and if these CT's do, then they're idiots. 

David, you're welcome to try to counter any of my other points, about how you're getting hung up on the word "vaporized" to the exclusion of physical evidence, yet the way an airplane is designed to withstand stresses wouldn't serve it especially well in a frontal high-speed impact.


----------



## XEN (Aug 25, 2006)

David said:


> There's a reason why kids who weren't hugged enough as a child turn out to be killers, no love, and no respect. Luckily for me, I can live without both, although I would much *prefer* to have them of course.



Ok, now you're a psychiatrist? This pansy ass society we live in these days just plain pisses me off. We didn't get hugs, love, respect, acceptance, appreciation, affirmation, or any of that shit when we were growing up. We were punished brutally, sometimes beaten until we passed out, and sometimes just for the hell of it. We bled. We bruised. We got fractures and broken bones. We were still up on time for school the next day too. Some of us had guns pointed to our heads and had our lives threatened. Do you hear me whining about my freakin' upbringing? Have you seen me on the news for killing someone?

Holy freakin' hell! You've barely got pubes and you're trying to tell me how the world works?

/ignore David


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

urklvt said:


> Ok, now you're a psychiatrist? This pansy ass society we live in these days just plain pisses me off. We didn't get hugs, love respect, acceptance, appreciation, affirmation, or any of that shit when we were growing up. We were punished brutally, sometimes beaten until we passed out, and sometimes just for the hell of it. We bled. We bruised. We got fractures and broken bones. We were still up on time for school the next day too. Some of us had guns pointed to our heads and had our lives threatened. Do you hear me whining about my freakin' upbringing? Have you seen me on the news for killing someone?
> 
> Holy freakin' hell! You've barely got pubes and you're trying to tell me how the world works?
> 
> /ignore David



You clearly haven't bought very many nu-metal CD's, bro.  

Anyway, let's all chill out and try not to get into a shouting match with each other, ok? We all play guitar. We all rock because of that. Feel the love.


----------



## XEN (Aug 25, 2006)

Drew said:


> You clearly haven't bought very many nu-metal CD's, bro.
> 
> Anyway, let's all chill out and try not to get into a shouting match with each other, ok? We all play guitar. We all rock because of that. Feel the love.



But, but, but, but I... I... um... ok.......  --> Drew

I may have bought nu-metal cds unaware, acidentally liking the music. My bad!  

Back to the point of the thread: Penn and Teller. They freakin' rule. I heard somewhere that there's a conspiracy against them or something....


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

Hey, I like some of it too, no shame there. True, more the Taproot/Lifer school than LB/Korn, but I DID just post a Thumb (german-american rap/hardcore group who I'm sure Durst must have heard and ripped off) thread that everyone ignored...


----------



## XEN (Aug 25, 2006)

Drew said:


> Hey, I like some of it too, no shame there. True, more the Taproot/Lifer school than LB/Korn, but I DID just post a Thumb (german-american rap/hardcore group who I'm sure Durst must have heard and ripped off) thread that everyone ignored...



Hang on...

/unignore Drew

What was that again?


----------



## Drew (Aug 25, 2006)

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13978

Keep in mind, all similarities to what eventually became "nu-metal" aside, these guys are a emo hardcore band (in the original '90's sense, not the slit-my-wrists-and-black-my-eyes sense of emo today), just with a rap influence and a DJ. 

I love Opeth and all, but Thumb kicks ass for when you just want to feel pissed off. My one "CT" if you will is that I'm SURE Fred Durst heard these guys before he formed Limp Bizkit.


----------

