Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth.
 
View testimonialsView Artwork
Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 318
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth.

    Not just some kids with theories or people unqualified like myself but people of Professional Expertise with doubts. Demolition Contractors, Military Demolitionist, Civil Engineers, and High rise Architects discuss why they do not accept the official conclusion about why 3 buildings fell that day. Probably the best I've seen so far.


    Last edited by Jason Ross; September 11th, 2011 at 04:43 PM.
    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jason Ross For This Useful Post:


  4. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The 911 attacks were carried out by 19 men with extremist Muslim views, located in the U.S., mostly holding Saudi passports.

    These men were trained and financed by a group known as Al Qaeda headed by a man named Osama Bin Laden. Several of the men used their funds to finance jet pilot training in the U.S.

    They commandeered several civilian jetliners and flew or tried to fly them into buildings.

    END OF STORY.

    Last edited by Kamber Parrk; September 11th, 2011 at 04:10 PM. Reason: Shanksville
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Kamber Parrk For This Useful Post:


  6. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jason Ross For This Useful Post:


  8. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    desert
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 76 Times in 47 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    END OF STORY.
    "That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far."

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,180
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 2,357 Times in 1,211 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gnarl View Post
    "That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far."
    I like the implication that you can improve on history. Imagine how much more exciting the fall of Rome would be with the addition of giant mechanical octopi.

    *** Sketchbook * Landscapes * Portfolio * Store***

    "There are two kinds of students: the self-taught and the hopeless."
    - Dr. Piotr Rudnicki
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    152
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 39 Times in 21 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    There is very compelling physical evidence that suggests certain critical information is being withheld from the public. Accepting this evidence as even a remote possibility would in turn open up the possibility that the American government is corrupt to the core and that the world you thought you lived in is an illusion. It's certainly scary to entertain these thoughts and it's no wonder they're ignored and shut out. What if the same events had occurred in say Pakistan, Libya, or North Korea and the citizens of that country were saying that the government had turned a blind eye in order to move their country towards a police state and to give credibility to an invasion of an oil rich nation. What would everyone think? Would they say the government of Libya would never let that happen to their own people? What is different about America? What saves it from corruption?

    AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dimension For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    560
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 91 Times in 48 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    This is a little old, but popular mechanics tackled most of the popular conspiracy theories back in 2005 in this article.

    I believe they also put out a book and documentary on the subject. If there really was a conspiracy involved it would have to be absolutely massive, far beyond pretty much anything successfully covered up thus far in our history. There would likely be hundreds maybe even thousands of people involved in it, who would all have to keep quiet. It's been ten years and not a single person has stepped forward, no information has been leaked that directly implicates the government.

    It should take a lot more than theories coming from a small group of "professionals" to get people to believe their government had anything to do with these attacks. In this country we don't trust the government, and with good reason. But these theories are bullshit, if you believe them you are foolish.

    Remember, just because you have their attention doesn't mean you have their respect-Dale Gribble (from King of the Hill)
    Old Sketchbook 1
    Old Sketchbook 2
    Newest sketchbook
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to wiggum For This Useful Post:


  14. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggum View Post
    It's been ten years and not a single person has stepped forward, no information has been leaked that directly implicates the government.
    If the government was responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on that day what do you think they would do to a few more who actually decided to talk? And how do we even know that they didn't try to talk or have talked? I dont think that our media would even cover it. Some parts of our government may be implicit to some degree but I don't think that they were directly responsible.

    Quote Originally Posted by wiggum View Post
    It should take a lot more than theories coming from a small group of "professionals" to get people to believe their government had anything to do with these attacks.
    Well I really do not think that 1,500+ professionals count as "a small group of professionals". All they are implying is that the government is covering up the truth and they want a new independent investigation. The're not saying that our government did it. Maybe watch the video?

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  15. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vangroovy Island, BC
    Posts
    929
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 189 Times in 112 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Ross View Post
    Maybe watch the video?
    Sadly, listening to 2.5 hours of incredibly informed, but differing opinion seems to be a lot to ask of people.

    Grave Sight Graphics: The Art of Eric Lofgren.
    elofgren@ telus.net (to use e-mail address please remove space between the '@' and 'telus')

    My Art Blog
    My Online Portfolio (Updated Jan. 30/ 2011)
    ~NiNjA~^~mOuNtAiN~^~PoDcAsT~(Working illustrators talking illustration)
    Eric Lofgren's licensible rpg art resource
    Art Director for New Gods of Raanon
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eric Lofgren For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    41
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Sadly very few people understand how science works.

    The scientific method involves having a clear story of how things work (referred to as a theory or a hypothesis) and making a guess about what should have happened (prediction). The only conspiracy theory that satisfies this is 'nuclear demolition'.

    Nuclear demolition says there should be big fucking holes under the three buildings. That prediction was met (official story is these holes are caused by glaciers). There are alot of predictions met (such as high temperature of holes, cancers etc). The scientific literature on underground nuclear explosions is freely available. Many parts of the story are not found in scientific literature, such as the effect of a human being in the 'crush zone'. Some predictions are not met, such as the seismic readings released by Berkley being magnitude 2 when they should be 4. But on the whole nuclear demolition is the best (dare I say, the only sane?) conspiracy theory out there on 911.

    You can read more about it here:

    http://psyopjunkie.deviantart.com/ar...-911-244678842

    I think all artists who are interested in these theories should draw cartoons about them. If art can't raise people's awareness then what good is it?

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  18. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    356
    Thanks
    86
    Thanked 155 Times in 84 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Ah yes, empirical evidence, independent research, not just trying to prove an already conceived idea... Harder than it sounds. No-one does the things he does in a vacuum; there's always society, ideology, sentiments...

    If you want to play it absolutely safe, you can't know anything for sure. It's good to keep that in mind and not put all your faith in one side of the story. Especially when 'in times of war the first casualty is the Truth'.

    That said I have nothing against a new investigation. Even if the true motives of the scepticists would be discrediting Clan Bush and the republicans and the downfal of the USA as we know it, I'm sure those 'll have their own means to save butt, or make things complicated until all attempt at change is out-dated and utterly moot. But at least things will be looked into again, for a while. If multiple people find that thorough research has not happened at the time, I find that hard to lay down beside me and forget about.

    Continue the critique at Deviant Art
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ahnem Mee For This Useful Post:


  20. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,903
    Thanks
    180
    Thanked 294 Times in 189 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn...
    USA is built on slavery, what is to say they will not blow up a few buildings and kill a few K of their people to future proof their nation further? USA is shitting itself because all Powers crumble eventually.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  21. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    215
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 23 Times in 21 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The heat from the fire melted the foundations of the building, Those planes where actually like a missle. Filled with explosive materials which happen to be the jet fuel. In a way; the US government is responsible because the CIA trained those motherfuckers and we have not learnt our lession and are now helping them in Libya.

    9/11/73 was an inside job, but not this one. This was a case of rouge agents with money who got piss off, who used poor people from the Middle East to do their dirty work because that how fuck up the system of government in those oil rich nations are.

    To me 9/11 is just now an excuse for people to be racist and bigots and nobody care to mention 9/11/73.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  22. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    SPACE, MUTHAFLIPPER
    Posts
    1,485
    Thanks
    2,739
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 378 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    From the deviation description...

    In fact no planes hit the buildings. It is misdirection. Instead it was missiles (a Granite Missile hit the pentagon). The clips we see of planes impacting the towers were CG. Witnesses who claimed to identify planes were ‘plants’.
    This happened in New York CITY. I'm pretty damn sure people were paying attention after the first one hit, at least.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  23. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    515
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 187 Times in 56 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    There is a thing called "peer review"
    911 conspiracy theorists do not submit their ideas to peer review, therefore their speculations are exactly that and no more, just speculation. Also they do not retract statements even after they have been proven false. They also mis quote and para phrase testimonials to benifit their own delusions, even when the testimonial in it's entirety is saying the exact opposite.

    Which is waht happened when a witness said "the plane that he saw hit the pentigon was like a missile with wings" - the conspiracy theorists simply left out the bit about it being a plane and went with - "it was like a missile with wings"
    These people are the equivilant of internet trolls.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onionface For This Useful Post:


  25. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mölndal, Sweden
    Posts
    2,781
    Thanks
    2,383
    Thanked 1,912 Times in 833 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Until somebody can actually prove it was an inside job and not just say, 'this shouldn't have happened because I'm smart and I know what happens when passenger airplanes fly into giant skyscrapers.' then I'm gonna assume the simplest explanation is the truest one. A bunch of angry people hijacked a couple of planes, flew them into a couple of skyskrapers and the skyscrapers went to pieces. I just think the whole situation is way too compley for someone to calculate how it should have happened. Unless someone replicates the event down to every last detail and shows that what happened wouldn't have happened, or someone involved actually goes out to say it was all a bluff I don't see why I should have any reason to believe anything else.

    "I've got ham, but I'm not a hamster"

    Sketchy Link

    Portfolio
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to tobbA For This Useful Post:


  27. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tobbA View Post
    Until somebody can actually prove it was an inside job and not just say, 'this shouldn't have happened because I'm smart and I know what happens when passenger airplanes fly into giant skyscrapers.' then I'm gonna assume the simplest explanation is the truest one. A bunch of angry people hijacked a couple of planes, flew them into a couple of skyskrapers and the skyscrapers went to pieces. I just think the whole situation is way too compley for someone to calculate how it should have happened. Unless someone replicates the event down to every last detail and shows that what happened wouldn't have happened, or someone involved actually goes out to say it was all a bluff I don't see why I should have any reason to believe anything else.
    I can't agree more.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  28. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vangroovy Island, BC
    Posts
    929
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 189 Times in 112 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I would seriously love to hear an opinion of this video by someone who's actually watched it. I know it takes a long time to sit through, but it's time well spent. And not once does the word 'missile' appear

    Grave Sight Graphics: The Art of Eric Lofgren.
    elofgren@ telus.net (to use e-mail address please remove space between the '@' and 'telus')

    My Art Blog
    My Online Portfolio (Updated Jan. 30/ 2011)
    ~NiNjA~^~mOuNtAiN~^~PoDcAsT~(Working illustrators talking illustration)
    Eric Lofgren's licensible rpg art resource
    Art Director for New Gods of Raanon
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  29. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eric Lofgren For This Useful Post:


  30. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,035
    Thanks
    2,167
    Thanked 3,345 Times in 1,123 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Lofgren View Post
    I would seriously love to hear an opinion of this video by someone who's actually watched it.
    And I'd like to start a debate thread where the op lists his views and reasons for holding them instead of letting a video talk for him. not gonna happen either

    I flipped through out of curiosity and a lot of it is credentials with people attached saying how this wouldn't happen or that wouldn't happen, so I'm still with toBBA. Doesn't seem like any empirical evidence is provided, except something about little balls that have to do with explosives. Would be nice to get some peer reviewed stuff out there to sort that business out.

    I really don't have any opinions on it other than I'm sick and tired of hearing about it whether it's true or not, and I have so much crap to deal with in my own life that I don't have the energy or interest to deal with a topic that seems a million miles away from impacting my own well being or happiness. if the case for it was better maybe, but it's not good enough to wrestle me away from trying to improve/support myself.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  31. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jason Rainville For This Useful Post:


  32. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vangroovy Island, BC
    Posts
    929
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 189 Times in 112 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I hear you Jason. And for the most part, I thought I had put all this to bed for myself as well. But I have to say that actually listening to what those folks are saying on that video (which really does take the whole length to properly digest) is quite interesting. These aren't crack pot theorists. These are qualified engineers and professors with massive amounts of credentials, who aren't afraid of peer review, saying some very intelligent things, rather than the usual, nut bar "it was a missile" crap.

    TobbA, above says' "I'm gonna assume the simplest explanation is the truest one", which, of course is Occam's Razor. And for the most part, the right tack to take for most events. But after watching this video, Occam's Razor does take on a brand new dimension.

    For what it's worth

    Last edited by Eric Lofgren; September 12th, 2011 at 02:19 PM. Reason: replaced 'credits' with 'credentials'
    Grave Sight Graphics: The Art of Eric Lofgren.
    elofgren@ telus.net (to use e-mail address please remove space between the '@' and 'telus')

    My Art Blog
    My Online Portfolio (Updated Jan. 30/ 2011)
    ~NiNjA~^~mOuNtAiN~^~PoDcAsT~(Working illustrators talking illustration)
    Eric Lofgren's licensible rpg art resource
    Art Director for New Gods of Raanon
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  33. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eric Lofgren For This Useful Post:


  34. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Rainville View Post
    And I'd like to start a debate thread where the op lists his views and reasons for holding them instead of letting a video talk for him. not gonna happen either
    I've been doing just that for the past 3-4 years on this site but as I stated in the OP I'm no expert in any field regarding building collapse. When I would state things like WTC7 came straight down at free fall like a controlled demolition people with your opinion would say well you're not a demolition expert or structural engineer so how would you know. And I would happily concede that fact. So posting a video in which a 'Demolition Technician' who states in the video at around 46:00 EXACTLY what I've been saying for years it's somewhat surprising to hear the same dismissive responses. So I really don't understand "who" or what type of "expert" needs to have an opinion worthwhile to be taken seriously.

    Quote Originally Posted by onionface View Post
    There is a thing called "peer review"
    911 conspiracy theorists do not submit their ideas to peer review, therefore their speculations are exactly that and no more, just speculation. Also they do not retract statements even after they have been proven false. They also mis quote and para phrase testimonials to benifit their own delusions, even when the testimonial in it's entirety is saying the exact opposite.
    Both of these are incorrect. In the video there are peer reviewed documents that are discussed. And over the years they HAVE retracted information that was proven false. Loose Change has gone through I think 4 different versions each one omitting facts there were incorrect and even apologizing for it. The idea of the Post was to have people watch the video then comment on it. I guess that was too much to ask.

    Quote Originally Posted by tobbA View Post
    Until somebody can actually prove it was an inside job and not just say, 'this shouldn't have happened because I'm smart and I know what happens when passenger airplanes fly into giant skyscrapers.' then I'm gonna assume the simplest explanation is the truest one....Unless someone replicates the event down to every last detail and shows that what happened wouldn't have happened, or someone involved actually goes out to say it was all a bluff I don't see why I should have any reason to believe anything else.
    Simple logic states that if the premise is flawed then the conclusion is flawed. These people are simply attacking the premise of the buildings collapsing the way they did and the conclusion given as to why they did. No mention of inside job or "proof of" was mentioned. Please don't respond to general attitudes or theories about 9-11. Post issues that you have with what people are saying in the video.

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  35. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  36. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,888
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,153 Times in 1,067 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Ross View Post
    These people are simply attacking the premise of the buildings collapsing the way they did and the conclusion given as to why they did. No mention of inside job or "proof of" was mentioned. Please don't respond to general attitudes or theories about 9-11. Post issues that you have with what people are saying in the video.
    I haven't watched the video yet because I don't feel like it right now. But what you're saying is that they're saying that the buildings falling don't make sense in the context of being hit by airplanes. Is that correct?

    I mean, we can all agree that two airplanes hit the buildings right? Surely no sensible person thinks that the airplanes never existed. So that implies that there was something more than the airplanes that caused the buildings to fall.

    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  37. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mölndal, Sweden
    Posts
    2,781
    Thanks
    2,383
    Thanked 1,912 Times in 833 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Simple logic states that if the premise is flawed then the conclusion is flawed. These people are simply attacking the premise of the buildings collapsing the way they did and the conclusion given as to why they did. No mention of inside job or "proof of" was mentioned. Please don't respond to general attitudes or theories about 9-11. Post issues that you have with what people are saying in the video.
    Except it's just these guys words against some other guys words. Since there is no actual proof of what happened, there's only speculation based on the evidence we have. Where one side is saying "this thing that happened couldn't have happened" the other is saying "this thing happened and this is probably why". And personally I find the latter a lot more interesting. The only thing I'd gain from watching the video is hearing a lot of people who are supposedly authorities on the subject state their opinion. And I'd have two choices, simply accept their explanation in blind faith because it 'sounds' legit, or make up my own mind about the entire thing.

    "I've got ham, but I'm not a hamster"

    Sketchy Link

    Portfolio
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  38. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,035
    Thanks
    2,167
    Thanked 3,345 Times in 1,123 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Ross View Post
    When I would state things like WTC7 came straight down at free fall like a controlled demolition people with your opinion would say well you're not a demolition expert or structural engineer so how would you know. And I would happily concede that fact. So posting a video in which a 'Demolition Technician' .....
    ... does what exactly? I'm no more of a Demolitions Technician than you are, so the only conversation we can have is about what we understand, IE your opinion based on the evidence vs mine. When you post a vid with people with credentials as your argument it turns into an argument from authority. I can't have a conversation with those people not only because they're just in a video but also because I just don't have the background in whatever they're talking about.

    For the record if i cared enough about this I wouldn't respond to

    WTC7 came straight down at free fall like a controlled demolition
    with

    you're not a demolition expert or structural engineer so how would you know
    Because that's an appeal to authority, like that video (these are experts so believe what they say). I'd rather see a debate between 2 groups of experts, that's at least a fair discussion.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  39. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,109
    Thanks
    1,527
    Thanked 5,189 Times in 1,722 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    9/11 conspiracy buff:

    Shittiest. Hobby. Ever.

    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  40. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to kev ferrara For This Useful Post:


  41. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by s.ketch View Post
    I haven't watched the video yet because I don't feel like it right now. But what you're saying is that they're saying that the buildings falling don't make sense in the context of being hit by airplanes. Is that correct?

    I mean, we can all agree that two airplanes hit the buildings right? Surely no sensible person thinks that the airplanes never existed. So that implies that there was something more than the airplanes that caused the buildings to fall.
    Yes S.ketch. The video talks only about the "mechanism" of total global collapse as given to us by the NIST report. Not outlandish theories about the planes at all. It focuses mostly on WTC 7 which wasn't even hit by a plane yet fell straight down into its own footprint at around 5:00 pm that day. It's a long video I know. I was painting on one monitor and listening to it on the other.

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  42. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Rainville View Post
    When you post a vid with people with credentials as your argument it turns into an argument from authority.
    I agreed with you up until this. Appeal to "Authority" is often confused with "Expert Opinion". The Appeal to Authority fallacy is something like < Me: "Global Warming is a hoax" <You: "How do you know?" <Me: "Because my dad says so."

    Unlike:
    < Me: "Climate Change is real." <You: "How do you know?" <Me: "Because these scientist says so and explain why." "Expert Opinion". The Amazing Atheist did a nice video on wrongfully used fallacies.

    So my opinion about WTC 7 would warrant a response like "you're not a demolition expert or structural engineer so how would you know" and I would have to say that you are correct.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Rainville View Post
    I'd rather see a debate between 2 groups of experts, that's at least a fair discussion.
    I totally agree with you.

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  43. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    1,167
    Thanks
    1,423
    Thanked 867 Times in 333 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tobbA View Post
    Except it's just these guys words against some other guys words. Since there is no actual proof of what happened, there's only speculation based on the evidence we have. Where one side is saying "this thing that happened couldn't have happened" the other is saying "this thing happened and this is probably why". And personally I find the latter a lot more interesting. The only thing I'd gain from watching the video is hearing a lot of people who are supposedly authorities on the subject state their opinion. And I'd have two choices, simply accept their explanation in blind faith because it 'sounds' legit, or make up my own mind about the entire thing.
    Well not really. It's not "blind" faith if they are demonstrating what the problem is. They're saying that there is enough evidence to support a new investigation. That's it.


    Quote Originally Posted by tobbA View Post
    The only thing I'd gain from watching the video is hearing a lot of people who are supposedly authorities on the subject state their opinion...
    Isn't that what you already have done by accepting the NIST (government's official) report?

    Jay's CA.org Sketchbook:
    Jay's Conceptart.org sketchbook

    Check out my portfolio:
    http://jasonrossart.carbonmade.com

    Check out my blog:
    http://mind2pixels.blogspot.com

    "Practice" DOES NOT make perfect...
    "Perfect Practice" makes perfect...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  44. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Vangroovy Island, BC
    Posts
    929
    Thanks
    84
    Thanked 189 Times in 112 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Just as a general response to everyone in this thread (because I admit, I find this stuff interesting)

    I believe that most people are willing to accept the professional judgments of qualified specialists on a particular subject, that is largely unknown to us, at face value. There's nothing wrong with this model of behaviour and should largely be followed with everything, unless we have a vested interest in delving more deeply into the subject ourselves. For instance, my dentist tells me I need a root canal. I don't like that news, but I accept it for my own good. But someone else tells me that they had a similar situation happen to them, so they got a second opinion on the matter and it turned out they didn't need a root canal. Which could lead me to follow that example and at least see if my circumstance leads to a similar favourable outcome. At first, I was willing to accept at face value the professional recommendation of my dentist and I think most people would. But in doing more investigation, I discover that I probably don't need one. Just to be sure, I ask another dentist and he concurs with either the first dentist or the second. Either way, I am now more suitably armed to make a better decision on my dilemma.

    In context of the OP, A group of experts has put together it's findings for 911 which is properly considered the official explanation from that days events (the NIST report). But other experts are finding many issues with those results. I can either A) just accept at face value the judgments of the first group of experts and leave it at that, B) I listen to other experts in the same field express their reservations on the officially accepted findings and just dismiss them, or c) I listen to the other experts express their opinions on the matter and take them into consideration. Admittedly, my root canal analogy isn't near the same magnitude of 911, but the basic premise is the same. I'm now a bit more suitably informed to help me come to my own conclusions.

    As a final note, like everyone else here, I think the conspiracy theories surrounding 911 are a massive waste of time. But when I hear qualified people expressing their concerns on the accepted findings, that worries me. Not the least of which is that those findings should be used to help these people make better skyscrapers and that's not happening. In other words, the official NIST findings that structural engineers, architects, builders, etc. would love to get their hands on and apply to better future building practices, is largely unusable. That's not crack pot theory. That's a major concern for the safety of people who live and work in skyscrapers like the WTC. At least, this seems to me to be the gist of what they're getting at with their reservations.

    Last edited by Eric Lofgren; September 12th, 2011 at 05:18 PM.
    Grave Sight Graphics: The Art of Eric Lofgren.
    elofgren@ telus.net (to use e-mail address please remove space between the '@' and 'telus')

    My Art Blog
    My Online Portfolio (Updated Jan. 30/ 2011)
    ~NiNjA~^~mOuNtAiN~^~PoDcAsT~(Working illustrators talking illustration)
    Eric Lofgren's licensible rpg art resource
    Art Director for New Gods of Raanon
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  45. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Eric Lofgren For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook