SeanC Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the new bmw’s don’t guzzle that much gas, the > 3Litre in the 335 gets about the same milage as my > nissan. > > i walk to work and only use my car for fun, so i > dont really give a fuck. Dont trust these things. I bought a 07 650ci and was supposed to get 15/23 so i thought 20ish. My car is calculating 14.5-15.5, no idea how they ever got 23, even on a highway.
I saw a thing on the news awhile ago about how the EPA constantly estimates more MPG than actual. My Stang is suppose to get 22/30. At best I can get 22 freeway, 15 city.
> I am not sure if there is much of a point in > posting this as you seem really set in your ways > and with your “facts”, however I will still throw > this out there. > > This here, discredits just about everything you > say (especially in relation to the WTC), i found > it an interesting watch: > > http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ (It’s a free watch > that streams right from the website.) > > I don’t know why people are so against the fact > that this could’ve been orchestrated like the > events that took place in the past and led to > USA’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and Vietnam, and > now Iraq. There was always a catalyst, the > catalyst was always preventable. Zeitgeist was trash logic built upon trash “reality” with a sprinkling of bullshit. any body with half a brain can tell that their “physics” and “logic” is really nothing more than elementary school grade “F” garbage. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html You can find thousands of other articles debunking Zeitgeist, but it would be waste of my time to post them all. Suffice it to say, Popular Mechanics debunks the worst of the 9/11 tripe. As far as “catalysts”. GWB and his ilk can’t even keep renditions, illegal wiretaps, and the fact that they were idiots pre-Iraq, secret. Do you think they could keep something like 9/11 under wraps? Please.
I am not sure why you are getting so upset over this? I never sided with either your or “zeitgeist” i simply find a lot of this fairly interesting, as it appears you do as well taking into account the vast amount of time you’ve spent reading up on this. I went through most of the popular mechanic’s website and my issue is that their “evidence” is based on what other people said, yet a lot of the questions that “zeitgeist” raised go unanswered. I think the easiest example, without getting into too much drama is the pentagon crash. Whether or not there was a crash of an airplane, i don’t know, however why isn’t there any video footage of it, and why were all videos pointing towards that direction taken away? Popular mechanic’s FACT on this was the following: "FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. “It was absolutely a plane, and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. “I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: “I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?” That’s pretty weak for a fact, let’s base our facts on what someone said, rather than hardcore evidence? Where the engines of their airplane, at 6 tonnes each, you’d at least recover that right? The other thing that i found fascinating in regards to the move is that the Fed Reserve is a private organization…not sure, but how many people actually knew that? Anyway, let me know with what you can come up in regards to the above and don’t get angry, these are just questions.
Alexandrov Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am not sure why you are getting so upset over > this? > > I never sided with either your or “zeitgeist” i > simply find a lot of this fairly interesting, as > it appears you do as well taking into account the > vast amount of time you’ve spent reading up on > this. > > I went through most of the popular mechanic’s > website and my issue is that their “evidence” is > based on what other people said, yet a lot of the > questions that “zeitgeist” raised go unanswered. > > I think the easiest example, without getting into > too much drama is the pentagon crash. Whether or > not there was a crash of an airplane, i don’t > know, however why isn’t there any video footage of > it, and why were all videos pointing towards that > direction taken away? > > Popular mechanic’s FACT on this was the > following: > > "FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the > first structural engineer to arrive at the > Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the > emergency response. “It was absolutely a plane, > and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of > KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. “I > saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the > building. I picked up parts of the plane with the > airline markings on them. I held in my hand the > tail section of the plane, and I found the black > box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up > by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the > building. Kilsheimer adds: “I held parts of > uniforms from crew members in my hands, including > body parts. Okay?” > > That’s pretty weak for a fact, let’s base our > facts on what someone said, rather than hardcore > evidence? Where the engines of their airplane, at > 6 tonnes each, you’d at least recover that right? > > The other thing that i found fascinating in > regards to the move is that the Fed Reserve is a > private organization…not sure, but how many > people actually knew that? > > Anyway, let me know with what you can come up in > regards to the above and don’t get angry, these > are just questions. First off, don’t infer I am “upset”, as plain internet text is a poor tool for judging emotions. Second, how else do you want to judge whether what happened is real or not? The entire premise of 9/11 tin foil hat theorists is that the Pentagon couldn’t have been a plane since the hole doesn’t fit a plane. Yet they ignore that the Pentagon is not only the largest building in the world, but also one of the strongest. It has massive steel construction with heavy granite, marble, and other rock constructions. These aren’t easy to move. As seen by the actual damage to the rings of the Pentagon, the object was more kinetic force, rather than concussive. Why? Because it penetrated in but didn’t explode outwards. This can be further seen by the fact that there wasn’t a large crater. Yet, you can see that a something did penetrate many several rings into the Pentagon, with a damage cone, rather than a circle. Many think the wings would have made a hole. However, it’s pretty obvious from the ground around the Pentagon that the plane hit wing first, foremost. Second, wings are made of thin aluminum, engines aren’t much more substantial, they have little weight (relatively speaking) and break up easily upon impact, as can be seen in many other plane crashes. Additionally, there were large fires inside the building. Missiles do not carry much flammable material, just explosives and marginal fuel. However, the fires indicate much more than that. The engines aren’t 6 tons, they are about 3.5 tons. That includes materials which are very fragile. The fans are easily destroyed by a fricking bird. Humans that get sucked into the engine often survive because the blades rip apart easily. All of this is simple logic, all you need is knowledge of the way missiles and planes work. Anybody with the ability to do cursory reading into these matters can easily refute this. You can see a fricking plane with a tail in the security video. Did you know the Fed isn’t a private company, per se? All of the employees are government employees. The Fed is beholden to Congress, exists because Congressional allowance, has annual (and more often) reports to Congress, it’s Board of Governors are largely appointed by the government with the Chairman appointed by the President and approved by Congress. It *IS* a government entity. It’s “shareholders” are no more than every bank belonging to the Fed system. This is a logical situation, as the entities involved in the system should be supporting the system (interlocking strength). The shares, which contribute capital to the Fed, are never traded, but are held by every bank in the Fed system, including Bank of America, Capital One, JPM Chase, Wachovia, Southtrust, 5/3, TCF, Wells Fargo…etc. When Congress can effectively eliminate the existence of *ANY* company outside of the GSE’s (which they really can’t eliminate, just withdrawal the government charter and implied guaranty), the USPS, FDIC, or the Fed, let me know, because Congress doesn’t have that power over any company directly. Seriously, I can’t believe you would even watch one of those videos without thoroughly investigating their aspects. Don’t you feel a little foolish for jumping on a message board such as this without investigating it even a little bit and then declaring this tripe? I would expect this from some oddball sitting in a dark room watching X-Files reruns with long hair drinking Red Bull and eating twinkies. Not a CFA candidate.
You are either still dancing around the facts, or you simply have no answer. All you’ve done is given me unrelated “facts” that haven’t answered: 1. Where are the engines? 2. Why isn’t there video footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon when there were dozens of cameras pointing in the direction of the hit? I haven’t “declared this tripe”, but thanks for your efforts.
Alexandrov Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You are either still dancing around the facts, or > you simply have no answer. > > All you’ve done is given me unrelated “facts” that > haven’t answered: > > 1. Where are the engines? > 2. Why isn’t there video footage of the plane > hitting the Pentagon when there were dozens of > cameras pointing in the direction of the hit? > > I haven’t “declared this tripe”, but thanks for > your efforts. 1. They disintegrated, as planes do since they are almost all aluminum, which is a light and can be a fragile metal, especially when first hitting the ground then hitting one of the strongest structures in the world. 2. How do you know there are dozens? Do you have proof of this? They have one showing this event and you can clearly see the tail of a plane. All you have done is post tripe.
spierce Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Alexandrov Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > You are either still dancing around the facts, > or > > you simply have no answer. > > > > All you’ve done is given me unrelated “facts” > that > > haven’t answered: > > > > 1. Where are the engines? > > 2. Why isn’t there video footage of the plane > > hitting the Pentagon when there were dozens of > > cameras pointing in the direction of the hit? > > > > I haven’t “declared this tripe”, but thanks for > > your efforts. > > 1. They disintegrated, as planes do since they > are almost all aluminum, which is a light and can > be a fragile metal, especially when first hitting > the ground then hitting one of the strongest > structures in the world. > > 2. How do you know there are dozens? Do you have > proof of this? They have one showing this event > and you can clearly see the tail of a plane. > > All you have done is post tripe. 1. Engines are almost all aluminum? At most the casting can be only aluminum, however the compressor, combustion chamber, turbine, etc are made of nickel-based superalloys. Jet fuel will not melt or disinigrate them. 2. Let’s forget the picture for a second and focus on my original question, why isn’t there a single video released of the plane crashing when there were live traffic cameras that were pointing towards the general area of the hit.
> 1. Engines are almost all aluminum? At most the > casting can be only aluminum, however the > compressor, combustion chamber, turbine, etc are > made of nickel-based superalloys. Jet fuel will > not melt or disinigrate them. > > 2. Let’s forget the picture for a second and focus > on my original question, why isn’t there a single > video released of the plane crashing when there > were live traffic cameras that were pointing > towards the general area of the hit. 1. Prove to me that engines have been recovered whole in other crashes against the ground and other hard structures. That’s the real point, engines distintegrate because they aren’t as strong as the force they are faced against. They don’t have the physical structure to do so. So please, provide evidence that they’ll survive a 700+mph crash against the ground followed by a concrete, granite, marble, steel reinforced military-grade low-level structure with multiple rings. 2. How do you know there are cameras facing that *EXACT* area. Please provide evidence of your knowledge. AFAIK, I don’t have access to the pentagon CCTV system, if you do, then I am sure you’re smart enough to prove your point. 3. Finally, how does the blast hole of the Pentagon equate to one of a missile? Missile strikes are *CIRCULAR* in manner, this was linear, not circular (since missiles are omni-directional explosions), as shown in every picture of the strike sight. Explain point 3 in detail with your plethora of knowledge. I’d be interested to see how you explain the complete lack of any missile type blast damage.
Interesting thread. Obviously the sole super power needed a reason to secure the middle east. It is imperialism at its best. Oil is finite and the mighty want to secure whatever they can to serve their interest. Its been like that since the Romans, British and now US. Plus, with the pro Israel lobby pretty much running congress, there is another reason for the US to stay put in the middle east. You’d be surprised how strong and effective this lobby is. AIPAC - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC Furthermore, the oil reserve estimates of the saudis are highly confidential, so no one actually knows at what rate they are declining. The biggest oil field on the planet - ghawar has been declining for some time yet the saudis refute the claim. What to do? Invade another oil rich country. Peak Oil - http://www.oildecline.com/
spierce Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > 1. Engines are almost all aluminum? At most > the > > casting can be only aluminum, however the > > compressor, combustion chamber, turbine, etc > are > > made of nickel-based superalloys. Jet fuel > will > > not melt or disinigrate them. > > > > 2. Let’s forget the picture for a second and > focus > > on my original question, why isn’t there a > single > > video released of the plane crashing when there > > were live traffic cameras that were pointing > > towards the general area of the hit. > > > 1. Prove to me that engines have been recovered > whole in other crashes against the ground and > other hard structures. That’s the real point, > engines distintegrate because they aren’t as > strong as the force they are faced against. They > don’t have the physical structure to do so. > > So please, provide evidence that they’ll survive a > 700+mph crash against the ground followed by a > concrete, granite, marble, steel reinforced > military-grade low-level structure with multiple > rings. > > 2. How do you know there are cameras facing that > *EXACT* area. Please provide evidence of your > knowledge. AFAIK, I don’t have access to the > pentagon CCTV system, if you do, then I am sure > you’re smart enough to prove your point. > > 3. Finally, how does the blast hole of the > Pentagon equate to one of a missile? Missile > strikes are *CIRCULAR* in manner, this was linear, > not circular (since missiles are omni-directional > explosions), as shown in every picture of the > strike sight. > > Explain point 3 in detail with your plethora of > knowledge. I’d be interested to see how you > explain the complete lack of any missile type > blast damage. I still can’t understand why you appear to get so worked up over this. I never claimed I knew or had any answers to this, you simply fall into the typical group of people who tend to discredit just about anything when in reality you are fed information that is just as reliable as these conspiracy theory movies. As expected, you have no answers, but in your head you’ve won this battle and everyone who dares to question these events is an idiot right? Did you consider that maybe you are the idiot who never did his research, but rather read and believe all the bullshit fed to you so you can pick the “winning” side. 1. Why don’t you do some further research on airplane crashes and tell me that airplane engines disintigrate when they crash? Can you honestly tell me that a nickel base superalloy made to ENDURE maximum amounts of heat as that’s where the combustion takes place in an engine is going disappear in this air from jet fuel? Or wait, it will crash into a concrete structure and there will be a magical explosion that makes it all go away? 2. The movie itself shows a live traffic camera that points in the direction of where the airplane would’ve passed over right before hitting the building. No one has the tape. I never said these are Pentagon tapes, it’s a simple “live eye” camera. But you know, keep putting words in my mouth. 3. I never said a missle flew into the building! I am done with this, it appears that your nerves can’t handle a simple conversation and your comprehension of the questions is deteriorating. If you decide to actually open your mind and read on some real research maybe you can check this out and draw your own conclusions. http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis/videoframes.html
.
spierce Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I would expect this from some oddball sitting in a > dark room watching X-Files reruns with long hair > drinking Red Bull and eating twinkies. Not a CFA > candidate. First, I can absolutely positively attest to a non-empty intersection of CFA charterholders and people sitting in a dark room watching X-files DVDs (all seasons $140 @ amazon) and drinking Diet Coke and eating, not Twinkies, whatever. Anyway, I think the evidence is decent that the truth lies somewhere between the official version that everyone knows and a US gov’t missile strike on the Pentagon.
Alexandrov Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Conspiracy tripe. 1. The largest bulk of the engines isn’t any type of super strong metals. The “superalloys” (I am sure you get a woody saying this) are nothing more than high-temp coatings in the compression and combustion chamber which allow the metals to withstand high-temps. They are not for durability sake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superalloy As far as “super alloys”, they can’t even withstand the ability of an F-15 fighter (or many other fighters) to go its maximum speed. This is why the fastest jets (say and SR_71) don’t rely on typical turbofans for high-speed flight, they use Ram Jets (or Scram jets) with no moving parts and a ramspike to generate the compression. The “uber alloys” (why not go a level higher for mil-spec) do nothing for strength. This is why most military jets never use the full power of their turbines, it’d simply destroy them. Jet engines are very fragile and certainly wouldn’t stay in one piece with a 700+mph impact. To think they would is to be ignorant to physics, metallurgy, and engineering. I have a good friend who is a MIT mechanical engineering undergrad, has two masters in nuclear engineering and another masters in mechanical engineering. I asked him about your idea and he did nothing but laugh. 2. So what? Does that mean there are other cameras pointing to that exact area? You’re taking the absence of something as proof there is something. That’s absolutely ridiculous logic, something which would never stand up in a court of law. If you have proof other cameras were pointing there, then provide it. Otherwise the burden of proof has not been supported and conjecture is worthless, as is your argument. 3. Then what hit the building? A carbomb? UFO? asteroid with Bruce Willis on it? How about a giant SpaceBall piloted by Dark Helmet. Yes, I guess haven’t done enough “research”, but alien abductions and tin foil hat theories aren’t all that interesting anyway. As far as your attempt to minimize me by saying I am incapable of rational argument and trying to frame me as angry, sorry, but that lame-ass trick is as old as the internet. You’ve got no idea of my state of mind and you cannot infer it from simple text. Here you go, I thought I’d help you out with your shopping. Remember, buy bulk, it’s your friend. http://www.amazon.com/FOIL-002-Thick-19-25-Wide/dp/B0013ZED2M/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=industrial&qid=1211814367&sr=8-1
JoeyDVivre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > spierce Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > I would expect this from some oddball sitting in > a > > dark room watching X-Files reruns with long > hair > > drinking Red Bull and eating twinkies. Not a > CFA > > candidate. > > First, I can absolutely positively attest to a > non-empty intersection of CFA charterholders and > people sitting in a dark room watching X-files > DVDs (all seasons $140 @ amazon) and drinking Diet > Coke and eating, not Twinkies, whatever. > > Anyway, I think the evidence is decent that the > truth lies somewhere between the official version > that everyone knows and a US gov’t missile strike > on the Pentagon. I apologize for putting you into the x-files tin-foil hat black helicopter crowd. I’d think more rational thought would be needed for candidacy, but I could be wrong. Occam’s Razor. The government is too inept and full of bureaucratic dead-end government job types who *love* to leak, to be able to pull off a massive conspiracy.
Spierce obviously works for the man.
virginCFAhooker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Spierce obviously works for the man. Obviously. Maybe…I am *the* man? Ya never know. I did send an email to the director of the CIA telling him to look at this stuff.
Maybe you is, maybe you isn’t… (1) you think oil prices are too high for no good reason (manipulation, hedge funds, etc.) (2) you think the fed should bail out the bond suckers’ stupidity for the good of the market (3) you think 9/11 was caused by terrorists yup, you da man.
I don’t know what to believe. But its not like this is the first gov’t conspiracy/scandal. 1. Bay of Pigs 2. Watergate 3. Cook County/Daley and JFK 4. Bush and Iraq…?
KJH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don’t know what to believe. But its not like > this is the first gov’t conspiracy/scandal. > > 1. Bay of Pigs > 2. Watergate > 3. Cook County/Daley and JFK > 4. Bush and Iraq…? None of those are on the scale of what 9/11 conspiracy theorists believe. It would simply require too much. The people on the planes, pilots, ground crew, flight controllers, hundreds within the government…etc. Why is it so hard to believe that a group of heavily funded, religiously motivated, highly determined, people who had years of groundwork, could take control of poorly secured planes and crash them? 1. Bay of Pigs was exposed within months by the stupidity of the CIA and Airforce. 2. Watergate fell apart quickly because the conspirators were bumblers. Not to mention that it’s scope was far smaller. 3. Don’t know enough about #3. Bush absolutely wanted to invade Iraq, NPAC and the Neocons had him convinced of this. The “proof” they used was going to be used either way and all of that has been proven to be bogus.