hate religion and government?


  • tacolad
  • February 15, 2010, 5:05 pm
You might be interested

Comments

Reply Attach
  • 2

    I fxcking love Zeitgeist. Have you seen the other videos on that site? That shit will blow your mind.

    I did a presentation on this movie for my History class, discussing religion and government. - freaked out the teacher and all my class mates. Got 105% on it.

    Reply
  • 2

    To be apart of the Venus Project would be the greatest achievement of a lifetime.

    Reply
  • 2

    Not to be the only dissenter here... but the only part of Zeitgeist with real value is when it speaks to the Christian religion's Pagan origins/influences.

    The 9/11 section and the Government section? Utter bullshit.

    Debate, here I come! : D

    Reply
  • 2

    no debate, Logos you are correct. this is a video that depends on shock value and not data.

    Reply
  • 2

    I am a huge fan of dealing in facts, so here we go.

    First of all, you don't understand what a peer-reviewed source is. A peer-reviewed source is not just any lay-person agreeing with a conclusion, it is the entire scientific community in a certain field collaborating, repeatedly testing, and confirming a hypothesis. The "peers" are PhDs.

    Aside from that, I'll answer your specific objections.

    1. You asserted that the fire would not be hot enough to melt steel. Ignoring the fact that you assume jet fuel is the ONLY thing providing heat energy, when in reality there are many more factors funneling in that ever-important Q value, modern offices are known to burn at over 1300 C.
    "a reference office fire test [43] conducted in
    the United Kingdom, as part of the Cardington experiments in 1998, demonstratedthat
    “cellulosic,” or largely wood- and paper-based fires, can easily send atmospheric
    temperatures10 cm below roof decking above 1000 C... Modern offices, containing more plastics, are seen to reach even
    higher temperatures of up to 1300 C"

    Add Jet Fuel accelerant to a blaze with already 1300 C of Q (added heat energy), and you receive a number easily high enough to melt the steel. It is simple thermodynamics (which I have been rigorously studying this past month : D).

    http://www.jod911.com/drg_nist_review_2_1.pdf

    2. The towers were 410m tall. Using archive footage, the lower bound for the amount of time the collapse took is 7 seconds.

    Thus, the speed of collapse (using the top of the building as a point particle) is easy to calculate, as v=d/t. So, v=410/6, which comes out to roughly 15.71 m/s.

    Now, we must assess what the building's free fall speed would be. On earth, g (acceleration due to gravity) is 9.8 m/s/s. This means that for every second the building falls, it gains 9.8 m/s of velocity value. After one second it will be falling at 9.8 m/s. After two seconds, it will be falling at 19.6 m/s. And now we can be done with the calculation! This is because we are ALREADY past the observed speed with only two seconds of free fall speed.

    If the building were truly falling at a free fall speed, it would have fallen MUCH quicker than is observed.

    All it takes is a little thinking to debunk the wild claims of people in the "truth movement." Try critically assessing them, and not just taking them at face value. ALWAYS do that for any claim you hear. It's important.

    Reply
  • 2

    i agree. jamdogg your mind is made up. you want to beleive in the conspiracy go ahead. i truly feel sorry. every question you are asking me has been debunked by people who know. Ertrov is correct, i have to walk away now, you are a little too nutty for me.
    tinfoil - hate religion and government?

    Reply
  • 2

    I see you have no response to my detailing of hard fact. Thus, you did not reply. However, in the face of evidentiary backing, I doubt you changed your bias opinion.

    Yay for science, overriding false ideas everywhere!

    Reply
  • 1

    im with you jon. me and tacolad love this stuff

    Reply
  • 1

    oh ummmmmm im not the best debater.... actually i got a D- in debate....
    but..... i strongly disagree with you sir...... and i dont care for your statement very much at all.

    • tacolad
    • February 16, 2010, 3:48 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Haha, fair.

    So... ignoring the religion part, on which we agree....

    The 9/11 tower destructions, as confirmed by multiple peer-reviewed publications, are entirely consistent with not only the laws of physics, but typical construction/engineering standards, if in fact the plane crashes were the cause of said destruction.

    http://www.jod911.com/

    Aside from that... I don't really see any evidentiary basis for the end of the movie. Please provide it?

    Thanks!

    Reply
  • 1

    Well, I was with the Zeigetist when it came to religion. I'd heard alot of similar arguments, being an Atheist myself. They lost me once they got to the twin towers, I highly doubt it was an inside job. However, the more I hear about some of the nasty things the Bush admin did (Waterboarding, for example) the less it would surprise me.

    Reply
  • 1

    Either way, both are wrong, and against your country's laws. A good gov't would do neither.

    Reply
  • 1

    i agree that both are wrong. speeding and murder are also both illigal but i am sure we can agree there is a big diffrence.

    Reply
  • 1

    Yeah, but we shouldn't let them get away with it either way. Why hasn't dick Cheney been charged for war crimes? We prosecuted the Japanese for this back in ww2...

    Reply
  • 1

    i agree. i also agree that i went threw worse than water bording during college rush. we are the US. we are better than that shit. we are not perfect. i do not have all the answers you are looking for. as a retired USMC i can tell you not everyone in the armed forces think that way. i can also tell you that waterboarding and 911 are not one and the same.

    Reply
  • 1

    do you claim to be an engineer? i don't. so if you are asking me to explain i am not qulified. watch the history channels 911 myths debunked where enginers explain and show what happened.
    are you an engineer?
    are you crazy? might as well try and tell me the moon landing was in hollywood.
    i do know this history channel had the twin towers on modern marvels. i also know that during this episode the engineer who built the twin towers says the towers were build to withstand a plane smaller than what hit the towers. this man is now dead. one of the last interviews he gave was to the History Channel before 911.
    the enginer who built the towers said it was not built to take a crash of that size. i think i will believe the man who built it.

    Reply
  • 1

    Just wanted to point out, there is a difference between the Christian religion, and a true relationship with God through Jesus Christ as a Christian. The second is not influenced by Pagan doctrine/tradition. But yes, a lot of religious tradition, especially in Catholicism, is based off Pagan rituals. Anyway, yeah, those other two you mentioned are just conspiracy crap.

    • Ertrov
    • April 12, 2010, 12:55 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Nothing wrong with water-boarding. "Oh no, how dare we hurt criminals!"

    • Ertrov
    • April 12, 2010, 12:59 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Wow, Ertrov and Johnecash in agreement with me? Savor this with me, boys!

    Reply
  • 1

    Let's not turn this into a water-boarding debate! No matter how much I want to now. Stop the water-boarding discussion or start a new thread please : P. I won't be able to resist much longer, and I'm enjoying this agreement you too.

    Reply
  • 1

    funny i have no problem agreeing with people. do you?

    Reply
  • 1

    No, our opinions just often meet in opposition.

    Reply
  • 1

    agreed.there is nothing wrong with that. even though we often disagree i have no problem agreeing with some one when i feel they are correct.

    Reply
  • 1

    Awesome. More agreement! : D

    Reply
  • 1

    *High5*-TheSameHappenedWhenIDebatedWithErtrovAndGaveScientificEvidence

    FeelProudMyFellowScientist,FeelProud.

    Reply
  • 1



    go on youtube and watch coincidence 9/11, it a 19 video series watch it if you can be bothered it makes a good arguement.

    Reply
  • 1

    I am currently watching the first video you posted. Color of flame has nothing to do with temperature, they are lying through their teeth to try and cast doubt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame#Flame_temperature

    A flame's color depends on the material being burned, the oxygen supply, and somewhat the temperature. But even in the video itself, it admits that in an uncontrolled, "open-air" burn, you see what they are showing. However, an open-air burn is different than an office fire.

    I addressed the melting steel/weakening of steel above.

    If this is what this series has to offer, why would I watch it? It's more of the same unscientific propaganda. Can you tell me what facts they offer that I might not have seen?

    Reply
  • 1

    its nice to see that not all post are crazy ass Conspiracy theorist. did we not all watch it happen live? what more do you need? why would you think a plain would not bring down the towers? please don't even try and answer the question crazy people. i am just happy to see that not everyone on here is nutty as squirl shit.

    Reply
  • 1

    crazy jay... the things the japanese did were terrible. they still havent taken blame for the genocide they did in china, they killed millions, and to this day deny it. and being thrown in a hole, starved, and having your eyes sliced open with knives is alittle different from having water poured on your head to induce an anxiety attack... waterboarding is physically harmless, though scary... know what else is scary, unpleasant, and can induce panic attacks? having an airhorn blown at you unexpectidly. "BLAAAAAAAAT!!!!" but you wouldnt consider someone a "war criminal" if they did that to you after you conspired/attempted to murder people in their country. ... would you?

    • c8r15
    • April 20, 2010, 9:34 am
    Reply
  • 1

    his name is crazy jay. need i say more. some people think water boarding and the hanoy hilton are the same thing. we call these people crazy.

    Reply
  • 1

    Must... not... debate....

    • Ertrov
    • April 20, 2010, 3:29 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    exploding head 2


    That's just amazing...

    Reply
  • 0

    DUDE!!!! kick ass!!!!!!!!
    yea i saw addendum! i wanna help with the venus project so bad but im all the way in muchigan!

    • tacolad
    • February 15, 2010, 5:14 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    you sed it.... but i think hes selling his research facility

    • tacolad
    • February 15, 2010, 5:29 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    big jump from waterboarding to bringing down the twin towers don't you think?

    Reply
  • 0

    i have bad news for you friend. there is no cover up. its sad but true that crazy people ran the planes into the the towers. don't take my word for it. take "Popular Science" word. i mean they are just enginers who study these things.

    Reply
  • 0

    lol did you even watch the video?? I mean all of it. I'm pretty sure there were engineers in there saying its impossilbe, Demolition experts saying only explosives could do it, coroners saying there where no tracers blood?? But i suppose they wouldnt know they only study these things. Make an arguement when you can back it up with something not just some crazy people that managed to fool the most powerful country in the world. Wow maybe think about it next time.

    Reply
  • 0

    look up popular science and their article on 911. if you think it was a conspiracy then yes you are crazy. i have watched the entire video. its crap. i don't have to make an argument. if you think 911 was a conspiracy then you are a screwball. i am sorry you will hate me and probly take it personal, but its also the truth. at the end of the day know what brought down the towers? planes. i am not here to educate you. that you must do on your own. i am just here to say you are nutty as squirl shit if you think 911 was a conspiracy.

    Reply
  • 0

    Just read tht article pretty shit source really as is doesnt answer the serious questions only the crazy ones like where people say it wasnt a plane that hit them or that the planes were hit with missles where in this video does it say anything about tht? nowhere so dont tell me something i already know. Where does it explain melted steel ? nowhere coz its impossilbe with the type of fire they explain. Also there part on building seven was utter shit. Rumble and a two story fire brought a 47 story building down from the inside but not to fall over just in on itself? y cant you just tell me one soild fact y it wasnt an inside job intsead of tellin me about these shit article you believe. i told you mine Steel melts at 2150 degrees so y the fuck is there melted steel there plz explain??

    Reply
  • 0

    when did i claim to be an engineer? i said Fact- steel melts at 2150 degrees not about if it could take a hit by a plane. I said this coz there is melted stteel seen pouring out of the building, melted steel in the wreackage when collpased im no expert but it says fires from jet fuel can reach 1800 degrees when lit?? did the steel just think fuck it al melt anyway? it may have been weakened but that doesnt lower mlting points!

    Reply
  • -1

    WOW! are you seriously that dumb. How can you so easily deny that 9/11 part. You seem to have no problem with part one about religion but 9/11 is false in your eyes? Wow just wow!The same amount of evidence is given for both cases yet you seem to just disagree with the 2nd part because of some peer reviews?!? How about all the fucking people tht think god is real? Now is tht review of religon not as stupid as those that try to bend the facts about 9/11? The ones which you follow blindly just like they do in there religon even though the solid facts state otherwise??? Jet fuel cant melt steel So y is there molten steel? the building drops at freefall speed with no resistance is this because of fire??? There was not fuckng fire on every floor so you cant say the steel was weakened coz it was nowhere near the fire. There are many more hard facts in the video tht you just say are wrong. Can the people you seem to believe explain how 2 whole planes just vapourise?? no engines no passengers no nothing just a few scraaps of metal? one landed in a field for fucksake and there just happens to be no plane?? oh but its ok the presdient says it was a plane so it must be. Jesus people suposedly follow religon blindly hahahaha whoever believes bush is just as bad dont talk about how u no the facts when there fucking right in your fsce and you cant fucking see them!!!!!!!! Btw great video!

    Reply
  • -1

    Warning! Conspiracy theorist alert! Please, jamdogg, put on your tin foil hat, and walk away.

    • Ertrov
    • April 12, 2010, 12:58 pm
    Reply
Related Posts