Albert Einstein

“Condemnation without investigation is the highest ignorance.” – Albert Einstein

So the other day I was watching some alternative international news sources: 1) due to frustrations with national mainstream media and 2) to stay a better informed individual through other’s eyes. In doing so, I came across an interview with the “We are Change” group on the Russia Today news channel.

These two individuals, Steve Crock and Saad Ali, who state their goals are not based on conspiracy theories but rather are interested in showing people the evidence available. They mention just a couple of their frustrations in the lack of logical conclusions of the events of September 11^th and the misuse of the Copenhagen climate summit via Al Gore to impose an unnecessary tax on citizens.

This [9/11 inquiry] stirred my inquisitive nature and so I decided to take a dip which turned into a dive into the murky depths of the events surrounding 9/11 and the inside job argument.

After spending hours the other night wadding through articles of alternative conclusions & debunkers, YouTube and Google videos and documentaries, I thought why not present some of these arguments, pose some critical questions and see if we can’t get a healthy conversation going. After all, a healthy bit of skepticism is always welcome at my door.

It’s also important to note that individuals from various professional sectors, including congressmen from all political fronts,  have been critical in the accuracy of these events. I’ve compiled a number of relevant videos throughout and documentaries at the end for your convenience. Check them out and make up your own conclusions.

Tower Collapse Explanations

The reason given as to why the towers fell was that the temperature was not hot enough to melt the steel support but enough to weaken (about 1000 degrees Fahrenheit) the supports, which through the pancake theory, allowed the rest of the building to collapse upon it. An attempt NOVA also tried to show was the one and only logical conclusion but left out the core columns in their diagrams.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology also stated that the fuel in the craft was mostly burned up upon impact or at least within 10 minutes.

If this is true, then was this enough fuel and time to accelerate the temperatures needed to critically impact the steel supports and if it was, was the breach on those levels enough to have the above levels force themselves down and all the way through the rest of the tower in a symmetrical fashion?

Time v Distance Graph of the Pancake Theory

Which hits the ground first?

Since then the pancake theory has been made irrelevant by many including Jim Hoffman, Weidlinger and Associates, Kevin Ryan and NIST itself which headed the investigation. Kevin Ryan of Underwriters Laboratory, which was hired by NIST to examine the steel, was fired after hearing that tests were unsuccessful.

“NIST reported this in its October 2004 update, in a table of results that clearly showed that the floors did not fail and that, therefore, pancaking was not possible.”

This video along with support of others including this MIT engineer shows how they debunked the pancake theory. If the joints gave out, then the trusses would pancake on each other leaving evidence of stacking and some vertical beams in the air. The speed in which the tower collapses would have been much, much slower but it fell in about 10 seconds which is near free fall speed.

In support of the heat explanation, Carol Ciemiengo, an infrared consultant, was near the towers with a FLIR infrared thermocam. Her thermograms and other paint tests done showed temperatures of 220 degrees Fahrenheit and 480 degrees Fahrenheit and were also given to the 9/11 Commission but were not included in the final report.

WTC Thermogram

Yet molten metal was also found at the site and verified by NASA thermal imaging. This molten metal remained hot weeks after the events. This requiring another factor to be explained and present among the debris— nanothermite.

Professor Steven Jones explains thermite and its presence at Ground Zero. He explains the traces of the compounds in the dust and if added with sulphur it becomes thermate which “can cut through steel like butter”. He also explains that it can serve two purposes as an incendiary and as an explosive and is only produced by defense contractors.

More recently in April of this year, Chemistry Professor Niels Harrit spoke in Denmark of his findings of thermite in the rubble and also how this material could not have been created in another way that day.

gulli.com: You say that there is iron oxide and aluminium and conclude that this means it’s Nano Thermite. Isn’t it normal in such a building that there is iron oxide and aluminium? Or could it happen that the substance Nano Thermite was produced as a result of the collapse?

Dr. Niels Harrit: No way. You don’t expect a box of matches to be formed in a fire.

This great video goes through some of the simple physics calculations why the shorter and lighter top could not have so easily and quickly gone through the rest of the tower.

Interesting Side Note:

WTC 1 suffered a 4 hour 700F fire in its base in 1975 and was not even remotely breached of its position. The towers fell in about 80 minutes respectively in 2001.

Furthermore, the design of the building was stated by the engineers that it was designed to withstand, 200mph winds, 100 year storms and impacts of multiple airliners; the biggest of the day was a 606. Accordingly, the core was hermetically sealed which would prevent the spread of fire to other levels.

The only other reason given would be that this was a controlled demolition. They compare other buildings such as the Windsor in Madrid which burned hotter (evident by the color and size of the flames and smoke) and longer yet structurally (different) remained standing in comparison to the superiorly engineered World Trade Center towers.

Richard Gage, 20 year architect, explains and provides rationale and evidence on a morning news show why this event looks much more like a controlled demolition with the presence of pyroclastic clouds of pulverized concrete.

This Italian TV news program shows why they believe it was a controlled demolition.

Demolition requires time, preparation and resources. Is there evidence of this? According to reports yes. Security was lowered weeks prior and the building residents experienced power outages , evacuation drills and maintenance crews.  Secondary explosions were also reported near the base of the towers.

Interesting Side Note:

The previous head of security at Securacom was also George W. Bush’s brother Marvin Bush.

Building 7

Building 7 amongst the initial rubble.

One of the main topics of inquiry was why building 7 wasn’t investigated or included in the 9/11 Commission Report and why it collapsed since it wasn’t hit by a plane. Allegedly, some fires got in from the outfall of the nearest tower which was 400 feet away and there was a structural compromise of one of the three steel cores. There was also damaged sustained from the closest tower collapsing.

In comparison, buildings 3, 4, 5 and 6 which were closer to the towers suffered greater damage but still stood erect. Molton metal was also found at the base of building 7 just like in the towers.

The owner of the buildings, Larry Silverstein, was also documented saying to “pull it” [the building]. Now some say this could have meant to “pull out” as in to pull the fireman out of the building but the timing doesn’t add up. The building was evacuated at 9:00 a.m., firefighters were already pulled out at 11:30 a.m. and the building fell 6 hours later.

Interesting Side Note:

Larry Silverstein also took out a new 99 year lease in 2001 which allowed him rights also to rebuild in case of destruction. He initially invested 15 million dollars into the lease and after fighting in court that the attacks constituted as two instances with two planes attacking, he won a total of 7 billion dollars in his settlement.

A slide from the Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Interesting Side Note:

The floors of the building housed the mayor’s emergency bunker, IRS Regional Council, US Secret Service, C.I.A., Department of Defense, American Express Bank International and other currency and exchange commissions, insurance companies and banks. Thousands of SEC case files on corporate fraud were lost.

Effectiveness of the 9/11 Commission

Volunteers from FEMA had to recover pieces (only a couple hundred) from the junk yard. A gross majority of the steel was sold for scrap and shipped off to China and India to be melted before the investigation was launched. In the event of such a major occurrence, why would all this evidence be sold of so quickly to be scrapped?

Fire Engineering magazine had stated the investigation was a “half-baked farce”.

Amount spent investigating WTC was $600,000 compared to Bill Clinton $40,000,000.

The 9/11 Commission Report spent 15 million dollars while a similar cost for Clinton’s alleged wrongdoings totaled 65 million dollars.

Many including the families of the victims have not been satisfied entirely with the investigation and still have unanswered questions.

Why did the investigation spend so little as compared to other disasters and even scandals? Why wasn’t building 7 included in the 9/11 Commission Report?

Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania

There was a huge scatter of debris over 3 to 6 miles in Pennsylvania. Is this typical of a crash like this? No large pieces or long trench was dug out like in the Lockerbie crash. There has also been speculation that the plane was shot down. Here is a video of Rumsfeld talking to troops and saying the plane was “shot down over Pennsylvania”.

Flight 77 and the Pentagon

The events around the Pentagon incident are also interesting. There were 86 cameras around but only 1 or 2 were given up for analysis and any surrounding surveillance was confiscated by the FBI on the day.

The alleged hijacker of the plane was also deemed incompetent by his former flight instructor who said he couldn’t even handle a small Cessna much less technically maneuver the extreme path the plane took towards the Pentagon.

This is one of a very few videos of a the explosion at the pentagon but not showing the alleged plane. The guy received rights to show the clip only after a court battle.

This video shows a fighter jet hitting a fortified wall very similar to the Pentagon’s.

Then this guy goes through one of the surveillance cameras frame by frame by slowing it down. It shows the object and explosion on the same frame which is kind of strange.

This article also states that the black box recovered from Flight 77 never reported the cockpit doors opening.

If the events are accurate to the 9/11 Commission Report then why not make all the videos public ala the Freedom of Information Act?

Hijackers

Some of the alleged terrorists were documented being frequenters of U.S. air force bases. Other Alleged hijackers were found to be alive in other parts of the world as stated in the documentary Zero.

Were the hijackers fundamentalists if Mohammed Atta was a heavy drinker and drug user according to his ex-girlfriend?

European parliament member and journalist Giulietto Chiesa says he was shown video in Washington how Bin Laden’s image can be easily and completely manipulated. The documentary also shows the questionable different appearances of Bin Laden in various videos.

In 1989, Al Qaeda, was a term, as stated by Robin Cook, invented by the C.I.A. to be designated for the database of the Mujahideen. The Arabic definition for Qaeda is base with maloomat meaning data. Ergo Al Qaeda (maloomat) is database.

So basically, Al-Qaeda is just a list of the Afghan war fighters of the 80’s who were funded and trained by the C.I.A. and then later hired by subcontractors (MPRI) of the Pentagon. 5 of the 7 involved in 9/11 were former fighters of MPRI in the Kosovo War according to the documentary Zero.

Other interesting notes

NORAD failed 4 times (with enough time to scramble jets) to stop the hijackers on September 11^th. NORAD, which has the world’s most state of the art detection system, prevented 67 prior hijacking attempts before 9/11. This radar system is alerted immediately if any unauthorized craft are (outside of military) in the area but the system prior to this was changed in which a confirmation from the Pentagon was required before jets could intercept the planes.

Condie Rice and Bush said they had no former idea that this could happen. There were ordered war games with hijacked planes and planes going in and out of radar on September 11^th. Three months before 9/11 an FBI informant gave warning of a terrorist act in 2001 involving airplanes.

This informative and comical video takes a look at those who benefitted from the collapse. It includes video of John Kerry admitting they used a controlled demolition on building 7. At 1:42 in the video Larry Silverstein says that they should “pull it” (demolish the building). At 2:54 it shows a jet hitting a nuclear containment wall and compares that with the depth the alleged airliner did on the Pentagon walls.

This individual has posted a 19 part series called WTC No Plane Theory. They compare various angles and views of the events of the day and compare what appear to be many incompatibilities and inconsistencies in reports, angles and sounds.

There a lot of interests also into the planes that hit the towers. Some videos propose they were not typical airliners and point out this unusual flash of light right before impact and after the plane makes contact seen on many angles.

A hijacker’s passport was found amongst the rubble of Ground Zero. Does this seem probable?

Also many workers became gravely sick after being exposed to the area and some have died from cancer. According to RT and others nearly 85% of the workers are suffering from lung disease and yet the government is offering no assistance.

Debunkers

There have been attempts at debunking some of these alleged 9/11 “myths” most notably by this article in Popular Mechanics magazine. But many of these provide weak criticisms and this piece has itself been subject of criticism by many including in this article, which displays the use of nepotism (the writer is the cousin of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security), how politicized the article is (foreword by John McCain), and their use of false arguments in their support while ignoring other important issues.

Conclusion

Does the rationale, videos, testimonies and documentaries point to this being an inside job? The U.S. government has fabricated claims before in order to get their agenda passed i.e. The Gulf of Tonkin, WMD’s in Iraq, Saddam and Bin Laden link, and during the Cuban Missile Crisis, there was a proposition of using a self-inflicted military act in order to justify military involvement.

In evaluating such claims, the term “correlation does not imply causation” should be taken into account. This “phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not automatically imply that one causes the other (though it does not remove the fact that correlation can still be a hint, whether powerful or otherwise).

Furthermore, as stated in the skepticism video initially, claims by either side of a story need to be analyzed including their possible motives and positions in order to prevent “conflicts of interest”. This alone can help shed light on why one side has a greater reason and end benefit or gain than another.

The problem with some claims like with the older “Loose Change” documentaries is that they miss some key points and misrepresent others. This allows debunkers take advantage of that by providing their own weak arguments and ignoring other empirical data from professional sources i.e. architects, engineers and professors. Even helpful information like Kevin Ryan’s whistle blowing and subsequent firing from Underwriters Laboratory can be attacked and misused by inaccurate portrayals i.e. he was working on the steel tests when in reality he was interested in the tests and brought them forward.

So take a look at some of these documentaries (some are better than others) as well and see if you develop any new insights into this matter.

Documentaries:

9/11 Blueprint for Truth – Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Zero – An Investigation into 9/11

MIT World: Ask all you like about 9/11, but just don’t ask why? – Lecture at MIT by Journalist Robert Fisk of The Independent (UK)

9/11 Let’s Get Empirical – Lecture by Professor David Ray Griffin

9/11 Coincidence Theory – A comprehensive and critical analysis by Spencer Morgan.

Fabled Enemies – Film focuses more on the intelligence network.

The Great Conspiracy – Hosted by Barrie Zwicker, journalist and media critic, the Canadian Michael Moore.

Loose Change (The Final Cut) – Mediocre documentary which has had a few revisions.

Dentist and Fresh Breath Expert Debunks Dental Hygiene Tips From Manufacturers

Every year, the makers of the leading brands of toothpaste come out with their tips for the holidays, mainly angled at promoting dental hygiene. This year, they targeted fresh holiday breath, and the nation’s foremost fresh breath expert, “Dentist to the Stars” Dr. Harold Katz is crying foul. 

“Their tips made no sense at all,” he said. “I can respect them wanting to put out a holiday story that puts their brand names in the public eye, as I know they like to sell toothpaste, but they should be more responsible than to be recommending measures that can actually be harmful to your teeth.”

 Instead of following the old time toothpaste manufacturers’ tips, Dr. Katz has his own Five Tips to Fresh Holiday Breath.

 ”I have no problem with them if they are disseminating useful, common sense tips,” he said. “It’s when they recommend to consumers actions that may actually prove harmful that makes me angry. They shouldn’t be spreading tips that may actually harm people. It’s an irresponsible way to market toothpaste.” 

Some of these companies recommend rinsing with Hydrogen peroxide, which can be dangerous. Hydrogen peroxide breaks down into free hydroxyl radicals which can eventually damage oral tissue if used every day. 

Other companies recommend their strong tasting mouthwash or toothpaste which can contain alcohol, Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (a strong detergent to create suds), Saccharin, and artificial flavors and colors as a marketing gimmick. None of these ingredients attacks the root cause of bad breath: Anaerobic sulfur-producing bacteria that breed beneath your tongue as well as the back of the throat and tonsils. 

Katz has his own tips, and they include:

1.  Drink More Water to help replenish precious saliva. Healthy saliva contains a high concentration of oxygen, which is the natural enemy of the anaerobic bacteria that cause bad breath.
2. Avoid Breath Mints and Gum with Sugar. Sugar feeds the bad breath bacteria, so don’t make them any stronger than they already are. Also avoid dairy foods. The bad breath bacteria love proteins – especially those in dairy foods. (They create nasty sulfur compounds when breaking down proteins).
3. Use Oral Products that contain Oxygenating Compounds, the newest therapy to stop bad breath. Brands include TheraBreath and PerioTherapy. More information is available at www.freshbreath.com or www.therabreath.com.
4. Keep Your Tongue Clean. GENTLY brush your tongue with a soft nylon toothbrush, but don’t use traditional toothpaste on the brush, because most toothpaste contains the harsh drying agent, sodium lauryl sulfate (which is a fancy term for SOAP).
5. Don’t Use Mouthwash Containing Alcohol. Alcohol makes the mouth dry and there is not enough alcohol in those strong tasting mouthwash formulas to kill any bacteria. Anyway, why burn the inside of your mouth during the Holidays!

Minutiae can be, and are, overlooked and imagined to be of little or no importance. I must say that, independently, this is probably true. However, the aggregated effect of these minor details can be quite large.

Picking up on small things is usually the domain of the pedant – the annoyance drawn from small language errors – such as the use of the word ‘enormity‘ as if it referred to size, ‘eccetera’ instead of et cetera, or ‘none of them are’ as opposed to ‘none of them is‘ – are banal and, in truth, this grievance lends itself to intellectual vanity more than anything.

In matters more ’serious’- and I use that term lightly – it can have an effect on your everyday life, and possibly your emotional well-being. For example, many people will go to a public toilet, take a piss, and rinse their hands under a cold (or warm) tap, dry them on their trousers/using a towel/using an automatic dryer – the effect is the same: none. If one’s hands are dirty, (Churchill’s famous retort after not washing his hands comes to mind – after being told by a colleague ‘In Eton, they teach us to wash our hands’, Churchill fired back: ‘In Harrow they teach us not to piss on our hands!’) then by adding water you actually worsen the problem, because handling the dirty faucet/door handle, you have given new bacteria a medium in which to multiply. Soap dissolves the oil ’sebum’ on your skin, which washes away the resident bacteria – without the emulsifying effect, they remain. It’s counter-intuitive, but it harks back to an ignorance or denial about microbes/pathogens. People with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) often over-compensate and are illogically fastidious in their washing (often using a bar of soap for each wash). But if you know this ‘minute’ detail, it can affect your behaviour.

Another example of this is the myth that reading in the dark/excessive reading is ‘bad’ for your eyes, or causes them damage. It doesn’t. There is no evidence that it does – so how did it become such a prevalent lie? Of this, of course, no one can be sure, just like the old lie told to children about the wind changing and making faces (though I suspect this was to save a parent embarrassment of having their weird child exposed!) However, reading a computer screen in a dark room is found to have adverse effects.

Antibiotic resistance is a real medical quandary – parents feed their children antibiotics, which means the child does not develop vital antibodies to fight infection later on in life – antibiotics are merely chemicals secreted by bacteria that are poisonous to other kinds of bacteria. When a bacterium mutates, it often becomes immune to the chemical previously used – so the patient must use yet another type and so on. This means that if I (or any other person who wasn’t molly-coddled as a child) get a nasty dose of infection and I go to use a standard antibiotic, I find it has become immune to it because unlearned, overprotective and media-controlled termite-mothers have ‘poisoned the well’ so to speak by over-indulging their child. It is a serious problem – there are only so many antibiotics! I have often heard ignorant, patently uneducated people speaking about giving their child antibiotics for a cold or flu. To anyone with a remote knowledge of biology, this causes one’s gears to grind very badly. Viruses are impervious to antibiotics – as they are not alive.

Another annoying ‘minor’ detail that is evident in everyday life, especially in winter, is the myth that ‘80%’ or some such ridiculous figure, of body heat is lost through the head – so basically if you wear a hat, you’re golden. This is a ridiculous nonsense piece of illogic – how do people believe it?

Now another piece of information that escapes people may seem from the outset to be quite ‘minute’, but on understanding a small piece of information, the person’s worldview may change. This particular ‘gripe’ I have refers to the question often asked by evolution-deniers as well as by people who claim to support it – without the remotest understanding, despite its all-encompassing importance. The question goes something like this: ‘If we evolved from apes, why are chimps and gorillas still around?’. Usually, on hearing this, a furious wrath descends on me, but quickly clears. The reason is, of course, that we did not evolve from chimps or gorillas – we share a common ancestor (as we do with all animals) going back a certain period of time (4 million years or so) It seems like a small point, but it is VERY important. Also, we did not evolve from Neanderthals. That is a myth.

Speaking of tiny differences, the fact that people claim to be sectarian (or don’t but are nonetheless) don’t realize the nuanced difference between different sect of their religion (as in the tiny differences between catholics and protestants, and the very tiny differences within the protestant faith – baptist,methodist,lutheran etc.) If people would actually read the doctrines they wouldn’t bother fighting.

Probably to most people, all of the aforementioned details are seen as obvious. You would be surprised though. It is the accrued of the above and many, many other ’small’ details that can have a real effect on people’s everyday behaviour. Just as someone with knowledge of endocrinology might roll with the punches of depression or ‘the fear’ a little better!

My purpose:

To inform anyone willing to open their minds and learn more about the truth, I will bring as many sides as I can to what ever argument I talk about in hope that the viewer will make a very informed decision.

Topics:

Religion (good or bad?)

The probability of god

Why atheism is not that bad

Altruism

Many subjects of Molecular Biology

Subjects of Astronomy

Evolution (why it is undeniable)

Irreducible Complexity

Intelligent Design

Great minds

and other atheistic topics….

Conclusion:

I will have hopefully helped any mind of making a decision they have been in search for. If anyone would like to go for a debate email me at JFlynn40824@gmail.com and I will set up a post just for the debate.

Thanks, Josh

My daily rant is about conpiracy theorists. Mainly the ones who have alternative governmental conspiracy theories about the collapse of the World Trade Center towers 1,2 and 7 on September 11, 2001. I figure that most of the people who have dedicated websites, blogs and videos about “911 conspiracy” either have a mental illness, just in it for the money. I’ll explain why I feel this way.

YouTube

Most of the conspiracy theory videos I’ve seen are on YouTube. They’re made by people who might sound like they know what they are talking about but in the end don’t have a rational facts to back up their argument. The proof to this is in the comments section. Listed are comments from many conspiracy believers and more often than not they don’t make any sense at all or can’t spell whatsoever. How am I supposed to take that seriously.

Rational Thinking vs. Irrational Thinking

I’ll admit they’re a pet peeve. Stupid people I mean. They believe anyone who says anything on the internet about their version of the facts of 911 yet how many of them took the time to read the report on 911? Alright I’m guessing the conspiracy theorist would debunk anything the government would publish but has their ever once been any tangible proof ever in history of a real governmental conspiracy to kill Americans by American leaders? I mean proof, not theories or proof that has disappeared.

If this issue is important to you to proof or disprove, one must educate one’s self to examine all angles of the argument.  I would rather listen to a proper structural engineer on his opinions of what happened on that dreadful day than someone on the internet that claims he knows the truth.

Not to mention Osama Bin Laden took responsibility for 911, why would he do that if he didn’t do it? Because he was in on the whole ‘Bush Conspiracy’? Speaking of George W. Bush, the man could handle anything in his job, how the world would he be able to pull off the work it would take for 911? All that manpower and no one talked? Nixon couldn’t even break into a hotelroom in 1972 without everyone finding out, how would Bush kill thousands without any governmental blabbing or documentation.

I’m wondering if conspiracy theorist have a psychological problem dealing with the fact that really bad people can kill us at anytime. I believe the guilty should be blamed, not the make-believe guilty.

Remember anyone can make anything sound good if you choose to believe it.

If you’re a scientist, or have experience with this technology, or a reliable source that is verifiable, I’d love to hear from you. because this is just plausible enough to scare me and exhilarate me at the same time… and leave me feeling like this might be a fake.

I mean, this is some really awesome technology, if it exists. think about what it could mean for places like the Sudan, or even rural areas in that battered, (and much face-palmed) but good hearted, old lady, my own U.S. of A.?

And that’s just for something like lighting a room for things like studying at night (Lincoln wouldn’t have had to wear glasses with these babies around, lol) . . . What about the other applications? extreme fuel efficiency, for instance? after all, think about how much heat comes off of a car’s engine, exhaust pipe, drivetrain, etc. … if all of that were kicking back into a hybrid’s fuel cell, we actually might get a car that would do three or four hundred miles to the gallon…

*boggles*

So before I get my hopes up, please come along and smash them ^^

’cause… yeah. *wants to do a “Fiddler On The Roof” dance to the beat from ‘If I Were A Rich Man’*

A quick video on some Martial Arts ‘Mysteries’ explained using simple physics and biology.

In light of all the “hubbub” and excitement surrounding the release of the new film “Sherlock Holmes” starring the very talented Robert Downey Jr, and the less talented yet still enchanting Rachel McAdams and Jude Law, I wanted to bring up an interesting fact about Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (the creator of the literary giant Sherlock Holmes) that most people know nothing about. Mr. Doyle was a very big believer in Spiritualism and all things of that nature and even went as far as to say that Harry Houdini actually had real psychic powers and just wasn’t really telling anybody the truth. Although Houdini and Doyle were friends, Houdini would (obviously) deny this statement on a basis of rationality. Houdini, while being the pre-eminent magicians of this or any time was also a dedicated student of rational thought and skepticism. Houdini detested when people claimed to have supernatural powers and often set out to prove those who proclaimed such a feat, false, and always succeeded. So, with such a reputation as an anti-supernaturalist, why would his friend Arthur Conan Doyle put forward that he really believe this to be true?

Because Arthur Conan Doyle believed in “fairies” and was a nut-job.

Let me backtrack. In 1917 two English cousins by the names of Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths aged 16 and 10 respectively, borrowed Elise’s father’s camera and used some elementary cardboard cut outs of fairies and took pictures of themselves interacting with said “fairies” and thus was born the Cottingley “Fairies” incident. The girls claimed the photographs were real, and that only they were the medium which could view and take pictures of the “fairies” and that if anyone else was witnessing the photos being taken, they wouldn’t work (nothing too suspicious there). One look at the grainy photos and any rational thinking person (like Houdini himself) would realize that these picture are fabricated and are a product of two teenage girls’ tom foolery.

There is the first photo that sparked the world’s interest in the existence of real fairies. That is Frances posing with the “fairies” although if you look closely you can see the waterfall in the background is blurred due to slow shutter speed on a moving object. However, the “fairies” though jumping, appear crystal clear with no blurring, an obvious check in the fabricated column.

There is picture number two. This time Elsie is shown with a “gnome”.

Arthur Conan Doyle saw these photos and was so convinced they showed true “fairies” in existence, that he wrote two pamphlets and an entire book on arguing the existence and explaining the history of “fairies” entitled The Coming of the Fairies, which is still in print. Conan Doyle also argued that only with more pictures could the argument for the existance of “fairies” finally be proven. So, low and behold, three years later the girls produced more photos featuring them patrolling nature with the “fairies” by their side. Conan Doyle was convinced and continued defending the “fairy” theory for years.

Of course, with most hoaxes, the shit inevitably hit the fan when Fred Gettings in 1971 found the very book that Elsie and Frances took the pictures of the “fairies” from (a children’s book that had come out in 1914 or 15) and the final nail in the coffin came when the girls themselves went on to confess that the photos were indeed faked, as if anyone with a rational thinking mind had any doubt. It’s just too bad that spiritualist and talented author Arthur Conan Doyle wasn’t around to hear how it was his belief in them and celebrity influence, that drove the girls to keep quiet about the truth behind those events.

And so, here we are. How is it, you ask, that Conan Doyle could create such a literary juggernaut as Sherlock Holmes, a rational thinking, level headed hero of thought and logical reasoning and he himself be fooled by pre-teen girls playing with cardboard cut outs and a father’s camera, not to mention go so far as to defend it to the point of published novels and pamphlets defending their authenticity? That, my friends, sounds like a case for Sherlock himself. Someone call Robert Downey Jr!

Source

“Psychic Derek Acorah is to attempt to make contact with late pop star Michael Jackson as part of two specially-commissioned shows for Sky 1.”

Or to paraphrase – Charlatan Derek Acorah is to pretend to make contact with the late pop start Michael Jackson in an attempt to exploit the dead and bullshit the living. Who the fuck has the right to make such an outlandish claim with absolute no empirical evidence to support what he’s doing? Despite Acorah be debunked on several times over (see here for one) he continues making money off the grief of others in a way that warrants no respects. The insensitive bastard.

Utter nonsense and dearly hope no-one tunes in, so there isn’t another one next week contacting Heath Ledger.

Cette série d’articles expliquera ce qu’est la glossolalie dans les milieux chrétiens charismatiques et réfutera un certain nombre de croyance entourant cette pratique, notamment son caractère surnaturel. Nous nous appuierons pour ce faire sur des articles scientifiques provenant de la psychologie, la neurologie, l’anthropologie et la linguistique.

La glossolalie désigne un acte de parole inintelligible et répétitif. L’expression est le plus souvent employée dans un contexte religieux. Le fait de “parler en langues” dans les milieux chrétiens charismatiques, ainsi que certaines transes rituelles, impliquent de la glossolalie. Nous entendrons ici par “charismatique” l’ensemble des mouvements religieux croyant en la possibilité de “parler en langues”, incluant notamment les branches du pentecôtistes du protestantisme.

Au sein des dénominations charismatiques, on considère généralement que la glossolalie est en fait de la xénoglossie, c’est à dire le fait de parler dans des langues pourtant inconnues du sujet. Cette doctrine provient d’un récit de la pentecôte dans les Actes des Apôtres:

¹ Quand le jour de la Pentecôte arriva, les disciples ^]étaient tous rassemblés au même endroit.
² Tout à coup, un grand bruit survint du ciel: c’était comme si un violent coup de vent s’abattait sur eux et remplissait toute la maison où ils se trouvaient assis.
³ Au même moment, ils virent apparaître des sortes de langues qui ressemblaient à des flammèches. Elles se séparèrent et allèrent se poser sur la tête de chacun d’eux.
⁴ Aussitôt, ils furent tous remplis du Saint-Esprit et commencèrent à parler dans différentes langues, chacun s’exprimant comme le Saint-Esprit lui donnait de le faire.
⁵ Or, à ce moment-là, des Juifs pieux, venus de toutes les nations du monde, séjournaient à Jérusalem.
⁶ En entendant ce bruit, ils accoururent en foule et furent saisis de stupeur. En effet, chacun d’eux les entendait parler dans sa propre langue. (Actes 2:1-6, trad. Semeur)

Les chrétiens croient donc généralement que “les langues” correspondent à des langues véritables, ou du moins à des langues qui étaient parlées au Proche-Orient au premier siècle. Le Web regorge justement de récits anecdotiques selon lesquels un croyant aurait parlé, pendant un service religieux, telle ou telle langue qu’il ou elle ne connaissait pas.

Dans d’autres interprétations, basées plutôt sur le premier épitre aux corinthiens, les langues ne sont pas une langue humaine, mais un langage spirituel. Les actes de glossolalie devraient donc être interprétés par un autre membre de la congrégation. Cette interprétation est toutefois contestée. Voyons 1 Corinthiens 12:10:

A un autre, il est donné de faire des miracles, un autre reçoit une activité prophétique, un autre le discernement de ce qui vient de l’Esprit divin. Ici, quelqu’un reçoit la faculté de s’exprimer dans des langues inconnues, et il est donné à un autre d’interpréter ces langues.

Le mot en italique n’est pas dans le texte Grec. Il s’agit d’une interprétation, laquelle semble indiquer que le pratiquant de la glossolalie parle une langue qui est inconnue des humains, dont divine ou angélique. Il serait déjà plus juste de lire que la langue est inconnue du locuteur, ou de la congrégation. D’autres traductions parlent non pas de langues inconnues, mais de langues différentes. En fait, le sens littéral du Grec dans 1 Cor 12:10 est “des langues (glossa) de sorte (genos) différente (heteros)”.

Bien que le débat concernant la nature des “langues” soit toujours en cours dans les milieux charismatiques, il est clair que la Bible ne parle pas de babillages aléatoires mais bien d’un langage. L’usage du mot Grec glossa dans le Nouveau Testament renvoie à des actes de parole cohérents, non au fait de faire des sons dépourvus de sens.

On devrait donc s’attendre à ce que les “langues” correspondent à des langues véritables, ou du moins possèdent une structure linguistique authentique. La prochaine partie examinera cette hypothèse sur le plan de la linguistique. Les “langues” de la glossolalie charismatique sont-elles de vraies langues?

I haven’t posted any science-related stuff on here in waaaay too long. Part if it has been Next Big Nashville, which I’m still recovering from, along with other general business. That being said, here are some goodies for you:

NASA has a renewed focus on the moon, especially to determine how much, if any, water is there.  One of the ways they decided to do that was to smash the rocket stage of the current satellite into the surface and analyze the result plume of dust and debris. Sunday they did just that, and the results are still coming in, but it was definitely a successful impact. Check out more about the LCROSS mission here.

I’ve mentioned the 2012 doomsday myth on here before and linked to various website that thoroughly debunk it, but today one article caught my eye. I’d never even thought to research what the Mayan descendants have to say about this issue. Turns out they are pretty smart and fully understand that the world won’t end just because their Long Count calendar ends. The whole steaming pile of bullshit that is the 12/21/2012 doomsday myth is entirely a creation of modern Western culture that’s been imposed on the Mayan culture and one of their many calendars. The point to drive home here is that THE VERY PEOPLE WHO INVENTED THE CALENDAR DON’T EVEN BELIEVE THE HYPE BECAUSE IT’S BULLSHIT! They simply take it for what it is: an anniversary of sorts, a time when the Long Count calendar starts over again. Read the article at Discovery News.

Remember when Stephen Colbert lead a huge campaign to get the newest node for the Space Station named after him? While he did win the popular vote, NASA had the final say and didn’t name it after him, but they did come up with a ridiculous name for the new treadmill for the ISS that, when abbreviated, spells C.O.L.B.E.R.T. and the astronauts just completed its assembly. Here’s a pic of them using it for the first time:

Via Space.com

In this grand adventure within a grand adventure I would call my life, I feel I am learning about love through my desire to document fear. The initial intention of a movie entitled ‘Canada Knows’ was to document that we know about 911 and the possibility of something coming to “End Times”. As we discuss in private and now in public those theories that make us embrace our personal histories that quite often lead to more clues about what we know for sure, I am finding we know much more as individuals…those who have become simply aware of themselves and the impact of their presence even to the most definite end that we symbiotically feed the trees like they feed us.
Perspectives in this so called movement of truth are quite varied yet commonality is shown. In times of need as in times of hunger one is hell bent on stating what they know for sure, real or not. With a desire to save the world, as it is their own that is being threatened. Not only can one person not defend themselves alone, an army of persons would not solve this either, it is almost a coming together of separateness. A desire to believe what one knows for sure rather than what one has been informed to do or about.

I feel I am not a resource for anything but the same as debunkers. I am not an architect or a first responder. I was not in New York then or have I ever visited what I feel to be a phenomenal gathering of individual minds. A community like no other yet no different. The rights of New Yorkers are not what they should be. The denial of a referendum for that community after they have spoken up by taking that step to say what they want, is downright inhuman. Where do we go from here if diplomacy is ignored.

Please don’t riot. That is why they keep poking us with sticks. Violence is never the answer, especially to those that oppress. Fire stokes the Fire.

Could we resolve to stop the fighting? Can we work together without thinking that togetherness enhances that force and it should be used. I feel this is a new thing that I am reporting on. A newness that self polices. No One wants to be a part of violence. Just the same as someone who debunks 911, they are simply ignoring their personal choice to listen.

Almost as tragic as those 3000 not feeling one iota of justice. What if they are watching and are among us? Not that I definitely believe it to be so. But what if?

Everyone wants to play that game. I like to think I’m on the side of truth. And truth don’t take sides.

Peace
Max

The bottom line is that nobody except for insane maniacs would hang on to the creation myth, if it was not for the eternal life lies.. aka “Nigerian wager”.
Imagine taking such wager, get the reward after you are DEAD It almost makes Nigerian scam seem legit

The reference therein is to this debunked rumor, complete with a false police report, suggesting Beck committed a rape in 1990.  The linked website refutes the rumor, as does the site set up to promote it, aptly called DidGlennBeckRapeandMurderaYoungGirlin1990.com, which says that what they’re doing is an attempt to satirize tactics used by Beck himself.  Clearly, some people didn’t get it.  (Equally clearly, some people of my own ideological persuasion are just as stupid as those attracted to Glenn Beck.  Of course they’re in Adams Morgan.)

I suppose I compromise my own morals by promoting such a canard, but it is supposed to be satire and I really don’t like Glenn Beck and I really am desperate for visitors.  I think it’s about time I start believing in a moral system which simply takes the aggregate of lots of different motivations and adds the value together in a fairly random spastic way which reconfirms what I wanted to do in the first place.  Does such a thing exist?

Ethics is fun.

Props by the way to Andrew Fogle.  (Who of course was in Adams Morgan.)  Ironically this is at once the most comprehensible and most false communication I’ve ever had with you.

No Ghosts Found? Now What?

We have all been there.

You spend countless hours reviewing evidence collected from an investigation and you end up empty. Now what?

First I would like to say that ghost hunting is not always about getting the ‘find of the century.’ It is a study and process trying to find the right way to prove the existence of the paranormal.

That is tough job even when you have all the cool equipment. When you wind up empty it is a good time to sit down and reflect on the investigation and come up with some answers as to what can be done to improve your probability to find good evidence.

Now, mind you that just because they say their home is haunted does not mean it is. You know that already.

Whenever I come up empty on an investigation which will happen, I like to ask myself the following questions to help ensure that I take the right steps in the future.

1. How viable where the clients claims?
2. Was I able to debunk the claims?
3. Did I spend enough time going over the audio?
4. Have I had a peer review the evidence?
5. Have I thoroughly reviewed all the images?
6. Have I spent enough careful time going over the video?

You have to be honest. You need to carefully review each item and give it your full attention. Neglecting this will ultimately result in the possibility of missing one key piece of information that you client may need.

That is why Posey County Ghost Hunters in Mount Vernon, Indiana has a careful review process and spends the extra time to ensure that we give the client our full attention they deserve.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t
• 

UN exaggerated warming 6-fold: the scare is over

SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the publication of a major paper by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, demonstrating by direct measurement that outgoing long-wave radiation is escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, showing that the UN has exaggerated global warming 6-fold.Report, page 3.

Lindzen’s paper on outgoing long-wave radiation shows the “global warming” scare is over. Thanks to recent peer reviewed papers that have not been mentioned in the mainstream news media, we now know that the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is having very little effect on the climate. Page 3.

The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-6.

Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.

Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006. Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have suggested. Pages 10-12.

Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent – on a 30-year rising trend – reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.

Read entire article

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/scientists-debunk-un-global-warming/

The Kap’n here.

I’ve been tracking back some of the sites that we’re getting referrals from regarding the North Korea story, and viewing the threads at said sites.

It’s my turn to alleviate some confusion regarding the North Korea post.

1)

I won’t believe this until further evidence.
how/why did the man/woman:

A) Get Internet Connection
B) Be trusted by the government enough not to be regulated
C) Come into contact with a bunch of bloggers in the USA
D) Speak English to relative extent
E) Use “A…” the entire time, it’s not necessary in an online convo.

Right, let’s address these concerns:

A) This can’t be revealed, along with the method, in order to protect our source.

B) I can’t answer this, but remember, it’s possible that they could have breached North Korean controls, or piggybacked a Chinese/Japanese connection.

C) If you’d actually read the post (or even our URL!), and the first addendum with any intent, you’d realise that firstly, we’re British, not American, and secondly, the contact was accidental.

D) On this Wikipedia page, we can see that: “After graduating from people’s school, students enter either a regular secondary school or a special secondary school that concentrates on music, art, or foreign languages. These schools teach both their specialties and general subjects.” – This adequately explains “X”’s rudimentary grasp of the English language.

E) I’m not so sure that North Koreans know internet etiquette as you or I would know it. Also, the time taken to type was so long that the “a…” was quite useful to know that X hadn’t been assaulted by authorities.

2)

“So, some guy spouts incomprehensible gibberish to a couple of bloggers with korean sprinkled in and they think he’s a magical informant from the north who happens to know state secrets.”

Not at all. Not only was the only Korean in the chat sent by us, but nowhere do we say “OMGAWD NORTH KOREAN STATE SEKRITS REVEELED”. This is simply a citizen’s view of the state in which they live. It’s not groundbreaking, but the fact that it got out from within is.

3)
a)

“I think it’s an illegit blog post. It’s probably a troll.”

We’ve tried our best to show why we think that this is real, but as we’ve said, even we aren’t certain this stuff is true, even though we believe it is.

b)

[[Quoted: "herro" and "sreepiing"]]
So they learned all their English from Team America?

Well, way to take it out of context.
Herro was a typo of “hero” – even we native English speakers could make that one with little to no trouble. In addition, “X” corrected the “sreepiing” typo directly afterward.
The award for “hey guys, what’s context” goes to you, sir.

Not as much to deal with that time, and probably a good thing too, seeing as I’m rather ill. There were a few things on the comments for the original post, such as some confusion surrounding “grand poobah”, which were solved there.

We only attempt to explain these issues in order to a) protect our source’s credibility and b) help our source’s message get out without scrutiny that could be otherwise avoided.

2012 – that’s probably the most famous date in history of conspiracies and doomsday dates. We’ve got sources all over predicting cataclysmic events including the “ending” of the Mayan calendar, the predictions of “prophets” such as Nostradomus and Hopi, the chinese and the I Ching as well as others. Oh, let’s not forget the abominable Planet X, Nibiru. Seriously? Thats a lot of evidence. Even Hollywood has become fortune tellers: Armageddon? Knowing? Doomsday? The Day the Earth Stood Still? They’ve gotta be telling the truth, I mean, it’s Hollywood.

Climate change – ugh, we can’t forget Climate Change. Global warming is a warning to us all. Not really a warning – more like a heads up…”enjoy it while you can” I guess. So, with all this evidence, I believe it should be posted scientifically. If it’s not analyzed thoroughly, then it’s not scientific. If it’s not scientific, then it’s just a belief (and we know where unfactuated beliefs get us).

The Mayan Calendar
First off, the Mayans did not come up with that calendar – they adopted it from their ancestors of the region as did the other like cultures of their time. Secondly, the Mayan calendar was one of the most “off” calendars in history. It wasn’t even as accurate as the Julius calendar (and that’s saying something). The Mayan months were 20 days long (sometimes called 20 day weeks) and a “solar” year consisted of 18 of them. Yes, solar is in quotations. It’s not really a solar year – their calendar days were integers. As we know, nothing on earth ticks in exact integers for the same reason there is never a perfect circle no where in existance. So, for this, a year to them was 365 days (seems right….right?). The day, in fact, is not 365 days (and if you know what a leap year is, you’ll know why it’s not 365. It’s more like 365.25 (approx). So in other words, with their days as long as they are, doomsday has already passed. But, lets say that their calendar WAS accurate and their calendar “ends” in 2012 – what “ends” is not their calendar. The Mayan calendar DOES NOT END IN 2012. Only a cycle of the calendar, the 13th cycle to be exact, ends. What happens when it does? Destruction? Calamity? 2013? Yep, 2013 will come around just like 2012 did, just like 2009 did and so on. Not quite proving it? The 14th Mayan cycle starts as soon as the 13th ends on December 21st, 2012.

Nostradamus
What a name. Perhaps one of the most famous “prophets” of all time (except for maybe Matthew, Mark, Luke and John…and eh, we’ll throw Muhammed in there too). Nostradamus 1) was a severe drug addict, 2) practiced visioning with “demons” and admitting himself and in his writings that we was surely going to hell for what he was doing, 3) wrote so damned funny that anything he said could be interpreted to mean anything and lastly, 4) predicting events that take place AFTER 2012. Now why the hell would he predict things that happen TO MANKIND if he predicted the world would end in 2012? I’ll let you talk to yourself about that one…..

Knowing
It was a movie. It was Hollywood and special effects. First off, if our Sun was going to explode or erupt with this gigantic solar flare, we would be seeing the same event in stars which are approximately the same size as our sun and around the same age. We don’t. And there are thousands of them. The chances? Do the math. 5 Billion Years, Thousands of Sun-like stars, 0 events like that in Knowing.

Pole Shift
So you think the poles are all of a sudden going to flip or shift or whatever? Get over yourself, this isn’t science fiction. Do you realize how much energy it would take to shift our poles? If a source of that much energy was upon us 1) we would already know and 2) we’d be gone long before the poles shifted. We’re talking enough energy to permanently warp our magnetosphere. That’s like having enough energy to shove the Earth into Mars. Anything with that much force would kill us all LONG before our poles moved. Yes, the poles move naturally – but slowly. It may take thousands if not hundreds of thousands of years for our poles to move, but they do move, only slowly.

Nibiru
And finally, we come to Nibiru, the tenth planet coined, Planet X. First off, Nibiru isn’t the tenth planet. Nibiru isn’t a star. Nibiru…..doesn’t exist. If anything were close enough to be able to collide with earth in 3 years (as Nibiru is supposably forecasted to do) and is massive enough to completely wipe the planet clean of life, then we would most definately know about it by now. Think the government is covering it up? Well, there’s one aspect of life the government CANT cover up and that’s astronomy. Some of the best astronomers in the world with some of the best equipment in the world are amateur astronomers, people like you and me sitting at home looking through a telescope. If there was something out there, with over a million amateur astronomers out there all over the world, we’d already know about it.

Climate Change
Climate change. Yeah, it’s bad. Most likely, it’ll kill 30% or so of all species on earth. Nothing will be the same. Humans will survive it though. As will the planet. Period.

Back in April, I wrote a two-part review about the book Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins.  It seems that my post pops up for people who are searching for that book, but with an additional word added to their search: DEBUNK.

Now I agree that we should all be suspicious about broad-sweeping accusations such as the ones leveled in Perkins’ book.  But before all of you looking to write Perkins off as a whack job close the case in your mind, I recommend you watch a documentary from 2001 about Jamaica’s economy and the IMF.  Life and Debt by Stephanie Black uses the stark contrast between the tourist side of Jamaica and that of the native population to highlight how post-colonial Jamaica was exploited by the IMF.

I know a term like exploited is harsh and that the IMF is not only to blame, but Michael Manley, former Prime Minister of Jamaica and by no means a saint, asks a tough question about the IMF.  He says that to find out whose interest is served by the IMF, one must look at who setup IMF up in the first place.

The U.S. currently has  16.79% of the vote in the IMF.  While 16.79% seems like a small percentage, when compared to the next closest country Japan, who has a whopping 6.02%, the disparity starts to stand out.  When that disparity is shown in real numbers, the U.S. has 371,743 votes and Japan 133,378, a difference of 238,365 votes, it becomes obvious who calls the shots.

So when a documentary like Life and Debt shows how the Jamaican dairy industry is devastated by U.S. companies dumping powered milk into the country at prices far below cost, one has to ask how those U.S. companies got the right to do so in the first place.  Considering that at the time milk powder had a 137% subsidy from the U.S. government and America’s dominance of the IMF, dairy farmers in Jamaica didn’t stand a chance.

Good luck in your quest to debunk.  I hope you don’t pass over the truth however by blindly trying prove America’s innocence, and by extension yours.  I think we all wish what he said wasn’t true, but the lives of others prove differently.

-mike

I found a really cool, non-partisan site, Politifact.com, that debunks political talking points with facts. I’ll post one from time to time.

In the health care bill, “The ‘Health Choices Commissioner’ will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.”

Actually, the Bill says you pick your plan

“It may be the longest chain e-mail we’ve ever received. A page-by-page analysis of the House health care bill argues that reform will end the health care system as we know it: “Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! … Page 42: The ‘Health Choices Commissioner’ will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None. … Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.”

To explain this one, we will start with an explanation of the overall bill, which was unveiled July 14, 2009. The bill envisions that everyone will be required to have health insurance. People who get health insurance through work satisfy this requirement right off the bat.

People who don’t get insurance through work or another group will go to the health care exchange; it’s designed to help people who have to go off on their own to buy health insurance, and for small businesses with few employees. The reason for the exchange is that the government wants to regulate insurers to make sure that health plans clearly explain what they offer, can’t refuse people for pre-existing conditions, and must offer basic levels of service.”

-excerpt from Politifact.com