Popular Mechanics vs. Loose Change Debate

****From http://whisperingloudly.spaces.live.com***** Loud Whispers

I just finished watching the debate between the magazine Popular Mechanics who produced the book ''Debunking The Myths of 9/11'' I believe, and I tried log back into the site 911blogger.com to get more information for this post but it must be flooded with hits because it's down right now. During the debate though, I noticed how young the film makeres of Loose_Change are, but also how passionate they are. Even though I don't believe it went very well for the youngsters, they don't have much to debate. Everything is on film.

The editor of the magazine of Popular Mechanics and the books editor are visibly better schooled at debate but there's some key points I'd like to mention about their side of the debate......
The editor of Popular Mechanics has twice stated about pictures he has seen of wreckage inside the Pentagon and the photos of the other 6-8 security camera's perched atop that captured the ''plane'' approaching the building. The editor of Popular Mechanics stated this on todays debate and earlier last month on a broadcast on an Arizona radio station. On the broadcast from Arizona, the host asked why the government would allow the editor of a magazine to view those photos but not the rest of the world. He didn't have an answer whatsoever---- except that he wasn't allowed to publish them. But he stood by his comment that HE was allowed to see them.
The editor of Popular Mechanics today stated that there were pictures of wreckage inside the Pentagon. The question remains. Where are they? Why was he able to view them? And why can't the public see for themselves? Shouldn't Popular Mechanics publish them to dispell ''conspiracy theories''?
The editor of PM said that the live coverage of the events shown in the film were broadcasted in real time and insinuated that people were confused and that the reports coming that day could not be taken as accurate accounts. So when is it a good time to report a live event?'' -------Now?
The editor of the book by PM described himself just as that and not an expert. But he did claim experts thay talked to in the fields of engineering but named none that I can recall. Each time a piece of the film was shown, the editors didn't provide answers, they dispelled what they had seen as the way ''conspiracy theorists'' do things.
Well, I think there wasn't enough time in the debate. The young guys were outclassed but it doesn't matter. Popular Mechanics has shown nothing. No films, no photos, no comparison videos of building demolitions....nothing but hearsay.

All anyone has to do is watch the film. Period. The debate barely touched on the evidence documented over the world of who in the government knew what was about to occur. If the editors of PM and their book want's to challenge 2 young kids on whose engineers are better than the others, let them. That's about what that debate covered. Now that that's over, let's deal with the real issues brought about in the film Loose_Change .

I think the young guys did very well, & their film says it all..

I think the young guys did very well, and they are filmakers not debaters! They evoked a number of baldfaced lies out of the PM pricks, leaving no dobt in my mind that they are gov't agents or paid shills.

Furthermore, I have the PM book and it's a joke, whereas anyone who watches Loose Change should come away with very serious inclinations that 9/11 was indeed an inside job!


Aslo we discussed PM stated that the towers sent signals up into the air so a call at 35k feet gets connected. I am sorry to say that antenna design for cell towers deals with EIRP "Effective Istropic Radiated Power" - Engineers design antenna arrays for land-based communications. Radiated energy leaves the antenna on axis and then fold back aroung to the ground plane. These are low power devices so wasting power upward in not done. Check one of these antennas - they look like boxes mounted vertically on the mast..

PM guys were complete b.s. on cell phones...

Back in 2001, my friends & I were constantly loosing calls or often not getting connected at all in/around the NYC metro area, on the ground.

PM is telling us that cell phones worked at 35,000 feet in planes going 500 mph over rural Pennsylvania??? Oh what b.s.!!! (Plus, after the 1st & 2nd towers were struck, cell phones in the whole Northeast were jammed-up with calls.)

Loose Change has to distance itself from No Planes

It is destroying their credibility altogether

Loose Change filmmakers vs. P.M.

I watched the Loose Change guys on
The 9/11/06 edition of Democracy Now! (I'm a regular watcher of DN!)
In substantive terms, they did well. They had hard facts, while the P.M. guys had various vague statements about the most thorough investigation ever and a few weak factual assertions.

However, Avery and Bermas made a terrible mistake by snickering and laughing as Miegs and Dunbar spoke, and repeatedly calling them liars. For people who have not seriously looked into the research themselves, and are watching with relatively open minds, such an approach comes across as impassioned, but disrespectful and unprofessional, and therefore runs the risk of being interpreted as kooky. The point is not whether the P.M. position is laughable and dishonest, but that saying so in the wrong way or the wrong context can actually end up hindering acceptance of the truth.