Zeitgeist

[James-M]

The thing is though, there are lots of reasons for or against the way they collapsed. If you asked someone to make a video with the subject of making people believe that it was just a terrorist attack, and collapsed due to the planes, then i'm sure that would also change people's views on it all, and possibly make them believe that it was just a terrorist attack. A lot of it is the fact it is meant to be a biased video, telling you ONLY the reasons they want to to make people believe what they want. It's just like a debate where the other side aren't allowed to argue back, everybody is just seeing one side of the story, seeming to be so true that surely there is nothing different to believe...

I mean, what about the fact that as the towers collapsed, the top of the tower stayed intact as it fell? It can't be just a coincidence that the only floors being blown up are the ones BELOW where the planes crashed...

[Nick Garland]

If you watch the video you will see what Smo is saying instead of trying to argue without watching it. Everyone has seen both sides if you follow the news, there was a huge investigation into how the metal buckled and this is also included in the video IF YOU WATCHED IT.

Its another one of those conspiracy things, it all depends on what you want to believe. In a way it is contradicting itself as it does mention something about everyone believing what is fed to them on the tv, well this is a film and its doing exactly the same just trying to make people believe the opposite of what is on tv. If that makes sense.

The third one is how some very clever people created panic in america till a lot of banks went bust, after they won independance from the English Empire as they did not like the central bank idea. They held some meeting and created what is still in place today, a central bank where by the bank loans money to the government with interest instantly thus creating a perminent debt. They then re-call it all and then lend it back out etc, everytime causing more debt. Eventually this led to the wall street crash in 1929.

If you watch it all it does kinda make sense, I studied this in history so already half knew what was going on.

[James-M]

I understand what you're saying, but if I did watch it, then I may not be able to have a different opinion, and therefore not be able to argue, as I would be agreeing with Smo because I would've been filled with the same biased opinions and biased facts* so that I would believe nothing else apart from what the movie is telling me, which it is trying to do.

*When I say biased facts, I mean only facts they want to show you which will lead you to making a biased opinion.

EDIT - Have now watched the Vid. It's kinda worrying how after about 9 mins through the movie, I felt myself believing what they were telling me, I seemed to find myself becoming brainwashed...It just goes to show how things like this can brainwash people really, and lead them to believe many different things, possibly changing theire views on something totally. Maybe i'm being arrogant to this because I believe it is genuine terrorist attacks. Like has been said, it is purely up to what you believe in. Once you believe in something, it is hard to change your view, and you feel that what everyone else says, they are wrong. Even i'm biased, and I think with things like this it is very hard to have an unbiased view and understand both sides of the argument totally. I'm just gonna stop thinking about it now and give my brain a rest ...Nothing comes of opinions.

Edited June 23, 2007 by trials pie

[Nick Garland]

It is all opinion based even when someone lays solid facts on the table its up to your mind to decide what you want to belibve.

I am torn on whether to believe it all or not, it is believable but then again you have to think "is shit bull or not"?

[Dr. Nick Riviera]

Zomg!!! Aleins Found in area 51!!!!!!!111!!

[Greetings]

what i was trying to get at was if he cannot intepret words correctly to convey what he is saying; then on what grounds can he even begin to slate this program that is more than likely formed by many P.h.d staff?

First of all, this was probably formed by a bunch of people who are scared to leave the house thinking the world around them is not unlike the one portrayed in Orwell's 1984. Secondly - they take two facts about how banks work and base everything on that. I couldn't be arsed to go over it again but at one point they were talking about "something mysterious" which in fact is called a public debt.

There was also a graph of M3 stocks there, which according to the authors proves that the central bank has to issue more and more money to cover the debt created from issuing money. First of all, it's only M0 stocks that the central bank can control directly - and M0 is only a small percentage of M3. M3 stocks which they show on the graph are largely dependent on the reserve requirements and are generated chiefly by commercial banks - if you deposit $1000 and the reserve is 20%, that will generate an extra $5000 of M3. That is what the whole f**king economy runs on and where we get money for investments from. Also, the increase in M3 stocks from 1950-2000 is due to the economic growth and NOT to having to issue more and more money to cover the debt. I see no connection between that and what they are talking about - this just proves that they can put any graph/picture/quote into that video to make it look "dangerously true" whereas as a matter of fact, it's not.

Another thing is, that if you issue say $1000 with a 1% interest rate, you have to issue another $10 to cover the debt, then 10c etc. So the cost is not "so bloody high that we become slaves", it's f®=1/(100-r) where r is the interest rate. Issuing $1000 with a 1% interest rate, the total cost is $1010,10. Doesn't sound as bad as in that video does it? Seriously man, go over the points they talk about there, it's utter bullshit.

Edited June 23, 2007 by Inur

[Dr. Nick Riviera]

inur > *

[Simon]

not all that spectacular it seems.....otherwise this film would have been stopped, surely?

Not at all, then more people would believe it. The way people think.

Not watched it, nor am i going to, but the 9/11 short change one was super interesting, but this one just sounds a bit far fetched and not as well articulated as the 9/11 one.

[Tomm]

Why would the inside fall in the first place? It's reinforced steel girders and may I remind you that no other steel reinforced building such as the Twin Towers has ever fallen due to fire in the entire history of man.

To be fair, a place flying into a building is completely unprecedented. You can't do crash tests on buildings where you fly planes into them and see if they're still standing. No-one knew for certain what would happen, at all. Similarly, the WTC was one of the biggest buildings in the world - a completely unique structure. So to use the example of other similar structures doesn't really tell the whole truth.

lol @ inur too - I had a feeling the video was complete bollocks but I couldn't prove it because I know nothing about economics. So well done

[Simpson]

watch any video of the collapse and you will see plumes of smoke blowing out windows 10-15 stories below the collapsing debris.

Ever knocked down a wall? how much dust is left in the rooms afterwards? a good mm, now times that by the ammount of 47 storys compressing down on top of 1 another, f**king brick dust, fumes, explosions will happen anywhere. Not watched much yet ill bother to watch it all tommorow but these programmes do infuriate me sooooooo much, just because its like the myspace bullitins they put it in a complicated "scientific" mumbo jumbo and stamp "oh 5 blokes with Phd's did it" so therefore they must obiously be right is total bullshit, ill watch it fully tommorow

[Hendrix]

Number 2 was really eye opening. But it could very easily be fake, but I don't know!

[RicH_87]

not gonna read this whole thread. can't be arsed getting into an argument, however i would just like to say.

would a world government be such a bad thing? would a world with just one large country really be that bad??

at the end of the day the public would be oblivious to the truth, but they would be happy and more wealthy and all have jobs and all go out on the weekends.

if you have read brave new world or 1984 or any of that sort of book, the public are under control, but if they behave themselves they lead a lot happier lives than anyone does nowadays.

to be honest i don't care, i'll no doubt be dead by the time anything like this comes about, but for the people throwing fits over a world empire, what is so great about modern day culture that you are so eager to protect?

[Extreme_biker0]

not gonna read this whole thread. can't be arsed getting into an argument, however i would just like to say.

would a world government be such a bad thing? would a world with just one large country really be that bad??

An excellent topic for discussion!

Too bad i've had a drink!

However, I think one of the main conceived advatages would be that different coutries go to war. Obviously one super state would be less likely to go to war, becasue that would mean civil war, and there have been far fewer of those than conventional wars. There would still, in the early decades, be segregation of the people becasue of religion/race etc, but over time under the flag the same country, people would forget their differences, I reckon. Especially seeing as the world govornment would be able to start funding missions to mars and stuff to really put into perspective how petty it is to fuss over immigrants from another part of the world coming to take over your jobs becasue they'd work for less (something that would probably dies out quickly anyway).

But consider this.

If you don't like this govornment, your vote is 1 in 60,000,000. If you didn't like the world govornment, your vote would be diluted by over 100 times, and those people would be from all over the world, not just your island, and therefore probably not care abou t your issue/have issues of their own. Can't get policy changed? You can't even move to a different country!

As much of a waste of resources as it may appear, I think many separate leaderships are a basic human instinct, like competing tribes. The way forward is to get the separate leaders to all get along, and establish vital trade routes making it worth nobodys while to break a relationship with another country.

I wish i was back down the pub drinking, cos this is boring the shit out of me.

[Smo™]

To be fair, a place flying into a building is completely unprecedented. You can't do crash tests on buildings where you fly planes into them and see if they're still standing. No-one knew for certain what would happen, at all. Similarly, the WTC was one of the biggest buildings in the world - a completely unique structure. So to use the example of other similar structures doesn't really tell the whole truth.

lol @ inur too - I had a feeling the video was complete bollocks but I couldn't prove it because I know nothing about economics. So well done

Well in that case the lead designer/project manager who designed the Towers obviously had no idea what he was on about. In all the interviews where he's been asked such questions he stands by the designs and perpetually claims that the buildings were created to withstand such impacts. Even the Empire State didn't collapse when a plane flew into it and that building is older and the structure weaker.

[Tomm]

Yeah, but that's what I mean. He designed it to withstand a plane crash, but no-one really knew what would happen in the situation, because it never happened before. That's what unprecedented means...

How big is a 747 compared to a Mitchell B25 (the one that flew into the Empire State Building)?

[Dr. Nick Riviera]

Tomm, not forgetting the massively larger amounts of jet fuel compared to what would have been on the b25, and the fact the buildings were built 50 years apart.

smo, you can't argue a theory as fact. it may be interesting, but it's not been proven as the truth.

[rocktrials]

just watched 2....and wow

Love the bit about the molten pools of metal, and how only thing possible to do that was Thermite, and how the girders are cut diagonally.

[Joel]

I understand what you're saying, but if I did watch it, then I may not be able to have a different opinion, and therefore not be able to argue, as I would be agreeing with Smo because I would've been filled with the same biased opinions and biased facts* so that I would believe nothing else apart from what the movie is telling me, which it is trying to do.

*When I say biased facts, I mean only facts they want to show you which will lead you to making a biased opinion.

EDIT - Have now watched the Vid. It's kinda worrying how after about 9 mins through the movie, I felt myself believing what they were telling me, I seemed to find myself becoming brainwashed...It just goes to show how things like this can brainwash people really, and lead them to believe many different things, possibly changing theire views on something totally. Maybe i'm being arrogant to this because I believe it is genuine terrorist attacks. Like has been said, it is purely up to what you believe in. Once you believe in something, it is hard to change your view, and you feel that what everyone else says, they are wrong. Even i'm biased, and I think with things like this it is very hard to have an unbiased view and understand both sides of the argument totally. I'm just gonna stop thinking about it now and give my brain a rest ...Nothing comes of opinions.

Fair play if you don't believe it but you have to think logically. Why no passengers in the plane? but have a passport (in perfect condition) of someone ALIVE who cant even fly a small plane to be able to into a ring with a 50 mile diameter without difficulty. Aren't you 1 bit curious of why the building didnt fall to the side? And to do a controlled demolition of a building, you rig the frame with expolisives on each floor and each set floor to go after the other from top to bottom.

Also to the second part. I am almost 100% certain governments do some f**ked up stuff but what can we do! I believe what the video is saying but what can we honestly do. Things are f**ked up.

Thank you for your interest in Zeitgeist.

Zeitgeist was created as a not for profit work to inspire people to start looking at the world

from a more critical perspective. The large Internet response for this film was very unexpected,

as the work itself is not finished. The Google release was simply to show immediate friends

& consultants. Over the course of the next few weeks a new version of the work will be presented.

In all humility I want to point out that 99% of the information in the current work is accurate.

The 1% that is highly debatable is going to be clarified or removed. The graphics are also going to be

improved. Furthermore, on this site there will be a source list for the entire film, detailed by segment.

It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth, but find out for themselves.

Thank you

Statement on their website.

To the third part, not fully watched but doesn't surprise me.

To first part, I feel soo free. I mean I used to be a christan and then I realised how stupid it was but I still sorta believed there is a god. Not anymore. I never heard of the 200 over virgin born micrle workers born on the 25th dec with 12 people at there side and then die for 3 days and arise again. I feel so relaxed lol.

Overall now knowing that most stuff is bullshit, I am not going to give a shit so much now.

[br3n]

Watched 1/3 videos so far and im defiantly watching the other 2...

its all very well to say the bible is a load of bollocks... but to explain everything and have all the research in place is a different matter.

I suppose these videos (such as the 9/11 ones) are only really circulating and sucessing because of the net.

[Matt_Tupman]

This has now been made into a complete film. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331#

One point on part 2 that no-one has talked about is building 7! Not even the US goverment could talk their way out of that WATCH IT!! fire what a load of bull that was a controlled demolition and if you don't belive that your just another fool who has been brainwashed by media. Who by the way never said a thing about this building.

[br3n]

Video 2 is a shorter, much less detailed explanation of what happened (or could have) on 9/11 and even uses parts from the other 9/11 conspiries, In this video its not supposed to justify every claim made its just there to tie up videos 1 and 3..

If you want all the answers to your questions you need to watch the full length 9/11 conspiricy video and EVERY SINGLE question you could ask is backed up with fact.

[Sam Nichols]

I understand what you're saying, but if I did watch it, then I may not be able to have a different opinion, and therefore not be able to argue, as I would be agreeing with Smo because I would've been filled with the same biased opinions and biased facts* so that I would believe nothing else apart from what the movie is telling me, which it is trying to do.

What an incredibly ignorant statement.

I see what you've tried to do here but you've missed the vital ingredient in forming your own opinion. Collation of available information and self-analysis therein.

How do you ever expect to form your own opinion if you don't examine everything relating to the topic in hand and pick out what you believe to be fact and what you believe to be the narrator/author/whatever opinion?

[Tomm]

I tell you what's annoying - People who get on their high-horse claiming we're all ignorant for believing the media, and believing what everyone else does.

Within about 10 minutes of seeing the first 9/11 plane hit the towers, I though to myself 'I wonder if this was all done by the US government for oil'. Then I realised that it probably wasn't, and that was that. Whereas some fat idiot in America would rather cook up some lies and present it as the truth on a youtube video. It's not fact, guys.

Apparently it's evolution, people are naturally paranoid (so that they're on the look-out for predators). Or it's some kind of search for a higher meaning. I just don't subscribe to it. I think it's all bollocks. It's like computer geeks - conspiracy theory geeks always seem the same to me (morally superior - 'OMFG n00b you're so ignorant, look around you, the media is controlling you'). It's like they think they're better and more intelligent than anyone else because they've read/seen some guff on the internet. That's what pisses me off most. I don't even care if it turns out they're right, it's the superior attitude they have that I don't like*.

*slightly hypocritical, oh well

[br3n]

I do see what your saying Tomm, I think if you look hard enough you can find conspiracys in everything...

I actually found that part one of that movie was the most interesting, To be honist i really dont understand religion or why people are so convinced of it - there are so many impossibilities, the easiest to denote would be one mans heaven is another mans hell.. To most of us the idea of heaven would probably involves some trials, So what happens when we start riding the walls of someone who doesnt approve of it?? Suddenly its not so great!

I believe religion made a lot more sense when things couldnt be explained and it was just a lot easier to say a higher power ie god did it, but there is so much scientific fact that disproves everything the bible has to say, also with part one of the video, its almost as if an astronama was trying to explain the movement of the stars to someone a little less intelligant and had to adopt a human form to explain their movements, Chinese whispers etc etc and suddenly its gone from start to humans and people still believeing it thosands of years on.

Sadly I realised long ago this world is full of gullable niave people and always will be.

[Tomm]

Sadly I realised long ago this world is full of gullable niave people and always will be.

The last few hundred years it's been religious nuts, now it's conspiracy nuts?