The Clarky Challenge

Eg. said:
Damn I was off. But oh well.
Click to expand...

I understand your disapproval of this thread, but I would like to try and explain to you and anybody else who views this thread in a similar fashion.

This is not an assault on Clarly personally; it is not an assault on anybody personally.

I have seen many similar threads, labelled differently “The WTC Challenge", "The Pentagon Challenge",” The Flight 93 Challenge".

Threads like this are a direct challenge to anybody, and I mean anybody who chooses to promote alterative theories. They are not meant to insult, nor degrade anybody. It is a simple challenge. Anybody can claim anything; here is the chance to not only promote your theories but to actually offer up your proof.

For me personally I am not laughing, nor mocking, I simply ask all those who really believe there is a conspiracy to back up their claims.

Basically, for anybody who objects, speak now or forever hold your peace.
 
This obviously will not work without Clarky's approval so I'll lend my opinion to this condemned thing.

We all know Mecha can be harsh. Matter of factly, I expect no less from him at this point.
So, when I saw this, I saw a chance for Clarky to get his information together and present it in a manner than can be broken down in a calm, calculative fashion instead of the bitching contests of weeks past.

Despite the massive condescension I think this is not necessarily a great idea, but a good one, and good can come of it. 9-11 is still developing. 9-11 news is still fresh.
It's as fresh as today.
On today's morning newscast, I only caught a minute of it, but Bin Laden (reportedly) released a tape claiming Mousaoui-whatever was not working under him.

Very interesting debate to be made there. Where can we start? Recent, unproven information lead to some people's belief he may be an inside man, and now a great source of credibility confirms it? (edit: confirm is the wrong word, but it is a step in the same direction)

I can see the world begin to tip and turn upside-down from where I sit.
 
Oh god no I wasnt hating on the thread, I love it. Its the one chance where someone can actually come out and challenge the problem-ridden logic of some dumb kid that believes everything he sees. Allowing yourself to be diluted in such a way by your own ignorance is stupifying, as people have put so much effort into trying to disseminate the truth. Clarky is a metaphor for the nations problems as a whole.
 
Actually, it was originally 100% an opinion, as most statements are.
It however, unlike many opinions, has a rather strong basis in established fact.

Please keep the insults out though.

Although I said I would present refutations to Clarky only, I may as well point out now that:
Recent, unproven information lead to some people's belief he may be an inside man, and now a great source of credibility confirms it?
Click to expand...
is a fallacious conclusion due to various assumptions.

The fallacies aren's so important, however, as the fact that the information has clearly been misinterpreted.

Bin Laden claimed that Moussaoui:
had no connection at all with September 11.... I am the one in charge of the 19 brothers and I never assigned brother Zacarias to be with them in that mission.... Since Zacarias Moussaoui was still learning to fly, he wasn't number 20 in the group, as your government claimed
Click to expand...
(note the bold areas)

After the trial, Moussaoui had likewise changed his testimony to state that he was not a part of 9/11 planning - and was actually planning another attack to take place after 9/11.

He claims that his admission to complicity in the 9/11 attacks was his own fabrication.
Other statements on the same date indicate to me that the fabrication was meant to increase his chances of being martyred via a death penalty.
Thus, the statement made by Bin Laden is likely accurate - but Moussaoui is very clearly a member of Al-Qaeda.

In the future, listening to the information with care may be a good idea before claiming that you have discovered earth-shattering news.
It's likely that similar telephone-games of factual distortion fuel all these myths.
 
Mechagodzilla said:
In the future, listening to the information with care may be a good idea before claiming that you have discovered earth-shattering news.
It's likely that similar telephone-games of factual distortion fuel all these myths.
Click to expand...
I plead ignorance. Like I said I only caught a few words of this morning's news. I looked for more as I was posting but was unable to find anything.

More importantly I was proving a point of the validity of continuing with 9-11 discussion as opposed to an end-all thread. I never claimed to have special knowledge. My statement would not be fallacious would you have not edited out my edit stating I was not concise with my wording. :rolleyes:
 
Here is what he said

Here is a perfectly reasonable spin on it

Bin Laden's focus on Moussaoui may have had two purposes: to show the al-Qaida leader's command of the Sept. 11 attacks and to taunt the U.S. over its effort to prosecute terrorists. Moussaoui is the only person convicted in the United States for the 9/11 attacks.
Click to expand...

Robert Pfaltzgraff, a foreign policy analyst with the Fletcher School at Tufts University, said bin Laden was seeking to weaken the United States.

"He's mocking our system of justice. He's saying: 'You guys got it wrong,'" Pfaltzgraff said. But bin Laden also was boosting himself, effectively saying: "I'm still here. You still haven't gotten me."

Moussaoui's true role remains unclear. He was notoriously erratic during trial, prompting his lawyers to say he was confessing in order to be sentenced to death and become a martyr. After sentencing, Moussaoui said he had nothing to do with the attacks.

Bin Laden's comments did nothing to resolve the question. Kohlman said he believed bin Laden issued the tape to distance al-Qaida from a person who came across as "a lunatic" because of his outbursts during trial.
Click to expand...
 
Clarky said:
I've stated pretty much everything
Click to expand...
Therin lies the rub. You often say this as a get-out clause. I don't think you have, and even if you have, I have never seen it arranged and presented in such a consistent, clear and concise way as Mecha tends to structure his arguments. Whereas in most discussions it is very easy to tell what Mecha thinks, why he thinks it and what his evidence is, I have never quite been able to gain a comprehensive picture of what you think, why you think it and what your evidence is.

This thread, then, is the perfect opportunity for you to lay out your entire argument on the issue. Open debate! Clear as day! As Mecha pointed out, if everything's already been laid out, it shouldn't be too hard to lay it all out again. Hell, you could just copy and paste from old posts with little summaries at the end.

Why not?
 
That's pretty cool: Forbes agrees with my conclusion.

Also, Zryuken, I had noted your change in wording.
However, you had still concluded that the Bin Laden tape at least supported the conspiracy claim. Also that it would cause the world to "tip and turn upside-down" due to some extreme importance.

Without the full source and context of that claim, you (unintentionally) created the very strong implication that substantial evidence supported Moussaoui being an american operative of some sort.

The purpose of this thread is to obtain a comprehensive list of supported claims from Clarky, so that we needn't rely on arguments consisting of only one or two unrelated quasi-facts.

Unintentionally, your post formed a conclusion that did not meet either criteria.
 
Mechagodzilla said:
That's pretty cool: Forbes agrees with my conclusion.

Also, Zryuken, I had noted your change in wording.
However, you had still concluded that the Bin Laden tape at least supported the conspiracy claim. Also that it would cause the world to "tip and turn upside-down" due to some extreme importance.

Without the full source and context of that claim, you (unintentionally) created the very strong implication that substantial evidence supported Moussaoui being an american operative of some sort.

The purpose of this thread is to obtain a comprehensive list of supported claims from Clarky, so that we needn't rely on arguments consisting of only one or two unrelated quasi-facts.

Unintentionally, your post formed a conclusion that did not meet either criteria.
Click to expand...

You are right.

But he won't be able to tell us their names, for a simple reason: that in fact they don't exist. This is from one perspective, and from another perspective, the brother Moussaoui was arrested two weeks before the events,
Click to expand...
Is this true?
 
First off, what is the source of that quote?
But he won't be able to tell us their names, for a simple reason: that in fact they don't exist.
Click to expand...
Second: whose names?
This is from one perspective, and from another perspective, the brother Moussaoui was arrested two weeks before the events,
Click to expand...
Third: this section is more-or-less correct, but deceptive in its many key omissions.

He was arrested August 16, 2001 for immigration violations after the Pan-Am International Flight Academy contacted the FBI. Although Moussaoui acted generally normal, he demonstrated what his instructor saw as a strange lack of knowledge concerning the plane's technical systems before his flight-simulator tests.

Some (but not all) agents suspected that his flight training had violent intentions, but they were legally incapable of obtaining warrants for his home and laptop under FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) regulations.

As a result, he wasn't actually accused of any terrorism-related crimes until December 2001.
The evidence that would link him to a highjacking plot and Al-Qaeda was not discovered until after the attacks occurred.
 
They were not allowed to search his residence or his computer.

wiki said:
FBI watchdog Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, later wrote to FBI Director Robert Mueller:

"If the application for the FISA warrant had gone forward, agents would have found information in Moussaoui's belongings that linked him both to a major financier of the hijacking plot working out of Germany, and to a Malaysian al-Qaida boss who had met with at least two other hijackers while under surveillance by intelligence officials."
Click to expand...
 
ATTENTION RE: REVISION AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE CLARKY CHALLENGE, GIVEN A STATE OF NEWFOUND RELEVANCE

In light of recent events, I am refurbishing this thread.

In May of this year, Clarky had stated the following as his reason to decline The Clarky Challenge:

the clarky said:
I've stated pretty much everything that is within an alternate theory that people can consider as having substance given the signs of active complicity of members of the US government [entire paragraph is sic][...] it's been talked to death.
Click to expand...
However, the clarky has evidently decided to continue with statements to the effect that 9/11, as it is commonly understood, is a myth.
From three days previous:
the clarky said:
I'm saying most of the contradictory elements in 911 are the phsyics [sic] not the 'facts' presented by the 911 comission [sic] report.
Click to expand...
It seems that there is more the clarky wishes to say after all and, as The Clarky Challenge has never been rescinded, I am resurrecting this thread and "raising the stakes", as it were.

As such, in addition to the terms outlined above, I am offering the clarky (A.K.A. clarky003) a cash prize of $100 (One Hundred) Canadian Dollars for full completion of The Clarky Challenge.

That is to say, a fully detailed and documented outline of any 9/11 conspiracy as understood and alleged by the clarky, and that said document be comprehensive and unabridged. The exact terms of this request are outlined in Section 1 of the Fundamental Aspects of The Clarky Challenge.

In addition to the above prize, being the sportsman that I am, I am offering an additional "bonus prize" of $10000 (Ten Thousand) Canadian Dollars if the "optional" aspects of Section 1 are fully realized by the clarky, in addition to those which are implicit.

The grand total prize money of The Clarky Challenge is thus set at $10100.

The terms for collecting the minimum $100 aspect of this prize are simple:

1) Accomplishment of the essential goals outlined in The Clarky Challenge.

2) That The Clarky Challenge thread become the sole media vessel through which the clarky disseminates all further past, current or future 9/11 conspiracy claims, in perpetuity.

I pray that (over) ten thousand dollars is enough compensation for the burden of writing in a way that can be understood by others.
Common ground is, after all, the first step towards any sensible discussion.
Please clarky, lay out the board for us so that you need not play with none but yourself.

Sincerely,

"A Mechagodzilla"
 
I never said I support any claims of conspiracey it is just my opinion that physics Steven Jones raises some good points and that only physical evidence from steel samples can really justify any other theorys right now. On the other hand why mecha is acting like a childish arsehole and assuming I'm some kind of leader on the issue :rolleyes: is actually quite understandable.

FYI its my opinion and im entitled to it although it's clear you have a massive problem with it, I really hope it hasn't created any kindof malignant tumour.. oh, and you are a very funny person.
 
clarky003 said:
I never said I support any claims of conspiracey it is just my opinion that physics Steven Jones raises some good points and that only physical evidence from steel samples can really justify any other theorys right now. On the other hand why mecha is acting like a childish arsehole and assuming I'm some kind of leader on the issue :rolleyes: is actually quite understandable.

FYI its my opinion and im entitled to it although it's clear you have a massive problem with it, I really hope it hasn't created any kindof malignant tumour.. oh, and you are a very funny person.
Click to expand...

Steven Jones does NOT make any good points.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf
http://www.911myths.com/Sulfur.pdf
 
You are indeed entitled to your opinion, clarky.

I am offering you up to $10100 dollars for that opinion.

clarky003 said:
I never said I support any claims of conspiracey [sic] it is just my opinion that physics [sic] Steven Jones raises some good points and that only physical evidence from steel samples can really justify any other theorys [sic] right now.
Click to expand...

Excellent!
This statement is the first step to claiming your $100 prize.

Now simply outline which of Steven E. Jones the (nuclear) physics professor's points are the "good points".
Then outline why "only physical evidence from steel samples can really justify any other theorys [sic] right now", along with any other supporting evidence(s) or argument(s).

In this thread, I have done nothing beyond offering you a minimum $100 of my personal savings in exchange for your ability to type a document in English.
I have simultaneously offered you $10000 to fact-check that document, if you wish to.

This is not an insult, nor an extortion or trick of any sort.

I am offering to buy your opinion from you for upwards of $100.

It is, as you have said, "just an opinion" which supports no claims whatsoever, and thus has no real-world application.
You also assert that you have no credentials whatsoever in any field(s) your opinion concerns.
Not only that, but you have assured all present that the entire content of your opinion has been disseminated, in full, across the internet - rendering it essentialy the domain of the public.

Thus, I suspect we may all agree that your opinion is quantifiably worthless.

Yet I am willing to pay you $10100 for it.

Why on Earth would you pass up such a one-sided bargain?
And why would you be insulted by the prospect of what is effectively free money?
 
Yea clarky, you're a lucky bastard. He won't even give me $1 for my opinion.... D:
 
Funny this topic should be being discussed I was actually doing so else where and have even racked my brain and done some calculations.

For WTC 2

PEgrav = mass * g * height

PE is potential energy.
Mass is given in Kilograms.
G is gravitational force.
Height is in meters.

Now let’s calculate the potential energy of a mass, say of 120,000 ton at a height of say for simplicity of calculations 300 meters.

Ok 120 000 metric ton = 120 000 000 kilograms

So PE = 120,000,000 x 10 x 300 = 360000000000 joules. This is the potential energy being stored above a crash site in WTC2.

Let me just clear up how much energy that is for you. Now one kilogram of TNT is equal to 4612070 joules of energy so 36000000000/4612070 = 78056 kilograms.

So the Potential energy above the crash site in WTC 2 alone is somewhere in the region of, the equivalent to 78000 kilograms of TNT.

Or basically the explosive force of 78 tons of TNT.

So if you were to drop this weight from say 1000 feet it would hit the ground with the force of a 78 ton bomb.

Ok so let put a steel structure in the way of this, remember it is 95% air.

Well let’s keep it really really simple let’s just have the same weight one meter above ground.

So the potential energy is now 120,000,000 x 10 x 1 = 120,000,000,0 joules

Again let’s convert this to the equivalent TNT. So 120,000,000,0 / 4612070 = 2.6 tons of TNT.

So for this massive weight to move only one meter under the influence of gravity it would hit whatever was beneath it with the equivalent energy of 2.6 tons of explosives.

Now I am not a rocket scientist I have simply done a few small calculations, feel free to correct them as I may well be mistaken. But I find it hard to believe something that was made up of 95% air would do nothing other than simply collapse under this massive force.

So questions

1. If all the resistance was gone and this massive weight really did hit the ground with such force would it not have displaced a massive amount of the ground?

2. Would it not stand to reason that a lot of this energy was actually absorbed by the building resisting it?

3. If such a weight really did hit the ground, with such energy would it not have been clearly recorded? i.e. it would have been extremely loud.

Hey I would actually welcome any feedback on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Terminator
Long time...
Replies
16
Views
1K
Xtremecherry95YT
Xtremecherry95YT
Acepilotf14
steam group bad link
Replies
3
Views
539
Xtremecherry95YT
Xtremecherry95YT
Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
ktimekiller
The "other" ValveTime website...
Replies
2
Views
692
Shem
Shem
Back
Top