Ace Baker Rumored Dead

[mynameis]

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/1056867/1/

[lightgiver]

Really:confused:
18 mins ago,
He's alive enough to log into Killtown's forum a few minutes ago.

[duckandcover]

Faked It !

[musti]

it looks like he faked it but this doesn't make any sense. he must have some reason, some motivation behind this act. this would only nullify his credibility and respect of his followers.

i read that fetzer said he faked it. also he is logged on in the 911movement forum. strange indeed...

[time2wakeup]

This is the link to the 2 minute clip of the (fake) suicide.
Sounds like a staged PSYOP to me.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=oK9876dk_zg

[keystone]

This is not the first time he has pulled such a stunt methinks.

[john white]

I respect Ace in that at least he has realised what a bunch of shysters most of the NPT pushers are even as he hasn't been able to let go of his own belief in it, and I can well expect that he is sick to the teeth of wading through the sewage of ego the NPT scene represents

So its fitting his "suicide" is a fake as everything else about the circus of delusion Fetzer's show represents

Respect wise, well its true pulling this kind of stunt is a metaphorical bullet to the head and KT etc will be able to write him off now

But then, I expect Ace wants to be free of the desire to have the respect of hustlers and their sheep anyway

Good luck to him

[thankyoudave]

WTF at that audio. :confused:

[bryan]

I respect Ace in that at least he has realised what a bunch of shysters most of the NPT pushers are even as he hasn't been able to let go of his own belief in it,

If you stopped insulting people for a few days, you could use the extra time to let us know where Ace Baker went wrong in his "Composites" paper, which he presented three months ago, inviting criticism and comments in a refreshingly open way. As far as I know, nobody has even tried to debunk what he says in that paper. You could make a name for yourself.

[white horse]

If you stopped insulting people for a few days, you could use the extra time to let us know where Ace Baker went wrong in his "Composites" paper, which he presented three months ago, inviting criticism and comments in a refreshingly open way. As far as I know, nobody has even tried to debunk what he says in that paper. You could make a name for yourself.

well said!

[john white]

If you stopped insulting people for a few days, you could use the extra time to let us know where Ace Baker went wrong in his "Composites" paper, which he presented three months ago, inviting criticism and comments in a refreshingly open way. As far as I know, nobody has even tried to debunk what he says in that paper. You could make a name for yourself.

LOL I dont need a NAME for myself, I just need to THINK for myself

This could be where your going wrong bryan

It only requires a bit of thinking to see where Ace has gone astray: his work has been thoroughly dissected in the past

Why do I, or anyone else, owe No Planes Theorists the time and energy to point out the same istakes time and time again?

Its past time bothering, I just tell you the truth instead, its up to you to think for yourself and come to see it

Like that self serving piffle Johnson wrote the other day: a hell of a cheek for that fantasist to write on the title of "perception management", but I'm not spending several hours taking it apart for the benefit of people who dont give a shit, like yourself bryan

[john white]

If you like, just see me as the grumpy cunt pointing our your dreaming

Ace included

Though im quite genuine in hoping Ace finds some happiness as I feel he needs to

[dave52]

John, you're not grumpy and you don't point things out... ;)

[size_of_light]

Ace Baker Rumored Dead

This is one of those weird moments for me when I feel nothing, because I've never heard of the guy.

I never knew he was alive, so I can't say I care if he's dead.

[lightgiver]

Ace Baker Rumored Dead

This is one of those weird moments for me when I feel nothing, because I've never heard of the guy.

I never knew he was alive, so I can't say I care if he's dead.

Do you have no compassion for sentient beings:confused:;)

[bryan]

A must read for anybody who cares about the truth:

http://acebaker.blogspot.com/2009/01/why.html

[dangermouse]

lol

[dave52]

It's difficult, I've always found Ace to be sincere - and for sure - I agree with most of his findings. He is being accused of disinfo from many people, but who can tell...

I remain a big fan of NPT, it makes sense and I see the video fakery. I will not back one horse over another, I remain positive and optimistic, I want to see all the cards on the table...

[john white]

A must read for anybody who cares about the truth:

http://acebaker.blogspot.com/2009/01/why.html

A good link

Ace has worked out a lot of important stuff about the various personage on the NPT circus: he's certainly seen through a lot of the methodology and perverted reasoning and behaviour: I applaud him going public with his understanding that Hutchinson is a blatant fraud: all he hasn't done is work out why he was wrong in his own theories

It will come, the clues are in front of him

[bryan]

It's difficult, I've always found Ace to be sincere - and for sure - I agree with most of his findings. He is being accused of disinfo from many people, but who can tell...

It was Gerald Holmgren who convinced me about the planes when I came across his site a couple of years ago, but I was still knocked out by Ace's Ghostplane video last summer. I was even more impressed when he totally wiped the floor with Steve Wright on Hardfire, even though Ronald Wieck had set him up and kept trying to change the subject every time Steve Wright was struggling.

I've known for a long time that Fetzer, Jones and Griffin are working for the perps, but I'm not sure about the others he accuses.

[dangermouse]

I actually read it this time, I only read the first part and assumed too much (as usual )Oo..says the stranger at the back., good article Ace

[bryan]

good article Ace

You might like these then:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QNXmgF2yAEc


http://acebaker.blogspot.com/2008/05/theory-of-live-911-airplane-composites.html

http://www.psy-opera.com/Papers/Composites-1-8.pdf (download)


John White, of course, will say they can be easily demolished, but he won't tell us how.

[john white]

John White, of course, will say they can be easily demolished, but he won't tell us how.

I manage to digest my meals without spoon feeding: don't you?

First one must be hungry: 10,000 words of explanation mean nothing to one who refuses to eat

You know, I'm sure there is much material buried in this section of the site that could be found if one was truly questing for a diet of truth

[white horse]

You know, I'm sure there is much material buried in this section of the site that could be found if one was truly questing for a diet of truth

Please illuminate us.

[john white]

Please illuminate us.

Again, more requests for spoon feeding

Sorry, done indulging those who just spit it out no matter how wholesome

After all, don't you do research? Haven't you gone out of your way to study, in depth, the counter arguments to what you support?

Or does research, to you, simply meaning finding stuff you agree with?

[bryan]

After all, don't you do research? Haven't you gone out of your way to study, in depth, the counter arguments to what you support?

It will soon be four months since Ace Baker presented his paper, and so far only one counter argument has been offered, as you can see in this thread:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36557&highlight=composites

That counter argument (columns bending inwards) didn't address any of the main arguments in the paper, and in any case the issue of the bending columns had already been discussed earlier in the thread.

The research presented in the paper was new, which means it's not possible for it to have been 'thoroughly debunked already' (as you and George Monbiot would say). Rather than counter arguments being offered, discussion of the arguments has been banned on most forums and avoided on others.

It's funny how the crew at 911truth.co.uk were happy to put manhours into debunking September Clues, yet they just can't be bothered to read Ace Baker's paper. What's even funnier is it's the work of somebody you say you respect!

[john white]

It will soon be four months since Ace Baker presented his paper, and so far only one counter argument has been offered, as you can see in this thread:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36557&highlight=composites

That counter argument (columns bending inwards) didn't address any of the main arguments in the paper, and in any case the issue of the bending columns had already been discussed earlier in the thread.

The research presented in the paper was new, which means it's not possible for it to have been 'thoroughly debunked already' (as you and George Monbiot would say). Rather than counter arguments being offered, discussion of the arguments has been banned on most forums and avoided on others.

It's funny how the crew at 911truth.co.uk were happy to put manhours into debunking September Clues, yet they just can't be bothered to read Ace Baker's paper. What's even funnier is it's the work of somebody you say you respect!

Who said I hadnt read it? Massive assumption on your part. It takes a little time to read a peice and compose thoughts on it, a lot longer to create a a point by point counter, and being as its clear Ace is simply going back over old ground, (especially basic errors regarding understanding perspective) little reason to.

What seems "funny" to you has a perfectly rational and non-funny explanation: can't be arsed. Being as there is little to no active NPT posting on the 9/11 forum anymore, there is little reason for anyone who has seen through NPT for what it is to continue to make threads or posts about it, obviously there is still pro NPT posting elsewhere on the net, but on the UK 9/11 forum the arguments have clearly been won

If Ace was active on the uk 9/11 forum I'm sure someone would have bothered to point out his mistakes, however most of us have lives to get on with and don't OWE Ace anything.

Yes I respect him for seeing others involved in NPT for what they are: presumably your DONT respect him for that Bryan: or do you AGREE with his denouncement of Killtown, Shack, Wood, Hutchinson, Fetzer? If so dont hide it, do tell. If you don't agree with him, perhaps you don't respect Ace half as much as I do

But meanwhile:

It will soon be four months since Ace Baker presented his paper, and so far only one counter argument has been offered, as you can see in this thread:

Is that the ONLY counter argument to NPT your aware of Bryan?

If you have actually done anything that could be described as research, you should be able to reel off ten or more just off the top of your head. Can you?

If you cant, that would seem to indicate you simply have never thought about them. I'd bet you a £5 that is the case

It certainly may be shocking for you to get your head round the fact that the vast majority of 9/11 truthers simply ignore NPT now, given that its credibility has a hole large enough to sink a ship in it. Its of no relevance how much any of NPT's "heros" rehash old poop and try to make it smell fresh, a manure pile remains exactly what it is

But I'm always happy to help out, so here's one to get you started, lets see if you can manage to approach it:

If there was no plane impact against either of the towers Bryan:

What caused the Fireball?

And to pre-empt you if you are about to say "missile", what volume of fuel would be needed to produce such a fireball , and therefore what capacity of fuel would the missile of needed to be carrying in order to produce it? I think you will find yourself ending up with a plane sized missile. Plane shaped even. Even... identical to a Plane, because it WAS a Plane!

That's one of the "tough" questions people like Johnson run from, don't get me started on his "delayed" fireball farce

Alternatively, how did all that jet fuel get up the towers and into position on floors occupied by active offices at the time?

I'm betting you have never even thought about it, in which case, its way past time

[bryan]

Here's how Ace Baker asked for peer reviews of his paper:

Please feel free to download and read my treatise on the 9/11 airplane composites. Any criticism or correction will be welcomed, any questions answered.

http://www.psy-opera.com/Papers/Composites-1-8.pdf

And here's the kind of response he gets:

Its of no relevance how much any of NPT's "heros" rehash old poop and try to make it smell fresh, a manure pile remains exactly what it is

(Johh White advocates a reasoned, evidence-based approach to 9/11 research.)


do you AGREE with his denouncement of Killtown, Shack, Wood, Hutchinson, Fetzer? If so dont hide it, do tell. If you don't agree with him, perhaps you don't respect Ace half as much as I do

John, you accidently omitted some names from Ace Baker's list: Steven E Jones, David Ray Griffin and Loose Change. Do you agree with Ace that these people are frauds? I've already said in this thread that I'm certain Jones, Griffin and Fetzer are working for the perps, and I said I'm not sure about the others. I also think Loose Change have been got at. What I don't agree with is the attacks on David Icke and John Lear for things which are not related to 9/11. I respect good research.


Is that the ONLY counter argument to NPT your aware of Bryan?

If you have actually done anything that could be described as research, you should be able to reel off ten or more just off the top of your head. Can you?

If you cant, that would seem to indicate you simply have never thought about them. I'd bet you a £5 that is the case

Some counter arguments to no-planes theory:

Fog of war, coincidence, cock-up, they couldn't, they wouldn't, they'd never keep it quiet, why are the experts not saying it? easier to do than to fake, what happened to the passengers? insult to the families, why no TV cameras at the Pentagon? public can't handle it, dividing the movement, reverse sequence demolition, millions of New Yorkers saw it on telly, media execs saw it with their own eyes, no-planers are insane, impact filmed by individuals but missed by a dozen TV cameras, journalists at the scene were out of earshot, poor quality video, perspective, right engine flips over 180 degrees and doesn't leave a hole, office debris takes on the form of a nose and cockpit, big explosion, columns bent inwards. The last one is valid. The rest rely on assumptions, imagination, trust, faith, or they are simply the result of working backwards to justify a predetermined conclusion. Please donate the fiver to a good Palestinian cause.


obviously there is still pro NPT posting elsewhere on the net, but on the UK 9/11 forum the arguments have clearly been won

If Ace was active on the uk 9/11 forum I'm sure someone would have bothered to point out his mistakes

Hasn't the UK 9/11 forum been purged of controversial subjects? Last I heard, even Lawson had been kicked off for 'hate speech'.


What caused the Fireball?

That's one of the "tough" questions people like Johnson run from

Alternatively, how did all that jet fuel get up the towers and into position on floors occupied by active offices at the time?

I'm betting you have never even thought about it, in which case, its way past time

Maybe they carried it up when they turned the security off and sent everybody home for two days.

Have you thought about what the flashes were?

[john white]

Fog of war

Meaning what?

coincidence

How?

cock-up

How, by whom?

they couldn't

Anything possible: what matters is did they?

they wouldn't

It matters if they didn't whether they would or not. That is why Truth matters btw.

they'd never keep it quiet

Anything's possible, and easy when there nothing to "keep quiet" becuase Planes hit the building

why are the experts not saying it?

Why would they? The entire of 9/11 truth is working against experts who wont give a full opinion, this is nothing to do with NPT

easier to do than to fake

It is. And the capability is there. Are you saying they couldn't? Are you saying they wouldn't? Meaningless objection then, you contradict yourself with above

what happened to the passengers?

Everyone on those planes was dead in that crash, its unknown whether the manifest can be trusted, doesn't mean some or all of those people wern't on the planes.

insult to the families

Again, nothing to do with NPT, applies to the entire of 9/11 truth, get real

why no TV cameras at the Pentagon?

Got nothing to do with what hit the towers

public can't handle it

Probably they can't, but irrelevant, what matters is what's true, not whether others can handle it

dividing the movement

That's just a statement of fact

reverse sequence demolition

You mean the top down collapse of the towers? An obvious observation, what has this to do with NPT?

millions of New Yorkers saw it on telly

I think you mean billions of humans,

media execs saw it with their own eyes

I doubt they used anyone else's

no-planers are insane

Perhaps some are, but mostly I simply think intellectually lazy and occasionally stupid

impact filmed by individuals but missed by a dozen TV cameras

Gee, the electronic age in the largest city in the world. You have a point to make about the social prevalence of Video Techonology in 2001?

journalists at the scene were out of earshot

City acoustics perfectly possible, especially in manhatten. Your point? That's assuming that's even properly sourced

poor quality video

Yep some of it is. A point there?

perspective

Every single image and video is entirely consistent with each other whether filmed privately or publically. This could be a grand conspiracy or it could be because its a record of a factual event. Which is more probable? Regardless, that consistency is a fact.

This does not help NPT because there can be no genuine images. A single genuine image of all the thousands available and that's it, NPT gone. A simple enough piece of reasoning that requires anyone supporting NPT to declare any image from any source a fake all produced in perfect synchrony with each other. Based on no proof but claims about images which have never been supported by solid evidence: even anything written by Ace Baker.

right engine flips over 180 degrees

Its a crash and an engine tearing through a skyscraper. A spinning engine wont spin ripped from a wing?

and doesn't leave a hole,

It does. Oft denied, but proven fact

office debris takes on the form of a nose and cockpit

Imposed imagery. This is only possible to even contemplate taking less than a handful of frames of footage, its an expulsion of debris ahead of a blastwave, and looks like one. Not a nosecone or a big smiley face. This is a suggestion implanted as a meme: bad business!

big explosion

Yes there is! I will know demonstrate to you how despite your best efforts, you have failed in your post,

If there was no plane impact against either of the towers Bryan:

What caused the Fireball?

And to pre-empt you if you are about to say "missile", what volume of fuel would be needed to produce such a fireball , and therefore what capacity of fuel would the missile of needed to be carrying in order to produce it? I think you will find yourself ending up with a plane sized missile. Plane shaped even. Even... identical to a Plane, because it WAS a Plane!

That's one of the "tough" questions people like Johnson run from, don't get me started on his "delayed" fireball farce

Alternatively, how did all that jet fuel get up the towers and into position on floors occupied by active offices at the time?

I'm betting you have never even thought about it, in which case, its way past time

As predicted, you can even approach this question. Bye NPT, you just failed

columns bent inwards
The last one is valid

Then the rest are irrelevant

(John White advocates a reasoned, evidence-based approach to 9/11 research.)

Ah finally the strawman point. How come John White is being so nasty to me when he is so "reasonable"?

Simple

I've always spoken the truth and no, I don't suffer bullshit. You can fool yourself, fine, but what fools you don't fool me. No really, I dont care at all who is "persuaded" by any of my posts, your choices are your own as is your time wasted

Have a nice life

Oh a final point:

John, you accidently omitted some names from Ace Baker's list: Steven E Jones, David Ray Griffin and Loose Change. Do you agree with Ace that these people are frauds? I've already said in this thread that I'm certain Jones, Griffin and Fetzer are working for the perps, and I said I'm not sure about the others. I also think Loose Change have been got at. What I don't agree with is the attacks on David Icke and John Lear for things which are not related to 9/11. I respect good research.

So why do you think Killtown is falsely promoting a theory that the entire body of imagery of the plane impacts is all computer generated?

[bryan]

John, as a philosopher, can you tell me if it's possible to respect somebody and call their research a steaming pile of manure at the same time?

[john white]

John, as a philosopher, can you tell me if it's possible to respect somebody and call their research a steaming pile of manure at the same time?

Sure. There is a nobility to the spirit quite apart from the numpty ideas one entertains with ones brain. The question is whether one owes it to another to withhold a statement of truth out of some charitable sense of "being respectful to them". I would have thought you would be uncomfortable with that kind of Political Correctness

[bryan]

What caused the Fireball?

And to pre-empt you if you are about to say "missile", what volume of fuel would be needed to produce such a fireball , and therefore what capacity of fuel would the missile of needed to be carrying in order to produce it? I think you will find yourself ending up with a plane sized missile. Plane shaped even. Even... identical to a Plane, because it WAS a Plane!

That's one of the "tough" questions people like Johnson run from, don't get me started on his "delayed" fireball farce

Alternatively, how did all that jet fuel get up the towers and into position on floors occupied by active offices at the time?

I'm betting you have never even thought about it, in which case, its way past time

Have you thought about why professional photographer David Handschuh, who was standing less than 100 yards away from the south tower, looking up at the building, heard a massive explosion, but didn't see a plane?

Have you thought about why his photo of the exploding building was published in the paper the following day, even though he doesn't remember taking the picture?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9lmMZQFRzFY


I've thought about that.

But no, I haven't given much thought to 'tough' questions like:

Would they have used the stairs to carry the jet fuel up, or would they have used the lift?

[mynameis]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9lmMZQFRzFY


From the angle of the photograph, he wouldn't have seen the plane where the triangulation of vantage point gives him the opportunity for his snap. This the is the ejection of the South Tower on the south side, opposite the impact zone.

[bryan]

John, as a philosopher, can you tell me if it's possible to respect somebody and call their research a steaming pile of manure at the same time?

Sure. There is a nobility to the spirit quite apart from the numpty ideas one entertains with ones brain. The question is whether one owes it to another to withhold a statement of truth out of some charitable sense of "being respectful to them". I would have thought you would be uncomfortable with that kind of Political Correctness

Just to clarify, do you mean: "Sure. It's possible" or "Sure. I can tell you"?

[bryan]

From the angle of the photograph, he wouldn't have seen the plane where the triangulation of vantage point gives him the opportunity for his snap. This the is the ejection of the South Tower on the south side, opposite the impact zone.

We must be looking at two different photographs. I'd say the person who took it had a good view of the south side.

But how do you know where David Handschuh was standing? He doesn't remember taking the picture. Cracking photo for somebody who's not even trying. First he knew about it was when he saw it in the paper the day after, with his name underneath. What if somebody else took it? What's your counter argument to that? Fog of war? See, I told you you'd need that one.

[mynameis]

We must be looking at two different photographs. I'd say the person who took it had a good view of the south side.

But how do you know where David Handschuh was standing? He doesn't remember taking the picture. Cracking photo for somebody who's not even trying. First he knew about it was when he saw it in the paper the day after, with his name underneath. What if somebody else took it? What's your counter argument to that? Fog of war? See, I told you you'd need that one.

I can tell by seeing world trade center three. And if you even watched the video the guy states where he was when he snapped. Also the North Tower and South Tower give clues to the position of the vantage point. It doesn't matter who snapped it, triangulation does not lie. Only you lie bryan. From further examination. The south side is the impact area of 175. He would have been as you stated in the other thread right under the plane and wouldn't have seen anything above looking through a view finder.