Thursday, September 10, 2020

Esquire Looks Back at Loose Change

 Fifteen years later (can you believe it's been that long) Esquire takes a look back at the unfortunate legacy of Loose Change. Don't say we didn't warn you.


To truly understand how we’ve arrived at this place, we need to go back 15 years and revisit Loose Change, the first time a fringe Internet conspiracy theory percolated to the highest echelons of our cultural and political institutions.

Released on April 13, 2005, by Dylan Avery, a 21-year-old amateur filmmaker, Loose Change was a “documentary” that posited a radical thesis:

Tuesday, December 31, 2019

Permanent Top Post--Scroll Down for Newer Posts

(Note: The date on this post is intentional; it keeps this post pinned to the top. Thanks for asking!).

11/11/07 Update: Loose Change Final Cut has just been released and so we have not prepared a full debunking. Both James and I have many comments about the movie below and I started a thread over at JREF with some examples of mistakes in the film. Much of the rest of the information in this particular post concerns the earlier versions of Loose Change.

Because this blog is getting so much traffic from Google searches and referrals from various forums and Wikipedia, we decided to put one post up top to link to information our newest visitors are apparently looking for.

First, if you have not seen the film and want to watch it, be sure to watch the annotated version, which was named after this blog, Screw Loose Change. The creator did a terrific job on this, and we strongly recommend watching this version rather than Dylan Avery's cut.

James has put together a list of major lies in Loose Change. Here's Part 1. Part 2. Part 3. Part 4.

I compiled three very easily refuted lies in the movie. I also showed three tricks and distortions that are used throughout the film.

A friend of the blog named Mark Roberts (aka Gravy at the JREF forums) compiled this amazing Viewer's Guide to Loose Change, (now HTML) which includes a complete transcript of the movie, pictures and links that refute many of the claims, and which highlights the changes between Version 1 and Version 2.

The hot new film in 9-11 Denial is called 9-11 Mysteries. One of our JREF buddies, The Doc, has put together a rebuttal video called (you guessed it!) Screw 9-11 Mysteries, and assembled a viewers' guide to 9-11 Mysteries.

Many 9-11 Deniers focus on the collapse of World Trade Center 7, which fell at 5:20 PM on September 11, almost seven hours after the North Tower. If you want a really detailed analysis of WTC 7, I recommend Mark Robert's WTC 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 Truth Movement. I also recommend the BBC's terrific video on The Third Tower.

If you'd like to discuss the ideas about 9-11 you've encountered here or elsewhere, another friend of the blog started a Screw Loose Change Forum. It's a very lively place with lots of opinion back and forth between both sides. There's also a Screw Loose Change MySpace page, with some animated commentary. Of course, we also welcome comments on our posts.

If you're looking for detailed rebuttals of other aspects of 9-11 Denial, I heartily recommend 9-11 Myths, Debunking 9-11 and Internet Detectives.

Markyx has also put together a video (note: graphic images and strong language) called 9-11 Deniers Speak. If you think Dylan Avery and Jim Fetzer have any respect for the victims of 9-11, just watch this film. There are five parts. Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V.
There's also a Google Video which is all in one part.

This should be enough to get you started debunking Loose Change to your friends. We have a lot more content below this post.

Notes on unusual terms/abbreviations: Looser (not a misspelling of Loser)=Believer in Loose Change. CT=Conspiracy Theory, Conspiracy Theorist. Truther=9-11 Conspiracy Theorist (all Loosers are Truthers, not all Truthers are Loosers). OS=Official Story. CD= Controlled Demoliton. LIHOP: Let It Happen On Purpose; theory that the government knew the 9-11 attacks were coming but allowed them to happen to further other goals of theirs. MIHOP: Made It Happen On Purpose; theory that the government planned and orchestrated the attacks. Most Truthers are MIHOP.

Update: Comments closed on this post, which is intended solely as a pointer. Because Haloscan will not let us close comments on a particular post, be forewarned: Don't leave a comment in this post or it will be deleted.

Update II: Note on comments: Because some of our commenters have chosen to act like children, we are no longer allowing comments.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, November 18, 2018

The World Trade Center Memorial

After all these years I finally got the opportunity to visit the Ground Zero and the World Trade Center Memorial. Thankfully, it was completely free of Truthers. I guess they died out years ago. The memorial was rather striking, and I must confess to a few tears while gazing over the names. The museum was also well worth visiting.



Saturday, January 06, 2018

Truther Dating Advice

Apparently there are Truthers still out there and they are trying to reproduce. Who knew?
Q. Conspiracy theories: My cousin recently set me up on a date with a really great guy that she knew from work. At first, I was hesitant to go on a date with him as he is 43 and I am 27, however I decided to give him a chance and I was really glad I did. He’s smart, funny, and easy to hang out with. I am also very attracted to him physically. The only bad thing, so far, is that during a text conversation, he alluded to believing that 9/11 was an inside job. At first I thought he was joking, but further questions revealed that he was not. We discussed it in person the next time we met up, and he was joking about it with me but didn’t change his stance. Is this a deal breaker? I felt bad afterward because I was basically making fun of him to his face not realizing he actually believed what he was saying.

Tuesday, August 01, 2017

John Oliver on Alex Jones

HBO's John Oliver does an extended piece on our old friend Alex Jones. Pretty funny, but content warning, some of it does get a little... err... anatomical. Hey, it is HBO.


Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Alex Jones: Narcissist?

In the continuing saga of the Alex Jones custody trial that Pat touched upon earlier, the issue of Mr. Jones's mental disorders was brought up. Now my admittedly amateur diagnosis was Bipolar Disorder, but apparently the professionals thought otherwise:


Infowars founder Alex Jones was diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder in a psychiatric evaluation, the divorce case manager confirmed during his custody trial in Austin on Wednesday. Austin psychologist Alissa Sherry said that a different doctor compiled the report, part of what she said was the most time-consuming divorce case she has ever worked. People diagnosed with NPD typically show traits including a lack of empathy, arrogance, and a propensity for grandiose fantasies. 

Monday, April 17, 2017

Alex Jones' Lawyers Admit He's Putting On an Act

It's admitted, as Alex would say.

He hasn't come across our radar much in quite awhile, although obviously he has been prominent in his support of Donald Trump's astonishing campaign for the presidency. But Jones was a big-time Truther back in the first decade of this century. I still remember him claiming that James and I worked in the basement of the Pentagon.

There was a video years ago of him going on a tirade, absolutely apoplectic, to the point where you thought he was going to burst into flames. And then he turned to Jason Bermas and gave him a wink.

Turns out that Jones' public persona is going to be used against him in court by his ex-wife in a custody battle. Which has his attorneys scrambling to distance him from the nutty things he says and does.

At a recent pretrial hearing, attorney Randall Wilhite told state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo that using his client Alex Jones’ on-air Infowars persona to evaluate Alex Jones as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in “Batman.”

“He’s playing a character,” Wilhite said of Jones. “He is a performance artist.”

A couple years back somebody looked his house up online and found it was worth something like $450,000. I didn't use the information partly because I saw it as irrelevant, and partly because it actually seemed like a pretty modest home. Turns out Alex could afford quite a bit more:

Wilhite said the crux of Kelly Jones’ problem is that she has gone through one set of lawyers after another and some $3.5 million since her divorce settlement, much of it pursuing fruitless motion after motion that actually cost her access to her children each step of the way.

And she already receives $43,000 a month from her ex-husband.

Whew!