Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Facts about Bilk's 9-11 fictions he does not want people to know
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Snit
May 17, 2013, 10:04:10 AM5/17/13
to
Updated summary of reasons why Bilk's claims about 9-11 are insane:
* Bilk claims that there was a video showing rebar coated with something
which is assumed to be explosives (but Bilk does not say how anyone
knows this). The only "evidence" he offers is the welders had to have
some sort of special security clearance - but how would even this be
seen on a video? He never explains that either - nor what the
clearance was or who authorized it. Anyway, Bilk says the video was
held for many years, then shown on a government owned TV network only
to magically disappear from *all* stations and he says secret
government agents visited all libraries and remove them from there
while, coincidently coincidentally, not a single known person happened
to record the show on their VCR. [1] [2] [6] Additionally, Bilk has
not shown a single one of the regular welders he claims complained on
the video saying anything about the incident either before or even
after 9-11.
* Bilk claims people with special security clearances managed the
welding of rebar which was coated with highly flammable explosives.
[2] When questioned about why the sparks would not ignite the highly
flammable explosives coating the rebar, Bulk invented, on the fly,
stories about copper clamps or wet cloths (yes, really, wet cloths!)
[3]. He later said these things were merely "heat-sinking" and failed
to explain how flying sparks managed to not hit any of these highly
flammable explosives. [6] Later he said the sparks were blocked by
"heavy cardboard with aluminum foil" which he had not thought of
before [12] because he finally admitted he had not even seen this
fictional video. [13] Bilk could have just invented a story about how
the explosives were added *after* the rebar was all welded together
(and before concrete was added). That would make a lot more sense than
his fairy tales!
* Later Bilk said the video was produced in 1987. [14] This completely
contradicts many of his claims from the two above bullet points. A
list of some of the problems with Bilk's claims of the video (some
repeated from above):
* No known copies exist in any library.
* No known copies exist in any PBS station.
* No known VCR copies exist.
* No listing of it can be found in any 1990 TV guide.
* No reason why it would be shown on a government network
* No known welder comments in 1969 as the towers were made.
* No known welder comments when the show was broadcast in 1990.
* No known welder comments after 9-11.
* No people related to these welders can be found speaking up.
* No explanation for why you changed your story about it's "series"
* No comment in the video about explosives you say it proves.
* No agency has been named which authorized special clearances.
* No name of any producer has been given.
* No name of anyone working on this video has been given.
* No reason given why explosives were not added after the welding
* Bilk has admitted not even he saw the video yet insists it is real.
* Bilk claims other were saying it was compressed air that ejected tons
of steel from the Twin Towers, a completely bogus story Bilk
fabricated. At first he denied he even made this claim until I showed
him the many posts where he did - and quoted his own words back to
him. [4] His comments show he does not understand even the basics of
what knowledgeable people say actually happened to the Towers.
* Bilk has no evidence of some unknown force which would have prevented
steel from being ejected from the pancaking towers without the added
force of explosives. Nor can he explain how explosives would break
this unknown force where tons upon tons of falling building would not.
No such force has ever been described by physics. Yet Bilk continues
to insist only explosives could explain the forces needed to eject the
material seen in videos. [5] Bilk claims this is a lie because he has
never named the unnamed force [6], which *supports* the comments he is
trying to refute. Very funny!
* Bilk changes his story *in the same post* and claims that the
flammable material on the rebar exploded on 9-11 but also says he does
not recall if he was told it did or did not.[11] Bilk is clearly just
making things up as he goes! When faced with this Bilk claimed he was
talking about different rebar, but only the rebar from that post was
being discussed.
* Bilk claims detonators were brought into the Towers shortly before the
attack, but he fails to account for how this would be possible with
the heightened security, why nobody saw this, or why there is no video
of this. He also does not explain how these detonators survived the
fires and other extremes after the planes hit the towers, nor does he
explain why the detonators were able to set off the explosives but the
concussion force from the planes ramming into the building did not set
them off. All sorts of unnamed forces must be assumed for his story to
make any sense at all.
* Bilk has not refuted the alternate and equally reasonable idea that
the buildings were brought down by Underground Marshmallow People. He
responds to this claim worse than others respond to his claims - yet
whines others are not being respectful to his claims. He proves he is
a hypocrite. [7]
* Bilk claims that to merely quote Stallman is to "attack" him make no
sense. [8] Stallman's comments are an attack on decency and against
children.
* Bilk claims that to quote him is to lie about him [9] - a claim that is
clearly dishonest. He cannot explain why that would be so, but he
hates how his own words have shown his ignorance so he just lashes out
with some of the most vile attacks to ever be posted to COLA.
* Bilk claims that I and others are paid to post to COLA [10] - a claim
that is utter nonsense... and even Bilk admitted he would need
financial records to fully support his fairy tails and admits he has
no such records. He "evidence" is that people disagree with him and
the "advocates" and find amusement in watching them try to back their
cult-like BS and other nonsense.
The following is in no way a complete list... just examples of the things I
note, above. And, remember, Bilk has not refuted a single one of the above
bulleted points:
[1] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
94c7e1ee-41a3-4811...@kk9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
[2] d8eb487c-f16c-48cf...@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com
11639315-fa13-4152...@lg15g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
c2d7c52b-b7aa-4184...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
97ca9d19-5155-44b0...@vv8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
6e25123f-ce1f-4322...@5g2000pbs.googlegroups.com
fcbdeca5-a699-493a...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com
db4cf4d4-f5b2-40bd...@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
ef56ff12-06a6-4684...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com
[3] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
[4] b2e65490-015f-469b...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com
4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
8cd48407-4288-4f28...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com
67ce8cf4-58e1-47c2...@r13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com
b3d5b78c-4b57-43b4...@g4g2000yqd.googlegroups.com
[5] 7ebe3e0d-8efd-4a69...@fw24g2000vbb.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
5e7a5f07-9dc9-4a95...@h1g2000pbg.googlegroups.com
[6] c59ad337-2ef9-46ef...@k6g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
[7] e15defa6-96a6-4d30...@vc1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
88857097-401d-4c2d...@h1g2000pbg.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
11678110-4597-470b...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com
[8] 6a6b62ab-51bc-41cf...@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
[9] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
[10] 6a6b62ab-51bc-41cf...@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
[11] 69d1db67-471f-4e5a...@n4g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
[12] 37fca37f-81b8-4a48...@ul7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
[13] b78d91b2-b053-49bb...@tz3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
[14] 81c9ea7f-4dc4-43c6...@k8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com
At one point Bilk complained about calling his ideas magical. So I asked him
the following questions. He never was able to answer any of them:
How is it not "magical" that this video disappeared from all TV
stations, libraries, and even home VCR collections?
How is it not "magical" that you did not even see this video but
know it showed not just a coating on rebar, not just a flammable
coating on rebar, but an *explosive* coating on rebar?
How is it not "magical" that this one set of buildings are the only
buildings in the world where such explosives have ever been put in
as the building was erected, at least that anyone can find?
How it is not "magical" that the coatings were embedded in concrete
yet people could discretely attach detonators to the explosives
throughout the building?
How is it not "magical" that none of the workers who you say
complained about losing this job never came forward any time before
or even after 9-11 to speak up about the events?
How is it not "magical" that a video was able to show some special
"security clearance"... one you have never named as far as I know.
How is it not "magical" that not a single spark hit any of this
rebar coated with highly flammable materials
How is it not "magical" that this video was not shown for many years
and then shown on a *government* owned network of stations?
How is it not "magical" that this video was first, according to you,
just one of series and was the only one missing, and yet the name of
the series cannot be known and none of the other videos can be
found... and only when this was pointed out did you decide there was
no such series?
The only way Bilk's ideas can be taken even slightly seriously is if one
believes in *magic*.
--
Proof Mark Bilk's http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/ is nothing but silly
fiction: <http://bit.ly/12GULa6>
Using Bilk's own "logic" he posts his lies because the Underground
Marshmallow People pay him to.
* Bilk claims that there was a video showing rebar coated with something
which is assumed to be explosives (but Bilk does not say how anyone
knows this). The only "evidence" he offers is the welders had to have
some sort of special security clearance - but how would even this be
seen on a video? He never explains that either - nor what the
clearance was or who authorized it. Anyway, Bilk says the video was
held for many years, then shown on a government owned TV network only
to magically disappear from *all* stations and he says secret
government agents visited all libraries and remove them from there
while, coincidently coincidentally, not a single known person happened
to record the show on their VCR. [1] [2] [6] Additionally, Bilk has
not shown a single one of the regular welders he claims complained on
the video saying anything about the incident either before or even
after 9-11.
* Bilk claims people with special security clearances managed the
welding of rebar which was coated with highly flammable explosives.
[2] When questioned about why the sparks would not ignite the highly
flammable explosives coating the rebar, Bulk invented, on the fly,
stories about copper clamps or wet cloths (yes, really, wet cloths!)
[3]. He later said these things were merely "heat-sinking" and failed
to explain how flying sparks managed to not hit any of these highly
flammable explosives. [6] Later he said the sparks were blocked by
"heavy cardboard with aluminum foil" which he had not thought of
before [12] because he finally admitted he had not even seen this
fictional video. [13] Bilk could have just invented a story about how
the explosives were added *after* the rebar was all welded together
(and before concrete was added). That would make a lot more sense than
his fairy tales!
* Later Bilk said the video was produced in 1987. [14] This completely
contradicts many of his claims from the two above bullet points. A
list of some of the problems with Bilk's claims of the video (some
repeated from above):
* No known copies exist in any library.
* No known copies exist in any PBS station.
* No known VCR copies exist.
* No listing of it can be found in any 1990 TV guide.
* No reason why it would be shown on a government network
* No known welder comments in 1969 as the towers were made.
* No known welder comments when the show was broadcast in 1990.
* No known welder comments after 9-11.
* No people related to these welders can be found speaking up.
* No explanation for why you changed your story about it's "series"
* No comment in the video about explosives you say it proves.
* No agency has been named which authorized special clearances.
* No name of any producer has been given.
* No name of anyone working on this video has been given.
* No reason given why explosives were not added after the welding
* Bilk has admitted not even he saw the video yet insists it is real.
* Bilk claims other were saying it was compressed air that ejected tons
of steel from the Twin Towers, a completely bogus story Bilk
fabricated. At first he denied he even made this claim until I showed
him the many posts where he did - and quoted his own words back to
him. [4] His comments show he does not understand even the basics of
what knowledgeable people say actually happened to the Towers.
* Bilk has no evidence of some unknown force which would have prevented
steel from being ejected from the pancaking towers without the added
force of explosives. Nor can he explain how explosives would break
this unknown force where tons upon tons of falling building would not.
No such force has ever been described by physics. Yet Bilk continues
to insist only explosives could explain the forces needed to eject the
material seen in videos. [5] Bilk claims this is a lie because he has
never named the unnamed force [6], which *supports* the comments he is
trying to refute. Very funny!
* Bilk changes his story *in the same post* and claims that the
flammable material on the rebar exploded on 9-11 but also says he does
not recall if he was told it did or did not.[11] Bilk is clearly just
making things up as he goes! When faced with this Bilk claimed he was
talking about different rebar, but only the rebar from that post was
being discussed.
* Bilk claims detonators were brought into the Towers shortly before the
attack, but he fails to account for how this would be possible with
the heightened security, why nobody saw this, or why there is no video
of this. He also does not explain how these detonators survived the
fires and other extremes after the planes hit the towers, nor does he
explain why the detonators were able to set off the explosives but the
concussion force from the planes ramming into the building did not set
them off. All sorts of unnamed forces must be assumed for his story to
make any sense at all.
* Bilk has not refuted the alternate and equally reasonable idea that
the buildings were brought down by Underground Marshmallow People. He
responds to this claim worse than others respond to his claims - yet
whines others are not being respectful to his claims. He proves he is
a hypocrite. [7]
* Bilk claims that to merely quote Stallman is to "attack" him make no
sense. [8] Stallman's comments are an attack on decency and against
children.
* Bilk claims that to quote him is to lie about him [9] - a claim that is
clearly dishonest. He cannot explain why that would be so, but he
hates how his own words have shown his ignorance so he just lashes out
with some of the most vile attacks to ever be posted to COLA.
* Bilk claims that I and others are paid to post to COLA [10] - a claim
that is utter nonsense... and even Bilk admitted he would need
financial records to fully support his fairy tails and admits he has
no such records. He "evidence" is that people disagree with him and
the "advocates" and find amusement in watching them try to back their
cult-like BS and other nonsense.
The following is in no way a complete list... just examples of the things I
note, above. And, remember, Bilk has not refuted a single one of the above
bulleted points:
[1] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
94c7e1ee-41a3-4811...@kk9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
[2] d8eb487c-f16c-48cf...@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com
11639315-fa13-4152...@lg15g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
c2d7c52b-b7aa-4184...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
97ca9d19-5155-44b0...@vv8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
6e25123f-ce1f-4322...@5g2000pbs.googlegroups.com
fcbdeca5-a699-493a...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com
db4cf4d4-f5b2-40bd...@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
ef56ff12-06a6-4684...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com
[3] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
[4] b2e65490-015f-469b...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com
4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
8cd48407-4288-4f28...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com
67ce8cf4-58e1-47c2...@r13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com
b3d5b78c-4b57-43b4...@g4g2000yqd.googlegroups.com
[5] 7ebe3e0d-8efd-4a69...@fw24g2000vbb.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
5e7a5f07-9dc9-4a95...@h1g2000pbg.googlegroups.com
[6] c59ad337-2ef9-46ef...@k6g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
[7] e15defa6-96a6-4d30...@vc1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
88857097-401d-4c2d...@h1g2000pbg.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
11678110-4597-470b...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com
[8] 6a6b62ab-51bc-41cf...@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
23195fcb-7e1c-4d66...@kx16g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
[9] 4e3bf76f-1961-47c9...@r6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
[10] 6a6b62ab-51bc-41cf...@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
[11] 69d1db67-471f-4e5a...@n4g2000yqj.googlegroups.com
[12] 37fca37f-81b8-4a48...@ul7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
[13] b78d91b2-b053-49bb...@tz3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
[14] 81c9ea7f-4dc4-43c6...@k8g2000pbf.googlegroups.com
At one point Bilk complained about calling his ideas magical. So I asked him
the following questions. He never was able to answer any of them:
How is it not "magical" that this video disappeared from all TV
stations, libraries, and even home VCR collections?
How is it not "magical" that you did not even see this video but
know it showed not just a coating on rebar, not just a flammable
coating on rebar, but an *explosive* coating on rebar?
How is it not "magical" that this one set of buildings are the only
buildings in the world where such explosives have ever been put in
as the building was erected, at least that anyone can find?
How it is not "magical" that the coatings were embedded in concrete
yet people could discretely attach detonators to the explosives
throughout the building?
How is it not "magical" that none of the workers who you say
complained about losing this job never came forward any time before
or even after 9-11 to speak up about the events?
How is it not "magical" that a video was able to show some special
"security clearance"... one you have never named as far as I know.
How is it not "magical" that not a single spark hit any of this
rebar coated with highly flammable materials
How is it not "magical" that this video was not shown for many years
and then shown on a *government* owned network of stations?
How is it not "magical" that this video was first, according to you,
just one of series and was the only one missing, and yet the name of
the series cannot be known and none of the other videos can be
found... and only when this was pointed out did you decide there was
no such series?
The only way Bilk's ideas can be taken even slightly seriously is if one
believes in *magic*.
--
Proof Mark Bilk's http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/ is nothing but silly
fiction: <http://bit.ly/12GULa6>
Using Bilk's own "logic" he posts his lies because the Underground
Marshmallow People pay him to.
Snit
May 18, 2013, 1:57:34 PM5/18/13
to
0 new messages