|
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
There's nothing reasonable or rational about accepting a weak hypotheis that has the least scientific probablity (i.e. next to implausible), |
youre fucking kidding me right? the "least scientific probability" - you know, because its far more likely that thermite, a fucking incindiary ffs brought down one of the biggest buildings in the world, despite the massive logistical nightmare. its far more "probable" that flight 77 disappeared than it is to have crashed into the pentagon. its far more likely that the evil government brought down WTC7 for shits and giggles because blackops just love to increase the chance of being discovered as much as possible.
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
having a pro establishment attitude, and disingenuos allegation of intellectual dishonesty against individuals come from an academic tradition of logic and a scientific background... |
oh, sorry. i forgot. having a "scientific background" makes up for their obvious dishonesty not to mention their failure to have their bullshit theories tested by peer review which is a staple in getting credibility.
what would you call those that continuously repeat known fallacies that have been explained over and over and over? if someone knowingly presents facts that are lies and distortions, would you not call them intellectually dishonest?
id like to know why you support those that repeatedly repeat such fallacies whilst simultaneously avoiding a proper scientific examination of their work?
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
or selectively dismissing evidence, scientific anomolies, |
yeah, only fools like you see anomalies, if they really existed then we would have a nice peer-reviewed analysis which explained these anomalies now wouldnt we?
what's even more ridiculous is that the controlled demolition hypothesis doesn't actually explain any of these supposed anomalies in the first place, despite your ilk's belief that they are the panacea for everything.
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
and stumping on actual arguments you can't find a copy paste source for. |
oh please. trancer and cretinrot have copy-pasted x10 compared to me, the difference being that at least ive fucking read the opposing viewpoints and arguments.
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
There's also nothing reasonable or rational about putting faith in the corperate world (I'm not referring to the mainstream media, but 'engineering associations' for lack of a better term) to produce an analysis unhindered by political concerns of the "top elite" elements of the state or establishment. |
there's nothing reasonable or rational in kowtowing before the fantastic with no evidence asides from a juvenile conspiracy mindset to support such positions. Yeah, the entire global engineering community is merely a puppet of the new world order. Seriously dude, grow up.
the nonsense that you guys let through your logic senses on a daily basis whilst thumbing your nose at real peer reviewed analysis is fucking ridiculous and i am at a loss for you to explain such an asymmetrical level of scepticism.
___________________
|