When one side is backed by faith and the other backed by science was there really any doubt as to what the outcome would be? They should join forces with IDers, and combined, the truthiness of their pseudo-science will be 3 fold.
/love how people try to create non-scientific "fact" by creating doubt
josh4
quote:
Originally posted by occrider
When one side is backed by faith and the other backed by science was there really any doubt as to what the outcome would be? They should join forces with IDers, and combined, the truthiness of their pseudo-science will be 3 fold.
/love how people try to create fact by creating doubt
haha I admit the PM guys first made that comparison in the debate but you couldn't help and twist the screw. ;)
occrider
quote:
Originally posted by josh4
haha I admit the PM guys first made that comparison in the debate but you couldn't help and twist the screw. ;)
It's an excellent comparison that deserves reiteration.
shaolin_Z
quote:
Originally posted by occrider
It's an excellent comparison that deserves reiteration.
Your vehement passion about no governmental involvment in the attacks isn't very reflective of high confidence in your world view. At the very least, it makes you come across as a little emotionaly insecure about your opinion on this topic. I'm sorry, no offence Occ, but I don't see any reason for you to get so upset about it if you think a conspiracy involving the goverment is so utterly ridiculous. It's not like you have anything to loose if you truly believe goverment complicity is not the case. That goes for the rest of you too.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Your vehement passion about no governmental involvment in the attacks isn't very reflective of high confidence in your world view. At the very least, it makes you come across as a little emotionaly insecure about your opinion on this topic. I'm sorry, no offence Occ, but I don't see any reason for you to get so upset about it if you think a conspiracy involving the goverment is so utterly ridiculous. It's not like you have anything to loose if you truly believe goverment complicity is not the case. That goes for the rest of you too.
ill just speak for myself, but im sure occ would agree- i get upset because people become so convinced of something which has its roots in intellectual/academic fraud. i couldnt care less whether the government instigated the attacks or not, its the methods by which the theories come into existence that really gets to me.
for instance, after the port arthur massacre where 35 people were killed, theories burst forth about it being a government conspiracy carried out by elite Oz forces, so the government could bring in stricter gun laws. sound familiar?
there was plenty of "evidence", such as how could a mentally deficient man shoot people with such accuracy? they point at supposed holes in the official narrative as evidence to something, which it clearly isnt.
whilst there may be a number of questions still circling re 9/11, pointing at apparent or supposed anomalies in such a chaotic environment isnt evidence of a government conspiracy. if anyone had something more then id be jumping sides immediately. unfortunately, after 5 years, theyve still got little more than poor research and questionable assessments to back up their extreme claims.
occrider
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Your vehement passion about no governmental involvment in the attacks isn't very reflective of high confidence in your world view. At the very least, it makes you come across as a little emotionaly insecure about your opinion on this topic. I'm sorry, no offence Occ, but I don't see any reason for you to get so upset about it if you think a conspiracy involving the goverment is so utterly ridiculous. It's not like you have anything to loose if you truly believe goverment complicity is not the case. That goes for the rest of you too.
I've spent the better part of 2002-2004 arguing conspiracy theories about 9/11 on TA to no end until frustration drove me to avoid every and all 9/11 discussions other than making passing comments. Oftentimes, when I had very little to work with, I spent hours doing the research into engineering and phsyics to properly substnatiate my rebuttals. In every instance that I can remember, I don't think very many have responded to my arguments in a reasonable fashion that is reflective of the time I took to properly respond to their arguments. I don't have a vehement passion about "no government involvement", I have a vehement passion against unsubstantiated, unscientific arguments. To be frank, there is no aggregate, defendable scientific explanation for 9/11 that conspiracy theorists have been able to stand behind. Their tactics consist of creating doubts about a million little things, the vast majority of which, if not all, fail, and thus we are supposed to subscribe to their grandeoise, unsubstantiated theory which would not last half a second of the very same level of scrutiny that they apply towards the "official" explanation. I'm not upset at all. I just ridicule what I see worthy of ridicule. Some days it's 9/11 ... most it's the administration and Iraq, and others it's crazy religious people. Do you think I have anything to "lose" by there being a government conspiracy?? Do you really think I want these clowns in office?? Do you think I want this congress in office???
Danila
The video is gone of google video and off youtube. :( I would love to see it
shaolin_Z
quote:
Originally posted by Danila
The video is gone of google video and off youtube. :( I would love to see it
You could try Democracy Now's website. They should still have it in audio.
LazFX
quote:
Originally posted by Danila
The video is gone of google video and off youtube. :( I would love to see it
They probrobly took it off cause how foolish it made the CTs look. :D I am now sure that the CTs will say now that Google and You Tube are all part of the cover up. ha ha ha
Danila
Its back up on YOUTUBE! sweeet
shaolin_Z
Why isn't anyone (including the Popular Mechanics guys) addressing the quite out of the ordinary and convenient change of chain of command for NORAD? If it weren't for Cheney's stand down orders, whatever hit the pentagon would not have hit it. That is not incompetence, that's Cheney ensuring an attack on the pentagon. It's complicity, end of story.
shaolin_Z
quote:
Originally posted by occrider
I've spent the better part of 2002-2004 arguing conspiracy theories about 9/11 on TA to no end until frustration drove me to avoid every and all 9/11 discussions other than making passing comments. Oftentimes, when I had very little to work with, I spent hours doing the research into engineering and phsyics to properly substnatiate my rebuttals. In every instance that I can remember, I don't think very many have responded to my arguments in a reasonable fashion that is reflective of the time I took to properly respond to their arguments. I don't have a vehement passion about "no government involvement", I have a vehement passion against unsubstantiated, unscientific arguments. To be frank, there is no aggregate, defendable scientific explanation for 9/11 that conspiracy theorists have been able to stand behind. Their tactics consist of creating doubts about a million little things, the vast majority of which, if not all, fail, and thus we are supposed to subscribe to their grandeoise, unsubstantiated theory which would not last half a second of the very same level of scrutiny that they apply towards the "official" explanation. I'm not upset at all. I just ridicule what I see worthy of ridicule. Some days it's 9/11 ... most it's the administration and Iraq, and others it's crazy religious people. Do you think I have anything to "lose" by there being a government conspiracy?? Do you really think I want these clowns in office?? Do you think I want this congress in office???
Well, you have alot more to loose if these guys did infact orchestrate 9-11, or had forknowledge (which they did) and deliberately allowed 9-11 taking place, and still being in office, as opposed to neigther one of those and being in office. Eighter way (orchestration or deliberate inaction), it makes perfect sense for them to do so. They couldn't have begun their implementation of PNAC's 'Rebuilding Americas Defences' agenda with out "some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor." I don't why understand somone as intelligent as yourself doesn't connect those dots, when it's in black and white in their own agenda/document. "Incompetence" is a very convenient projected/perceived public image isn't it?
