Are debunkers all that keep the "truth movement" alive?

CHF

Illuminator
CHF
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
3,871
These days it honestly seems that way.

Truthers make no effort at peer-review, no effort at reaching out to the scientific/engineering community, no effort at organizing politically and no effort at anything else the least bit productive. Hell they can't even be bothered coming up with a narrative!

So just what do they do? Bitch and moan about debunkers. Yup, that's pretty much it.

Think about it:

David Ray Griffin writes a whole book directed against...Popular Mechanics.

Willy Rod names a speaking tour after...Mark Roberts (gravy).

Truthers launch a juvenile campaign against....Bill Maher.

Truthers bombard their media critics like George Monbiot with hate-mail and even threats.

Whenever Dylan and his friends come up with another "smoking gun" their first reaction is usually "let's see how the guys at JREF explain this!" or "In your face Gravy!" (You'd think their reaction would be something like: "hey, let's expose the NWO fascists with these incredible new info! Maybe we could even get it verified!")

We seem to be the only reason why a few of these sad people are still holding on.

A recent example is JHarrow, who claimed to have a couple really good questions for tonights HardFire show. These were questions "based on new research," questions that "will knock your socks off, so tune in."

Unfortunately, he couldn't get through. So what exactly were his amazing questions? What was this "new research" he spoke of? He's not saying, cuz apparently it's meant only for the NYC tour guide who destroys truthers in his spare time! Yup, Gravy's the alone recipient of "new research" and brilliant questions about 9/11.

So, in a nutshell, the truthers have apparently given up on defeating the NWO and instead are placing all their hope in battling...us.

I tell ya - hiring us was the best move the Bush regime ever made! :D
 
Rob Balsamo flatly refuses to draw up a paper outlining point by point the supposed inconsistencies between the DFDR data and the advertised flight path of FLT 77 instead choosing to battle it out on internet forums to the point of coming here, getting banned for being a dick then coming back in other sock reincanations. This forum is his white whale rather than actually getting his message out to a wider mainstream audience.

Go figure!
 
There is market for woo, like tax evasion books and DVDs, "truth movement" DVDs and books make money off of a anti-logic group of people who remain gullible for crazy ideas about 9/11. There is a market for crazy stuff…

It does seem like a "Unbreakable" scenario...
 
CHF said:
These days it honestly seems that way.

Truthers make no effort at peer-review, no effort at reaching out to the scientific/engineering community, no effort at organizing politically and no effort at anything else the least bit productive. Hell they can't even be bothered coming up with a narrative!

So just what do they do? Bitch and moan about debunkers. Yup, that's pretty much it.

Think about it:

David Ray Griffin writes a whole book directed against...Popular Mechanics.

Willy Rod names a speaking tour after...Mark Roberts (gravy).

Truthers launch a juvenile campaign against....Bill Maher.

Truthers bombard their media critics like George Monbiot with hate-mail and even threats.

Whenever Dylan and his friends come up with another "smoking gun" their first reaction is usually "let's see how the guys at JREF explain this!" or "In your face Gravy!" (You'd think their reaction would be something like: "hey, let's expose the NWO fascists with these incredible new info! Maybe we could even get it verified!")

We seem to be the only reason why a few of these sad people are still holding on.

A recent example is JHarrow, who claimed to have a couple really good questions for tonights HardFire show. These were questions "based on new research," questions that "will knock your socks off, so tune in."

Unfortunately, he couldn't get through. So what exactly were his amazing questions? What was this "new research" he spoke of? He's not saying, cuz apparently it's meant only for the NYC tour guide who destroys truthers in his spare time! Yup, Gravy's the alone recipient of "new research" and brilliant questions about 9/11.

So, in a nutshell, the truthers have apparently given up on defeating the NWO and instead are placing all their hope in battling...us.

I tell ya - hiring us was the best move the Bush regime ever made! :D
Click to expand...

You're right about this CHF, it is their new operational tactic. They question the evidence shown to them by asking: How do you know what they say is true? Which is just plain conjecture on their part by being argumentative.
JAQ is replaced by JBA: Just Being Argumentative.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
CHF said:
So, in a nutshell, the truthers have apparently given up on defeating the NWO and instead are placing all their hope in battling...us.
Click to expand...
There is some truth (pun intended) in what you say. Gravy has become the primary target for a number of CTists here, RedIbis, SwingDangler have also developed a man crush on getting their Gravy.

But the group your talking about are the trolls. The subset of CTists that really don't' give a crap about 9/11 other then as a vehicle to act out their adolescence and testosterone infused anger. They make no positive arguments for any alternative hypothesis, nor do they develop any detailed arguments against NIST or any other evidencery based research on 9/11, other then the occasional cut and paste from a CT site. Their goal is create waves, a ruckus, incite and get a reaction.

Some argue no troll should go unchallenged for the sake of the lurkers. I disagree. If the lurkers are swayed by the trolls, they won't be swayed by honest debate anyway. Apollo, GregoryUrich and a few others often present genuine arguments which deserve honest rebuttal. Lurkers will benefit from those debates. Trolls should ignored.

Ban the trolls? No, let them piss in the wind, they deserve the back spray.
 
I wonder what would happen if somebody posted this at LCF.
 
MIKILLINI said:
You're right about this CHF, it is their new operational tactic.
Click to expand...
I think CHF's point was whether they would finally fizzle out completely if the debunkers stopped paying them attention. I think maybe so.

It's like the jingle from The Simpsons episode: Just Don't Look.

[Paul Anka]
To stop those monsters 1-2-3
Here's a fresh new way that's trouble free
It's got Paul Anka's guarantee...
[Lisa]
Guarantee void in Tennessee!
[All]
Just don't look!
Just don't look!
Just don't look!
Just don't look!
 
Last edited:
I'm also very curious why so many Truthers are obsessed with Gravy.

Is Gravy stopping them from pursuing a new investigation?

Is Gravy stopping them from presenting their smoking-gun evidence to the media?

Is Gravy stopping them from picketing?

Is Gravy stopping them from starting a revolution?




He's only one man, and he hasn't done anything but argue against you. Grow some balls, Truthers.
 
DavidJames said:
...
But the group your talking about are the trolls. The subset of CTists that really don't' give a crap about 9/11 other then as a vehicle to act out their adolescence and testosterone infused anger. They make no positive arguments for any alternative hypothesis, nor do they develop any detailed arguments against NIST or any other evidencery based research on 9/11, other then the occasional cut and paste from a CT site. Their goal is create waves, a ruckus, incite and get a reaction.

Some argue no troll should go unchallenged for the sake of the lurkers. I disagree. If the lurkers are swayed by the trolls, they won't be swayed by honest debate anyway. Apollo, GregoryUrich and a few others often present genuine arguments which deserve honest rebuttal. Lurkers will benefit from those debates. Trolls should ignored.

Ban the trolls? No, let them piss in the wind, they deserve the back spray.
Click to expand...
good post...
To not post! Perchance to ignore:--ay, there's the rub;
For in that not posting a death of what false information that may come,
Void of evidence, vacant of fact… to see an absence of reply, now that is a good dream to have and see...
 
1337m4n said:
He's only one man, and he hasn't done anything but argue against you.
Click to expand...
That's my point, that's exactly why they go after him. It has nothing to do with finding the "truth" about 9/11. They are Internet punks trolling for a fight. If they had balls they would join a street gang or be a common thug or criminal. But with the Internet, they get to act out their aggression without breaking a sweat.

Hmmm, maybe I just argued against my previous point, maybe arguing with them here keeps them in front of the computer and safely away from harming others.
 
Last edited:
CHF said:
<snip>
So, in a nutshell, the truthers have apparently given up on defeating the NWO and instead are placing all their hope in battling...us.

I tell ya - hiring us was the best move the Bush regime ever made! :D<s/nip>
Click to expand...

The reptilian overlords thank you for your support! Rumor has it that we'll all be getting new golf shirts at the next NWO picnic....Izod shirts....:alligator
(shhhhhh....it's sposed to be a sekrit)
 
I'm sure many here find the current state of the TM to be absolutely hilarious.

First they tried to pass themselves off as being "scientific," but soon found themselves so hopelessly outclassed by real science and engineering that they ended up creating their own journal for "peer review."

Now they have turned their attention primarily to on-line opponents....and are still getting crushed!

:dl:
 
CHF said:
I'm sure many here find the current state of the TM to be absolutely hilarious.

First they tried to pass themselves off as being "scientific," but soon found themselves so hopelessly outclassed by real science and engineering that they ended up creating their own journal for "peer review."

Now they have turned their attention primarily to on-line opponents....and are still getting crushed!

:dl:
Click to expand...

Yes, so hopelessly outclassed that you are yet to provide a single calculation that backs up your definitive statement about the total collapse of the towers.
 
void of evidence and facts; just talk and hearsay; lies, false information and faulty logic; not much of a effort and less of a movement - 9/11 truth
87904670cd1dc0fcb.jpg

lack of action, just talk - 9/11 truth
OP correct; all they have left is to spew their empty short quips to those who debunk and understand 9/11
 
Last edited:
1337m4n said:
I'm also very curious why so many Truthers are obsessed with Gravy.

Is Gravy stopping them from pursuing a new investigation?

Is Gravy stopping them from presenting their smoking-gun evidence to the media?

Is Gravy stopping them from picketing?

Is Gravy stopping them from starting a revolution?




He's only one man, and he hasn't done anything but argue against you. Grow some balls, Truthers.
Click to expand...

Since twoofers seem to spend most of their time "just asking questions", and since Gravy has a reputation for providing solid answers to nearly all of the questions they have asked, and since they are running out of questions and goofy theories, all they have left is to attack the messenger.
 
CHF said:
We seem to be the only reason why a few of these sad people are still holding on.
Click to expand...

You raise a good point. I have to admit, I guess I'm guilty of giving them some attention that they so desperately crave.

The CIT crazies have released another video which - they claimed - was evidence that the 84th RADES data was fraudulent, and also pointed to a third plane being involved in addition to the "decoy" jet and the c130... I should have walked away.. but it's like a freaking train wreck with them. I just can't look away!

It honestly leaves me dumbfounded when I read what some of the people over there post... It's pretty safe to accuse these people of being in denial, but I'm guilty of being in my own little world of denial where people just can't be this stupid. :D
 
JHarrow said:
Yes, so hopelessly outclassed that you are yet to provide a single calculation that backs up your definitive statement about the total collapse of the towers.
Click to expand...

"Find me a calculation that I won't understand!"

:dl:

That is what the TM has been reduced to.
 
JHarrow said:
Yes, so hopelessly outclassed that you are yet to provide a single calculation that backs up your definitive statement about the total collapse of the towers.
Click to expand...

Have you ever attempted to read any papers by Zhenek Bazant and others?

"The kinetic energy of the top part of the tower impacting the floor below was found to be about 8.4x larger than the plastic energy absorption capability of the underlying story, and considerably higher than that if fracturing were taken into account (Bažant and Zhou 2002a). This fact, along with the fact that during the progressive collapse of underlying stories the loss of gravitational potential per story is much greater than the energy dissipated per story, was sufficient for Bažant and Zhou (2002a) to conclude, purely on energy grounds, that the tower was doomed once the top part of the tower dropped through the height of one story (or even 0.5 m)."
Link to paper

Again, I'm not an expert in the required fields to even understand what the formulas in the paper mean exactly, but the abstract and introduction should make perfect sense to the layman.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom