ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags aa77 , cit , Craig McKee , David Chandler

Reply
Old 23rd March 2016, 06:37 AM   #41
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Source, please?
email of minutes from last teleconference. Years ago I participated in the call... then I changed to listening.... then I stopped listening live and listened to the recorded version... then I just read the emails of agenda and the meeting minutes.

I think these people are intelligent, but deluded and driven by some pretty nutting beliefs... and lack in education in science and engineering... which doesn't seem to have the least bit of impact to prevent them from being forensic "technical" investigators and self declared experts.

They completely refuse to allow anyone one who doesn't subscribe to the conspiratorial view to participate and that everything these days is a false flag. The movement is fracturing because of the junk scientists fighting over which whacky theory is the real deal... such as:

no plane hit the pentagon
something else but not the commercial flight hit the pentagon
the whole pentagon event was staged to look like a plane hit the pentagon
bombs did the damage at the pentagon
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2017, 01:59 PM   #42
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,229
Craig McKee has a brilliant idea about how to overcoe the schisms that are so apparent in his blog and the comments to it:

"9/11 TRUTHERS MUST FOCUS ON DESTROYING THE OFFICIAL STORY, NOT SPLINTERING OVER DOZENS OF THEORIES"

In short, he proposes to abandon the scientific method where theories are only replaced when a new theory is found that explains the totality of evidence better.
Instead, he advises all truthers to concentrate on being/remaining to be "NO-CLAIMERS".

His problems are manyfold. First, he is too much married to a theory (the CIT "fly-over" nonsense) to heed his own advice. Secondly to x-thly, he is read, and commented, by adherents of too many competing Churches of Truthdom. We find Jim Fetzer, we see Dwain Deets, there is Wayne Coste. And again they argue about demolition method and plane-or-no-plane at the Pentagon.


It's a strange and sad day when I find myself agreeing with Dawin Deets and Jim Fetzer at the same time: Dwain explains nicely why a high-momentum impact on the SoC path, such as a 757 crash - best explains all the Pentagon evidence. And then Fetzer certainly is right with the following:
Originally Posted by James Fetzer
With no theory, we have no story to weave the data together, just an assortment of facts, some far more interesting than others, no doubt; but without a narrative, none of it has much power to impress the public.
These guys are effectively suspecting the others of being plants and shills and agents and dupes. Why? Because their "facts" do not, cannot, converge on a consistent, realistic narrative. They think that the other guys' theories are wrong because they are in fact wrong - all of them! And Craig comes dangerously close to admitting this.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th May 2017, 12:39 PM   #43
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,174
Speaking of schisms,...

I stumbled across this article in the Foreign Policy Journal the other day by John D. Wyndham, who makes reference to a group I was previously unfamiliar with called Scientists for 9/11 Truth.

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...ntagon-debate/

In the article the author (who thinks there was CD at the WTC) applies the scientific method - and pretty well at that - to the Pentagon attack and concludes it was AA Flight 77. He then insists the 9/11 Truth Movement should stop bickering over competing nonsense claims and all rally around that conclusion.

The comments section of course contains the usual bickering drivel and ignore all the other evidence, where is the video non-thinking, strongly indicating the message was not heeded.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th May 2017, 04:42 AM   #44
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,738
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
Speaking of schisms,...

I stumbled across this article in the Foreign Policy Journal the other day by John D. Wyndham, who makes reference to a group I was previously unfamiliar with called Scientists for 9/11 Truth.

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...ntagon-debate/

In the article the author (who thinks there was CD at the WTC) applies the scientific method - and pretty well at that - to the Pentagon attack and concludes it was AA Flight 77. He then insists the 9/11 Truth Movement should stop bickering over competing nonsense claims and all rally around that conclusion.

The comments section of course contains the usual bickering drivel and ignore all the other evidence, where is the video non-thinking, strongly indicating the message was not heeded.
With people like this,
https://youtu.be/tAXmie-plnA

I don't think uniting around a common theme is even in the distant future.
The fact I caused one of the first Schisms, still brings me laughs.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:53 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.