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.
Reply
Old 27th July 2009, 07:01 PM   #161
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
See if this shifts your opinion any. If it does not does that have any meaning ? Will people be able to assess which way you will jump ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ4dVo5QgYg Firemen's Testimony- Study
God, not this stupid un-scientific study again?!?!!?!?! Can we drag this thing out to pasture and go all "Office Space" on it??? Thanks.

PS, you got OWNED in the VERY NEXT POST!!!! #20 HA hA!!!
triforcharity 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 27th July 2009, 07:03 PM   #162
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by scott.in.taiwan View Post
The impression I'm left with is that the Truther Movement (or whatever you call it) is on its last leg. I doubt they'll disappear, but they are less and less able to generate interest among mainstream people who might have had sympathy for them. They are increasingly left with only highly committed whack-jobs who are willing to accept any claim.

But what do I know? I never even imagined such a thing could exist until a few months ago. Is this a correct perception of the situation?
Judging by the response of Truthers in this very thread, the answer is "yes." You've gotten a sterling demonstration of the status of the Truth Movement. Looks like your thread is a winner.
R.Mackey 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 27th July 2009, 07:41 PM   #163
KJC
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 97
You know, when I look at dozens of copies of Neils Harrits Danish television interview on nanothermite on YouTube, all with hundreds of thousands of views and all 5-starred to death... the troofer movement is not dead. Not by a long shot.
KJC 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 27th July 2009, 07:42 PM   #164
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,838
The one reassuring thought is that youtube =/= real life.
carlitos 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 27th July 2009, 07:47 PM   #165
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by KJC View Post
You know, when I look at dozens of copies of Neils Harrits Danish television interview on nanothermite on YouTube, all with hundreds of thousands of views and all 5-starred to death... the troofer movement is not dead. Not by a long shot.
this one has 25 million
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


i seen 255K for neils 1st video

ETA: at 18 seconds the kids asks a question that most truthers should ask themselves
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus

Last edited by Justin39640; 27th July 2009 at 07:50 PM.
Justin39640 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 27th July 2009, 07:56 PM   #166
KJC
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 97
Well, what I mean is, there are all these videos about Niels Harrit and not really anything debunking him.

I was gonna try to debunk him myself despite the fact I'm not all the clued up on the chemistry aspects of the situation, but I'm waiting for a truther to who said he was gonna make a video proving why thermite was "100%" proven to demolish the towers. So far he still hasn't made the video.
KJC 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 27th July 2009, 07:57 PM   #167
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by KJC View Post
You know, when I look at dozens of copies of Neils Harrits Danish television interview on nanothermite on YouTube, all with hundreds of thousands of views and all 5-starred to death... the troofer movement is not dead. Not by a long shot.

I see Rick Astley is burning up the musical charts. You know, according to YouTube...
Cl1mh4224rd 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 27th July 2009, 08:04 PM   #168
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Scott,

Welcome my friend. Make youself at home.

If you REALLY wanna see just how disrespectful "truthers" can be, waatch this video.

Warning: Its got 90 curse words in 8:53 seconds, so be prepared.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFf-buObxl8

Watched it?? Good. Did you notice the bells in the background?? Yep, those are church bells from the Church near GZ. Guess what?? They aare in the MIDDLE of the cermony for the 3000 deaths on 9/11.

These sub-human lifeforms decided to attack at firefighter DURING this time. He is paying his ******* respects!! Leaave him alone DAMMIT!!

[/rant] [/off soapbox]

Steve Austin,

I figured it out in about 3 months that the TM uses the same BS over and over and over again. Its fairly simple. Click on page 101 of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories thread, and look at the titles of the threads. Now, click on page 1. See a pattern??? Not hard eh???

And yes, I had heard about the "truth" movement before 3 months ago, I just didn't know that they were so disrespectfull as to blame the FDNY for killing the people in the towers. That is whan I got really into it.
triforcharity 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 27th July 2009, 08:16 PM   #169
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,792
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
Scott,

Welcome my friend. Make youself at home.

>snipped for brevity<

And yes, I had heard about the "truth" movement before 3 months ago, I just didn't know that they were so disrespectfull as to blame the FDNY for killing the people in the towers. That is whan I got really into it.

Youtube is one of the most vile places to start arguing with CT nuts, because the moderation isn't good (understandably given the size of the site). I've started posting my own videos related to more private occasions and so I've pretty much halted my activity in dealing with them since I'm not keen on sharing details of my personal life (anime conventions, and hurricane videos). I like keeping all of that separate from what I do here...

There are kooks at my university... but I haven't run into any of them because I never took interest in the zeitgeist, terrorstorm, or Obama Deception crap. But out of the people I've openly discussed this conspiracy theory with I met three people who believe in one particular aspect but kind of stayed out of the really creepy ****... one believed 93 was shot down, and one believed in some of the TV fakery... but none of those people gave any indication of believing in the CD theory, or anything particularly crazy on the level of what I see online. The tv fakery person wasn't a no-planer interestingly... and the one who believed in the shoot down believed it was done to prevent it from reaching its target... SO I must have gotten the tamer bunch....
__________________
Grizzly Bear 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 27th July 2009, 10:39 PM   #170
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
Originally Posted by runlikell View Post
She also got the vote of Noam Chomsky, the world's most cited living scholar. The 5000 felon thing was not EVER part of her campaign. You are being misleading.
Though like the bowel movement failed she also failed.
~enigma~ 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 27th July 2009, 11:26 PM   #171
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by Stellafane View Post
Oh, this is just too perfect: Noam Chomsky believes that 9/11 was an inside job -- but he still thinks you guys are idiots!!!

Somehow, this is something you want to be true?!? Oh man, oh man o man o man....
Unfortunately Stellafane it is true. You better start learnng to live with it rather than denying the obvious.
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'

Last edited by bill smith; 27th July 2009 at 11:27 PM.
bill smith 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 27th July 2009, 11:29 PM   #172
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,576
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Unfortunately Stellafane it is true. You better start leantng to live with it rather than denying the obvious.

You are right, it is true that Chomsky thinks 9/11 CTists are idiots.

I don't see why Stellafane would have a problem living with this, or that he is denying the obvious idiocy.
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele 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 28th July 2009, 01:22 AM   #173
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 39,380
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Unfortunately Stellafane it is true. You better start learnng to live with it rather than denying the obvious.
What's it like, Bill? I mean, when you step through that looking glass over there in Bizarro Troofer World where up is down and yes means no? It must be pretty confusing, no?

Let us try to help. I know how you do so love to click links so I have to believe that you must've missed this one, provided by your good friend Gravy.

http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?o...rectlink&id=24

Give it a try. It won't bite.

Now if you could cite the ACTUAL WORDS - not your frothing lunatoid fantasies, but his actual words - where Naom has led you to believe that he supports the conspiracy theories, we'd certainly be pleased to see them.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz 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 28th July 2009, 02:34 AM   #174
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
When I first started studying the topic, exploring the mechanics of the tower's disintegration was correctly judged by many 911 skeptics then to be a red herring - as counterproductive as obsessing about what did or didn't hit the Pentagon - , or worse, and predicted that it would be used to destroy any chances of exposing US complicity in the attacks. Such arguments do not feature much in the discourse of those that 911 debunkers are interested in fighting nowadays.
And yet it's the topic of eleven threads currently on the first page of this forum, and is still actively being pushed by Steven Jones, Niels Harrit, Richard Gage, Tony Szamboti, Graeme MacQueen, Heiwa, bill smith, Homeland Insurgency, and those are just the ones I can think of without looking it up. Take a look at The 9/11 Forum on freeforums; virtually the only topic of conversation between femr2 and Major Tom is the minutiae of the collapse of the Twin Towers, in an attempt to find the one trifling anomaly that hasn't been explained in detail and hance can be falsely claimed as the ultimate proof of CD. Boredom with this obsessive behaviour is the main reason I don't read that forum any more. Your argument is a classic example of the No True Scotsman fallacy, but in this case you're excluding almost everyone north of Hadrian's Wall; the vain and hopeless attempts to prove the WTC collapses suspicious are still now, as they were in September 2001, the central delusion of the 9/11 truth movement, and this is instantly obvious to the casual observer.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 28th July 2009 at 04:23 AM. Reason: Corrected a forum username - didn't intend to change it, just couldn't remember it originally.
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 02:43 AM   #175
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by SteveAustin View Post
LOL, that was my exact thought. This is just another long time cult member trying to look like he is new just to try and add some more credibility to the cult.

I've noticed quite a few new cult members posting here, all seem to have the "debunker" lingo down pretty well. I wonder if they are part of an expanded paid internet 9/11 debunker group or part of the original 1000 they hired back in 2001?
32 A quick way of getting rid of an opponent’s assertion, or of throwing suspicion on it, is by putting it into some odious category.

Originally Posted by SteveAustin View Post
DING! DING! DING!

Yes JihadJane, that is a big part of it for many "debunkers". There are other factors of course but some of the "debunkers" here on JREF jump on any and everything "truthers" say so quickly that it looks exactly like tribalism.
32 A quick way of getting rid of an opponent’s assertion, or of throwing suspicion on it, is by putting it into some odious category.

Originally Posted by SteveAustin View Post
Now that statement deserves the MOST IRONIC STATEMENT award if ever I saw one. Of course there's always the very real possibility that Dave is paid to say these things and does not really believe them himself, in which case it is not ironic at all, just evil
32 A quick way of getting rid of an opponent’s assertion, or of throwing suspicion on it, is by putting it into some odious category.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 02:45 AM   #176
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by SteveAustin View Post
Oh you mean all that evidence that I have posted on other webistes and have invited you and all JREF "debunkers" to to debate the evidence there (and i've offered this to all JREF many, many, many times but everyone has chickened out...go figure, I guess you all need your safety net of having 20 other paid disinfo agents to cover your back. Hmmm maybe you could all joing the other sites together?? No that won't work unless you also get the mods on your side before you start posting)
19 Should your opponent expressly challenge you to produce any objection to some definite point in his argument, and you have nothing to say, try to make the argument less specific.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 02:46 AM   #177
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by SteveAustin View Post
PROOF that the average JREF "debunker" has no clue what the real world is.

"Debunkers" delusional thinking (those that are not being paid to spout this nonsense) here for everyone to see.
38 Become personal, insulting and rude as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 03:02 AM   #178
Klaymore
Critical Thinker
 
Klaymore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 282
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
I went there, and like, the top 50 sites were 99% porn!!! Heck, I think even midget lesbian horse porn gets more hits.
That's 'cause of me. Midget lesbian horses are SO freakin' hot!

I also really appreciate the link to the emo site; I am way cooler than those guys!
__________________
Zardoz is the greatest film ever made by a group of gay Irish teenagers as a prerequisite to graduation from a 72-hour drug-rehabilitation seminar.

Last edited by Klaymore; 28th July 2009 at 03:10 AM. Reason: Abuse of English language (felony), Reckless disregard for syntax (misdemeanor), typing at unsafe speed (punishable by fine).
Klaymore 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 28th July 2009, 03:05 AM   #179
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Here's a thought. He actually researched the topic and did some reading before he posted.

Try it sometimes.

I grant that it probably doesn’t take much research to master the characteristic playground language of debunker juvenile deliquency but the way scott.in.taiwan has levered nearly every traditional debunker talking point and insult in his/her brief appearance gives a strong impression of prepared articfice or, if not that, an impression of someone inexplicably keen to bond with the welcoming in-group

--------------------------------

re Chomsky:

One thing that appears to be be missing from the Chomsky discussion here is his insight that the attacks don’t matter because, in the context of the history of US-perpetrated terror and violence around the world the violence of 911 atrocity is not particulalrly significant except in terms of the number of simultaneous deaths and the fact that the victims weren’t in far off countries in South America, the Middle East, Central Asia etc etc.

In other words: Welcome, to the hyper-violent world of US foreign policy, US America.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Interviewer: if 9/11 was an inside job, then what’s to say that Bush Et Al., if cornered or not, wouldn't resort to another more heinous attack of grander proportions in the age of nuclear terrorism – which by its very nature would petrify populations the world over, leading citizens to cower under the Bush umbrella of power.

Noam Chomsky: Wrong question, in my opinion. They were carrying out far more serious crimes, against Americans as well, before 9/11 -- crimes that literally threaten human survival. They may well resort to further crimes if activists here prefer not to deal with them and to focus their attention on arcane and dubious theories about 9/11.

- extract, quoted:

http://www.oilempire.us/chomsky.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. - Noam Chomsky
__________________

Last edited by JihadJane; 28th July 2009 at 03:56 AM.
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 03:08 AM   #180
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by KJC View Post
Well, what I mean is, there are all these videos about Niels Harrit and not really anything debunking him.

I was gonna try to debunk him myself despite the fact I'm not all the clued up on the chemistry aspects of the situation, but I'm waiting for a truther to who said he was gonna make a video proving why thermite was "100%" proven to demolish the towers. So far he still hasn't made the video.
It's been discussed more or less to death here, and the forum has moved on, but there are some good resources in the thread, "New Thread to Discuss The Excellent Analysis of Jones latest paper", at http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=140017. In particular look for posts by Sunstealer, who has done an extraordinary amount of analysis of Harrit's work.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 03:43 AM   #181
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Not a casual observer.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
And yet it's the topic of eleven threads currently on the first page of this forum, and is still actively being pushed by Steven Jones, Niels Harrit, Richard Gage, Tony Szamboti, Graeme MacQueen, Heiwa, bill smith, Homeland Insurgency, and those are just the ones I can think of without looking it up. Take a look at The 9/11 Forum on freeforums; virtually the only topic of conversation between femr[whatever] and Major Tom is the minutiae of the collapse of the Twin Towers, in an attempt to find the one trifling anomaly that hasn't been explained in detail and hance can be falsely claimed as the ultimate proof of CD. Boredom with this obsessive behaviour is the main reason I don't read that forum any more. Your argument is a classic example of the No True Scotsman fallacy, but in this case you're excluding almost everyone north of Hadrian's Wall; the vain and hopeless attempts to prove the WTC collapses suspicious are still now, as they were in September 2001, the central delusion of the 9/11 truth movement, and this is instantly obvious to the casual observer.

Dave
You don't appear to have understood my point which was simply that scott.in.taiwan's observation that TM arguments haven't changed down the years doesn't match my own observation.

Far from remaining the same, there has been a dramatic shift towards focussing physical evidence..

For example, neither Michael C. Ruppert's 2004, 600+ page book on 911, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil nor Paul Thompson's 9/11 Timeline (The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11--and America's Response) and the related DVD 9/11: Press for Truth focus on physical evidence.
__________________

Last edited by JihadJane; 28th July 2009 at 04:11 AM.
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 04:06 AM   #182
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
You don't appear to have understood my point which was simply that scott.in.taiwan's observation that TM arguments haven't changed down the years doesn't match my own observation.

Far from remaining the same, there has been a dramatic shift towards focussing physical evidence..

For example, neither Michael C. Ruppert's 2004, 600+ page book on 911, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil and Paul Thompson's 9/11 Timeline (The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute: A Comprehensive Chronicle of the Road to 9/11--and America's Response) and the related DVD 9/11: Press for Truth do not focus on the physical evidence.
So what you're saying is that the output of the truth movement in 2004 is a good guide to the output of the truth movement in 2009, and this is evidence that the output of the truth movement has changed over the years?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 04:10 AM   #183
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
Originally Posted by KJC View Post
You know, when I look at dozens of copies of Neils Harrits Danish television interview on nanothermite on YouTube, all with hundreds of thousands of views and all 5-starred to death... the troofer movement is not dead. Not by a long shot.
Of course, in the sense of "no one on earth believes in 9/11 CTs" it is not dead. What we mean is it is dead in terms of its effectiveness as a movement. They no longer garnish any significant TV coverage, they don't even get much coverage on the popular blogs any more. They have done nothing with regard to getting their "new investigation", and apart from one published article in a sham/scam vanity "journal", they have done nothing despite all their supposed "scientists and engineers" who back their theories.

They are "effectively" dead as a movement.

TAM
T.A.M. 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 28th July 2009, 04:18 AM   #184
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
So what you're saying is that the output of the truth movement in 2004 is a good guide to the output of the truth movement in 2009, and this is evidence that the output of the truth movement has changed over the years?

Dave
No.

Perhaps you better re-read my earlier exchanges with scott.in.taiwan if you really seek clarity rather than confusion!
__________________
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 04:22 AM   #185
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
No.

Perhaps you better re-read my earlier exchanges with scott.in.taiwan if you really seek clarity rather than confusion!
I just find it hilarious that you're claiming that the emphasis of the truth movement has changed over the years, then cite a 2004 publication as a good example of current thinking. I can understand that you may have missed the irony.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 04:41 AM   #186
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I just find it hilarious that you're claiming that the emphasis of the truth movement has changed over the years, then cite a 2004 publication as a good example of current thinking. I can understand that you may have missed the irony.

Dave
I didn't cite a 2004 publication as a good example of current thinking. I cited it as an example of non-current thinking.

I hope that clears things up but that you will continue to enjoy your day.
__________________
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 04:52 AM   #187
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,176
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I didn't cite a 2004 publication as a good example of current thinking. I cited it as an example of non-current thinking.
Ah, I see what you mean. You're right, I've completely misunderstood what you're trying to say.

So your argument is that current thinking is to focus on issues such as the minutiae of the WTC collapses, an approach which was felt (you feel correctly) to be a red herring in the earlier days of the movement. Therefore, by your standards, is the truth movement in fact regressing rather than progressing?

I'd also query your subjective judgement that analysis of physical evidence was always felt to be counterproductive, or that it was never a major topic in the early years of the movement. I would cite, for example, Jim Hoffman's extensive, though fallacious, studies of the dust clouds from 2003/4, work which many 9/11 conspiracy theorists have cited as inspiration.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 28th July 2009, 05:26 AM   #188
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Jane I still suspect you know full-well that many of these so-called truthers are a little touched in the head, and since you are really not qualified to make any legitimate judgments on their science, the only reason you support them is from an ideological standpoint. I just don't see you as the crazy paranoid type, just an ideologue.

Strange bedfellows indeed.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead 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 28th July 2009, 05:34 AM   #189
eirik
Muse
 
eirik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 706
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I grant that it probably doesn’t take much research to master the characteristic playground language of debunker juvenile deliquency but the way scott.in.taiwan has levered nearly every traditional debunker talking point and insult in his/her brief appearance gives a strong impression of prepared articfice or, if not that, an impression of someone inexplicably keen to bond with the welcoming in-group

--------------------------------

re Chomsky:

One thing that appears to be be missing from the Chomsky discussion here is his insight that the attacks don’t matter because, in the context of the history of US-perpetrated terror and violence around the world the violence of 911 atrocity is not particulalrly significant except in terms of the number of simultaneous deaths and the fact that the victims weren’t in far off countries in South America, the Middle East, Central Asia etc etc.

In other words: Welcome, to the hyper-violent world of US foreign policy, US America.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Interviewer: if 9/11 was an inside job, then what’s to say that Bush Et Al., if cornered or not, wouldn't resort to another more heinous attack of grander proportions in the age of nuclear terrorism – which by its very nature would petrify populations the world over, leading citizens to cower under the Bush umbrella of power.

Noam Chomsky: Wrong question, in my opinion. They were carrying out far more serious crimes, against Americans as well, before 9/11 -- crimes that literally threaten human survival. They may well resort to further crimes if activists here prefer not to deal with them and to focus their attention on arcane and dubious theories about 9/11.

- extract, quoted:

http://www.oilempire.us/chomsky.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. - Noam Chomsky
So he's basically saying what most in here are saying:

911 was not an inside job, and the ones who believe that are whackjobs, but there are certainly other and real aspects of the government that needs scrutiny and criticism.

OK, I lost track. How is this relevant to your argument that it WAS an inside job?
__________________
"I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern without any superhuman authority behind it." -Albert Einstein
eirik 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 28th July 2009, 05:38 AM   #190
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by eirik View Post
911 was not an inside job, and the ones who believe that are whackjobs, but there are certainly other and real aspects of the government that needs scrutiny and criticism.
Great. Now we're all on the same sheet of music. Last one out turn off the lights.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead 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 28th July 2009, 05:40 AM   #191
Comrade Raptor
Critical Thinker
 
Comrade Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 399
There's a handful of TM kooks on the eBay boards. They really don't care for this place. It's like holy water and sunlight to them, together at last!

The lengthy discussion on that board (which has been some three years now) evolved on almost precisely the same lines as it did here. And I didn't find this place until a couple of months back.

I would suspect that any discussion arena where logic and sense collide with the Troof Fairy Myth, it's pretty much going to turn out the same.
Comrade Raptor 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 28th July 2009, 06:04 AM   #192
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,648
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Unfortunately Stellafane it is true. You better start learnng to live with it rather than denying the obvious.
Learning to live with this? Are you kidding -- I'd love it if this were true! Just imagine it: Noam Chomsky, respected scholar (at least in some circles), believes that 9/11 was an inside job. And yet in his opinion Truthers -- people whom you would think Chomsky would support, since they're laboring so diligently (at least when it's not raining) to reveal the truth about perhaps the most heinous crime ever perpetrated on American soil -- are idiots! Now, it's bad enough when people like me, those firmly convinced that every Truther argument makes about as much sense as a castle built out of snot, those of us who think this weird little collection of pathetic nonentities have left sanity and reason and logic and reality itself far behind, are idiots. That you would expect. But when one of your supposed own, who far and away has more intellectual stature than the rest of the TM put together, calls you an idiot despite the fact that he actually agrees with you...well, that's something extra special.

As much as I would dearly love to believe the preceding is true, I'm afraid it's not. You see (and this may come as a shock, so prepare yourself), the universe isn't all just one big matter of opinion. Some things are true and others aren't. And when a person says he believes the 9/11 CT is utter crap and disses those who believe in it in the strongest, most unequivocal language, you don't come along and say "Oh but he really does believe in it" unless you have some evidence to back that up. And said evidence better be pretty amazingly compelling, since it would be up against the person's own words.

Oh, and one final irony: Although I can sort of see the Truthers trying to claim as their own someone who has yet to weigh in on 9/11, what does it say about them that they insist Chomsky is on their side, despite his emphatic and crystal clear declarations to the contrary? Do these guys like abuse or something?
__________________
Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

Last edited by Stellafane; 28th July 2009 at 06:37 AM.
Stellafane 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 28th July 2009, 06:45 AM   #193
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Ah, I see what you mean. You're right, I've completely misunderstood what you're trying to say.

So your argument is that current thinking is to focus on issues such as the minutiae of the WTC collapses, an approach which was felt (you feel correctly) to be a red herring in the earlier days of the movement. Therefore, by your standards, is the truth movement in fact regressing rather than progressing?
Yes, but let's hope it's a temporary detour! It's encourging that activists can still unite for initiatives like NYC CAN to press for genuine investigation.

Quote:
I'd also query your subjective judgement that analysis of physical evidence was always felt to be counterproductive, or that it was never a major topic in the early years of the movement. I would cite, for example, Jim Hoffman's extensive, though fallacious, studies of the dust clouds from 2003/4, work which many 9/11 conspiracy theorists have cited as inspiration.
Yes, for good or bad, Jim Hoffman was the physical evidence pioneer of the earlier days.





Originally Posted by eirik View Post
So he's basically saying what most in here are saying:

911 was not an inside job, and the ones who believe that are whackjobs, but there are certainly other and real aspects of the government that needs scrutiny and criticism.

OK, I lost track. How is this relevant to your argument that it WAS an inside job?
No, he's not saying the ones who believe are "whackjobs". That's debunkerese and Chomsky is not such a crude, playground propagandist.

He's saying that, in his opinion, it's very unlikely that 911 was an "Inside Job".

I quoted the extracts because Chomsky puts the 911 attacks into the broader context of US foreign policy crimes rarely acknowledged by most forum whackjobbists, may of whom still believe that the US worldwide military activity is all about spreading freedom and democracy to the less fortunate.

Understanding the history, extent and ruthlessness of US violence around the globe makes the claims of 911 having been an "Inside Job" look less extraordinary. From his own comments, it is apparent that Chomsky hasn't felt it necessary to look beyond his own worldview for insights into the genesis of 911 and only has a superficial knowledge of the various, confusing strands 911 skepticism. He did, however, add his signature to a 2007 petition written by the 9/11 “Jersey” widows calling for the release of classified documents relating to the 9/11 attacks.
__________________
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 06:55 AM   #194
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
Yes, but let's hope it's a temporary detour! It's encourging that activists can still unite for initiatives like NYC CAN to press for genuine investigation.
What better proof can we show that the entire bowel movement and the turds that inhabit it are a bunch of ineffective, impotent, lying cretins?
~enigma~ 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 28th July 2009, 06:57 AM   #195
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 66,948
Originally Posted by Stellafane View Post
And yet in [Chomsky's] opinion Truthers ... are idiots!

Has Chomsky really called Truthers "idiots", Stellafane? If so, can you provide a reference so I don't have to put you on my ever-growing "I create my own reality" list.








ETA:

Hello ~enigma~.
__________________

Last edited by JihadJane; 28th July 2009 at 06:59 AM.
JihadJane 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 28th July 2009, 07:00 AM   #196
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
 
newton3376's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,320
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I quoted the extracts because Chomsky puts the 911 attacks into the broader context of US foreign policy crimes rarely acknowledged by most forum whackjobbists, may of whom still believe that the US worldwide military activity is all about spreading freedom and democracy to the less fortunate.
Who believes that?

The US does whats in its own best interest....just like every other country....

Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
Understanding the history, extent and ruthlessness of US violence around the globe makes the claims of 911 having been an "Inside Job" look less extraordinary. From his own comments, it is apparent that Chomsky hasn't felt it necessary to look beyond his own worldview for insights into the genesis of 911 and only has a superficial knowledge of the various, confusing strands 911 skepticism. He did, however, add his signature to a 2007 petition written by the 9/11 “Jersey” widows calling for the release of classified documents relating to the 9/11 attacks.
Please spare me the "Da US is eeeeeeeeeeeeevil" crap....there is ruthlessness and violence all over the world......it's not like every other country besides the US is some peace loving innocent......there are plenty of people that want to do the US harm.

If talking with them will stop them then I say talk.
Edited by Locknar:  Breach of Rule 2


Mod WarningYour post has been edited wrt breach of Rule 2.
Posted By:Locknar
__________________
AE911 Truth....still failing to get 1%

Last edited by Locknar; 28th July 2009 at 10:01 AM.
newton3376 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 28th July 2009, 07:06 AM   #197
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
You'll get used to JihadJane, newton3376. Every other country except the US that does something ruthless and violent has a good reason for it (and it's usually the US's fault anyway, somehow). Fortunately for rational people, the science and evidence of 911 precludes it being an inside job, no matter how feverishly people like Jane wish it didn't, and no matter WHAT THE US HAS DONE IN THE PAST.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead 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 28th July 2009, 07:09 AM   #198
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,838
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I didn't cite a 2004 publication as a good example of current thinking. I cited it as an example of non-current thinking.

I hope that clears things up but that you will continue to enjoy your day.
For the third time, let me ask you - How does the fact that the 9/11 "truth" movement evolved to ask different questions over 8 years make such a movement more credible?
carlitos 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 28th July 2009, 07:13 AM   #199
Longfellow
St. Louis Cardinals Fanatic
 
Longfellow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Baseball Heaven
Posts: 288
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I grant that it probably doesn’t take much research to master the characteristic playground language of debunker juvenile deliquency but the way scott.in.taiwan has levered nearly every traditional debunker talking point and insult in his/her brief appearance gives a strong impression of prepared articfice or, if not that, an impression of someone inexplicably keen to bond with the welcoming in-group---(snip)(sic)

No, JihadJane -- not at all.

What scott.in.taiwan has done is engaged in rational thinking. He's done what the vast (VAST!) majority of people do when first exposed to the '9/11 truth movement'. That is to say, he recognized it as dirt dumb [/beachnut mode] right off the bat. It only takes several minutes of dedicated searching for a rational person to see this. The fact that you haven't -- years later -- is quite telling.

That's all there is to it. He used his superior cognition (superior to that of some '9/11 truthers' at any rate) to reason, correctly, that the 'truth movement's' arguments, theories, and questions are rubbish -- have always been rubbish -- and always will be rubbish.

And as far as Chomsky goes; only those wearing the blinders of willful ignorance can read, listen, or watch Mr. Chomsky's comments on the '9/11 truth movement' and still think he's on their side. Mr. Chomsky thinks you people are nuts. It's quite amusing, actually. I guess I really should thank you et al for the years of grins.

Thank you!

And as far as people getting paid to debunk the '9/11 truth movement'?

Longfellow 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 28th July 2009, 07:17 AM   #200
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
bill smith meets noam chomsky (or at least what it might be like)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Quote:
ZNet Sustainer:Considering the long history of false flag operations to wrongly justify wars, our most recent precedent being WMD in Iraq, The Gulf of Tonkin in Vietnam, going back much further to Pearl Harbor (FDR knowingly allowing the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor – which is different from false flag operations), to the 1898 Spanish-American War, to the 1846 Mexican-American War, to Andrew Jackson’s seizing of Seminole land in 1812 (aka Florida).

Noam Chomsky: The concept of "false flag operation" is not a very serious one, in my opinion. None of the examples you describe, or any other in history, has even a remote resemblance to the alleged 9/11 conspiracy. I'd suggest that you look at each of them carefully.

ZNet Sustainer: Lastly, as the world’s leading terror state, would it not surprise anyone if the US was capable of such an action? Would it surprise you? Do you think that so-called conspiracy theorists have anything worthy to present?
Noam Chomsky: I think the Bush administration would have had to be utterly insane to try anything like what is alleged, for their own narrow interests, and do not think that serious evidence has been provided to support claims about actions that would not only be outlandish, for their own interests, but that have no remote historical parallel. The effects, however, are all too clear, namely, what I just mentioned: diverting activism and commitment away from the very serious ongoing crimes of state.
yeah hes basically saying that you guys are morons for making so much noise about impossible things you dilute any attempt to get at real issues with the govt and things theyve done wrong

way to go "WOOOOO"
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 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 02:17 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.