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 Consensus 9/11 , david ray griffin , Neils Harritt , steven jones

Reply
Old 1st December 2011, 12:34 PM   #281
TexasJack
Penultimate Amazing
 
TexasJack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 10,906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I am amazed how this thread got so distracted. There is one novel aspect in this "9/11 Consensus Panel" - and that something is not the claims, the supposed evidence, or the people pushing this thing. The novel aspoect is the approach:



Why is this thread not focussing on this aspect?

So let's do it:

1. "Delphi method"

According to consensus911.org, ...

According to Wikipedia however - which consensus911 links to!, ...

Interestingly, Wikipedia does NOT mention "medicine" as one science where the Delphy method is employed, nor any other particular science, nor does it talk about "advance knowledge". So from the very start, consensus911 misinforms their readers about their method. This should have everybody's alarm bells ringing.

From Wikipedia we learn further:
"If panelists are misinformed about a topic, the use of Delphi may only add confidence to their ignorance"
2. "Experts"

WP:

Let's see what the areas of expertise are of our panelists:

0: Aeronautical engineering
0: Physics and math education
0: Journalism
0: Aeronautical engineering
0: Geography and environmental science education
3: Aircraft accident investigator
1: Chemistry
0: Physics
2: Military and civilian Pilot
1: Military Pilot
0: Buddhism
0: Filmmaking
0: Law
0: Journalism
0: Psychological Counseling
0: Physical Therapy
0: Acting
0: Public Administration
0: Public Health
0: Economics
0: Journalism

And here are the Delphi facilitators' qualifications:
0: Theology
0: Law
0: Librarian

The number preceding the qualification is the number of claims out of the 13 that the panelist or facilitator is an expert for.

There is not a single expert on the panel for Points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13
There is only one expert on the panel for Points 9, 10, 11.
Only one Point (#12) has 3 experts (the pilots) to show for.

It is obvious that the panelists were not chosen bsed on their expertise in the pertinent fields of structural engineering, fire science, forensic investigation. Instead, many of them are known for already havin the opinion that the towers were CDed, flight 93 shot down, or other truther nonsense. They do not represent the full breadth of expert knowledge in the required fields.

Likewise, the 3 facilitators lack all expertise to facilitate the process.


Summary:

- The Delphi method is misapplied by consensus911 for deciding on state of knowledge instead of making a forecast
- The panel does not consist of experts
- Panelists were chosen not based on their knowledge but based on their opinons.
- The outcome of applying the Delphi method is therefore expected to be highly unreliable to the point of being worthless.
- consensus911 lies about what the Delphi method is
- consensus911 lies about the expertise of their panelists.


The "13 points of consensus" represent the consensus of a highly biased and non-random fringe of non-experts. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no reliable connection to actual knowledge of reality.


\thread
I think this post deserves a revisiting. Their total lack of expertise is very telling. All that DRG and his faithful followers can do is unsheathe their Dunning-Kruger sword, one they feel is mighty enough to conquer King Arthur himself. However, in reality, DRG and his Merry Men are just a bunch of Black Knights.

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

Last edited by TexasJack; 1st December 2011 at 12:36 PM.
TexasJack 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 1st December 2011, 01:10 PM   #282
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,287
Originally Posted by TexasJack View Post
I think this post deserves a revisiting. Their total lack of expertise is very telling. ...
They do have expertise of sorts - just not in the fields of expertise that would help them assess the validity of truther claims.
What they probably are experts for is knowing which truther claims are currently the most popular. Well, at least among themselves. DRG didn't invite Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Ace Baker, Craig Ranke or Rob Balsamo to his panel.
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 1st December 2011, 02:03 PM   #283
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
They do have expertise of sorts - just not in the fields of expertise that would help them assess the validity of truther claims.
What they probably are experts for is knowing which truther claims are currently the most popular. Well, at least among themselves. DRG didn't invite Judy Wood, Morgan Reynolds, Ace Baker, Craig Ranke or Rob Balsamo to his panel.
It's interesting Richard Gage is not on the list. Maybe they couldn't meet his price?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 1st December 2011, 02:16 PM   #284
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,350
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
It's interesting Richard Gage is not on the list. Maybe they couldn't meet his price?
Maybe. According to this post, they invited him and he declined:
One notable absentee is Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Gage declined, Woodworth says, because he wants the credibility of AE9/11Truth to rest on the reputations of the more than 1,600 architects and engineers who are on record as supporting its conclusions.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 1st December 2011, 02:22 PM   #285
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Maybe. According to this post, they invited him and he declined:
One notable absentee is Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Gage declined, Woodworth says, because he wants the credibility of AE9/11Truth to rest on the reputations of the more than 1,600 architects and engineers who are on record as supporting its conclusions.
And that would be the conclusions of this "panel" (Gage has nothing of his own). Could it be more transparent?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 1st December 2011, 03:22 PM   #286
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,426
The one thing that this "consensus" initiative demonstrates clearly is the lack of any intellectual depth to the material - and therefore it shows that those presenting it lack either intellect or integrity. Probably a mix of both.

Try this sample:
Quote:
Woodworth explains that the three points that didn’t quite make the cut the first go-round read as follows:

* “The FBI’s report on phone calls from the 9/11 planes, which became public in 2006, said that Barbara Olson attempted only one call from Flight 77 – a call that was “unconnected” and lasted “0 seconds.”
* “Although airliners have hundreds of (virtually indestructible, serially controlled) “time-change” parts, which can conclusively prove the identity of any airliner, the government did not point to time-change parts to prove the identity of any of the four 9/11 planes.”
* “Although some 80 cameras were focused on the Pentagon, as the Department of Justice has acknowledged, the government has not provided a single video that clearly supports the government’s claim about what damaged the Pentagon.”
On second (third? fourth??) thought they could have a long term plan.

The material is targeted at no higher than grade/primary school level...

...maybe the agenda is "catch them young and wait till they grow up."


:leave:
ozeco41 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 1st December 2011, 04:57 PM   #287
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,829
Quote:
* “Although airliners have hundreds of (virtually indestructible, serially controlled) “time-change” parts, which can conclusively prove the identity of any airliner, the government did not point to time-change parts to prove the identity of any of the four 9/11 planes.”
Of all the truther complaints, this one is one of the dumbest. Oh, heck, who am I kidding? They are all so equally dumb it's hard to single one out. But this one, often used by no-brainers, amounts to:

"Lieutenant, we found a body in the alley. The M.E. identified him by fingerprints and DNA."

"Did he identify him by dental records?"

"Um, no sir..."

"In that case you can't prove there even is a body. In fact, his failure to show the dental record match is clear proof that there was no body."


"Uh, we could go back and have the M.E. show the dental match...The body is still down there."

"Too late now, the so-called "body" could be anything. The M.E. could just fake the data."



ETA: If the above example of truther reasoning seems reasonable to you, you need to seek psychiatric help.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel

Last edited by sylvan8798; 1st December 2011 at 04:58 PM.
sylvan8798 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 2nd December 2011, 10:36 AM   #288
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
So I was thinking....

This conspiracy, if true, would have involved dozens if not hundreds of people who were apparently fine with the knowledge that they were planting explosives that would murder thousands.

Wouldn't it be easier for the evil NWO to train two to four people to hijack and fly a single plane into the Trade Center? Why the overkill?
NoahFence 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 2nd December 2011, 10:41 AM   #289
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post

Wouldn't it be easier for the evil NWO to train two to four people to hijack and fly a single plane into the Trade Center? Why the overkill?

You have not been paying attention. The plane collision was not a guaranteed collapse. Without the total collapse the "shock factor" would not be enough to send us to permanent war (that the "neocons" need for all their money)..

Don't shoot me, I didn't make this up.

__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 2nd December 2011 at 10:43 AM.
DGM 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 2nd December 2011, 02:04 PM   #290
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
You have not been paying attention. The plane collision was not a guaranteed collapse. Without the total collapse the "shock factor" would not be enough to send us to permanent war (that the "neocons" need for all their money)..

Don't shoot me, I didn't make this up.

That's why they had several strings to their bow, nano thermite, C4, unknown military grade explosives, space beams and Tesla devices were all in place and ready to be activated.
tsig 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 2nd December 2011, 02:04 PM   #291
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
So I was thinking....

This conspiracy, if true, would have involved dozens if not hundreds of people who were apparently fine with the knowledge that they were planting explosives that would murder thousands.

Wouldn't it be easier for the evil NWO to train two to four people to hijack and fly a single plane into the Trade Center? Why the overkill?
Depends on who those people were.

MM
Miragememories 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 2nd December 2011, 02:11 PM   #292
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Depends on who those people were.

MM
No MM, it wouldn't.

Training dozens (I'll give your side the benefit and make the number small) of people to covertly plant tons of thermite in the most visible buildings in one of the busiest cities in the world would be a much, much bigger undertaking.


So why not keep it simple, and train four guys maximum to crash one plane into the Pentagon if they wanted war?

If you don't think THAT would be enough to send us to war, I'm sorry. You're on crack.
NoahFence 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 2nd December 2011, 02:24 PM   #293
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,792
If there were ever such a large scale operation to pre plant explosives it would have required hiring and paying a large company or firm to do the work. I can suspend my disbelief at the practicality and just note that if they defied probability by whatever method... an operation of that size will have left an extensive paper trail. This is something that truthers would never need to have speculated about for ten years.. Before anyone questions the likely hood maybe one should first question whether or not truthers have ever

A) taken the initiative to locate or produce such a trail of evidence, and

B) Whether they find any such proof

Neither has been done, period. They can't even produce proof that Clinton/Bush/Obama admins have orchestrated/carried out/covered up for the attacks.

The evidence is plentiful that planes were hijacked and used as missiles however, and there's ample engineering exploration that shows they were enough to do the damage they caused both politically and to life + property
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 2nd December 2011 at 02:28 PM.
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 2nd December 2011, 02:56 PM   #294
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
...

maybe one should first question whether or not truthers have ever

A) taken the initiative

.....
LOL!!

Taken the initiative. Funny stuff!
NoahFence 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 2nd December 2011, 02:57 PM   #295
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
That's why they had several strings to their bow, nano thermite, C4, unknown military grade explosives, space beams and Tesla devices were all in place and ready to be activated.
Scary huh? To think, the NWO could take into consideration so many forms of crazy.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 5th December 2011, 05:57 AM   #296
Cheap Shot
Critical Thinker
 
Cheap Shot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 385
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Let me get this straight - we have a theologian, a librarian and a lawyer
Sounds like a lead into a good joke.
__________________
'Two things are infinite: The Universe and Human Stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'
- Albert Einstein
Cheap Shot 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 December 2011, 06:53 AM   #297
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,287
Originally Posted by Cheap Shot View Post
Sounds like a lead into a good joke.
A joke - yes. A good one - not so.
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 5th December 2011, 07:02 AM   #298
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
LOL!!

Taken the initiative. Funny stuff!
If they hadn't, this sub forum would not exist.

MM
Miragememories 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 December 2011, 07:05 AM   #299
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
If you people had even the slightest bit of initiative, you'd see how monumental a failure your theories are.

As it is, the only reason for the existence of the truth movement as currently constituted is for Stundies. That's it.

As soon as you're reduced to trying to show that paper can survive in temperatures that steel cannot, you've lost. Bad.
NoahFence 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 December 2011, 07:11 AM   #300
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
So why not keep it simple, and train four guys maximum to crash one plane into the Pentagon if they wanted war?

If you don't think THAT would be enough to send us to war, I'm sorry. You're on crack.
Unable to defend their big castle against an unarmed attacker.

It would have resulted in a major humiliation for the U.S. military.

That would not have resulted in war.

That would have gotten a few generals fired.

Which should have happened after 9/11.

MM
Miragememories 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 December 2011, 07:22 AM   #301
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Unable to defend their big castle against an unarmed attacker.
It would have resulted in a major humiliation for the U.S. military.

That would not have resulted in war.

That would have gotten a few generals fired.

Which should have happened after 9/11.

MM
Dude. You're officially done.

Blaming a foreign terrorist organization for slamming a plane into the side of the seat of military power in the US WOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY had the same affect, with much, much, much (where's that infinity symbol?) less trouble and margin for error.

9/11 WAS their castle being struck by an unarmed attacker. That happened, remember?
NoahFence 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 December 2011, 07:25 AM   #302
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
I'm terribly sorry for the death of your little group, MM. I hope in the near future that something terrible will happen somewhere in the world that has much less evidence, and witnesses so you people can have a different topic to be all stupid about.

9/11 was a terrible choice for you folks. Just terrible. Is it too late to go back to moon landings and JFK assasinations? John Hinkley Junior is trying to get out of jail, maybe you can make a conspiracy out of that?

Why choose 9/11?
NoahFence 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 December 2011, 07:56 AM   #303
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Unable to defend their big castle against an unarmed attacker.

It would have resulted in a major humiliation for the U.S. military.

That would not have resulted in war.



MM
Strange, I know several people that declared (myself included) when flight 77 hit the Pentagon that we were at war (and both towers were still standing).
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 5th December 2011 at 07:58 AM.
DGM 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 5th December 2011, 08:00 AM   #304
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Strange, I know several people that declared (myself included) when flight 77 hit the Pentagon that we were at war.
That's only after the two trade towers though. In MM's curious world, slamming a jet into the side of the Pentagon alone wouldn't have done it.

The towers had to be struck.
They had to collapse.
The Pentagon didn't have to get hit but the NWO had two extra planes, so what the hell. Why not.
Shanksville? Eh. We don't talk about that. Can't figure out an absurd reason so we ignore it.
NoahFence 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 December 2011, 08:04 AM   #305
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
That's only after the two trade towers though. In MM's curious world, slamming a jet into the side of the Pentagon alone wouldn't have done it.

The towers had to be struck.
They had to collapse.
The Pentagon didn't have to get hit but the NWO had two extra planes, so what the hell. Why not.
Shanksville? Eh. We don't talk about that. Can't figure out an absurd reason so we ignore it.
I think most would agree, the Pentagon would be enough. Hell, one plane one tower would be enough for some serious retaliation. It's not like we didn't want his ass on a platter before this.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 5th December 2011 at 08:06 AM.
DGM 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 5th December 2011, 07:45 PM   #306
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,829
Now we all know that the final straw was the collapse of WTC 7.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

- Professional Wastrel
sylvan8798 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 December 2011, 11:04 PM   #307
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Unable to defend their big castle against an unarmed attacker.

It would have resulted in a major humiliation for the U.S. military.

That would not have resulted in war.

That would have gotten a few generals fired.

Which should have happened after 9/11.

MM
In your world, are there unicorns?

Plane hits the Pentagon (and the WTC) = conspiracy to destroy "evidence" and to eliminate "accountants."

Plane hits the Pentagon (but not the WTC) = major humiliation for the U.S. military that would not have resulted in war that would have gotten a few generals fired.

It's like you make it up as you go.
Robrob 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 December 2011, 11:51 PM   #308
The Platypus
Graduate Poster
 
The Platypus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,883
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
If they hadn't, this sub forum would not exist.

MM
Gee what an accomplishment, a sub forum on a skeptics forum that discuss paranormal claims...
__________________
I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth".

Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

Last edited by The Platypus; 5th December 2011 at 11:57 PM.
The Platypus 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 6th December 2011, 07:47 PM   #309
JamesB
Master Poster
 
JamesB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,152
Well I don't know about you guys, but I wasn't ready to declare war until Building 7 fell in the late afternoon...

Yeah, I know. Truther logic is impossible to parody.
__________________
I said lots of things in NPH that I would not say today and that I did not repeat in NPHR, where I specifically corrected at least some of the errors I had made in that earlier book, written 5 years ago.
-David Ray Griffin-
JamesB 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 6th December 2011, 10:39 PM   #310
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
Well I don't know about you guys, but I wasn't ready to declare war until Building 7 fell in the late afternoon...
Yes, the collapse of that final empty building after 6-7 hours of inferno was really the last straw...

Robrob 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 8th December 2011, 11:47 AM   #311
Dash80
Rave on, Not Fade Away
 
Dash80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,186
Wow... Is this trash the best truthers can come up with now?

I've been away for a few weeks, I guess I've missed the Twoof Movement's funeral. Nevermind, I'll send it some flowers.
__________________
I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.
Dash80 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 2nd March 2012, 08:39 PM   #312
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,306
Bump.

It's taken them several months to agree on 5 more points, which are actually 3.

http://www.consensus911.org/the-911-...-points-set-2/

===

Set 2: Points 1A to 5A


Point 1A: Why Was President Bush Not Hustled Away
from the Florida School?


Point 2A: The White House Claim as to How Long
President Bush Remained in the Florida Classroom


Point 3A: A Claim that there was No Insider Trading in Put
Options before September 11, 2001


Point 4A: Why the Attack on the Pentagon Was Not
Prevented: The First Official Account


Point 5A: Why the Attack on the Pentagon Was Not
Prevented: The Second Official Account

===
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay 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 2nd March 2012, 08:51 PM   #313
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,426
Trivialities.
ozeco41 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 March 2012, 05:19 PM   #314
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,699
fail.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 7th June 2012, 02:10 AM   #315
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,306
There's been an update, and it seems they didn't actually reach consensus, as they've revised their previous points.

http://www.consensus911.org/the-911-consensus-points/

__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay 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 7th June 2012, 02:54 AM   #316
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,699
consensus of a consensus?? When will it ever end..
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 7th June 2012, 02:54 AM   #317
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,287
Huh?

They just re-arranged / grouped 26 points. Why do you think that "they didn't actually reach consensus" follows fromn "they've revised their previous points"? I don't see the logical connection.
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 7th June 2012, 03:03 AM   #318
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,287
Some of these points are obvious strawmen, for example "Point TT-5: The Claim that the World Trade Center Dust Contained No Thermitic Materials":

Originally Posted by Consensus Panel
The Official Account

Although NIST did not perform any tests1 to determine whether there were incendiaries (such as thermite) or explosives (such as RDX and nanothermite) in the WTC dust, it claimed2 that such materials were not present.
They reference NIST and quote them in the footnote, correctly I suppose (the link is old and now re-directed):
Originally Posted by NIST
found no evidence of any blast events.
So their own quote shows that their rendering of the "Official Account" is FALSE. NIST made no statement about the presence or non-presence of "Thermitic Materials" or other explosives or incendiaries.


If the "Panel" reaches "consensus" on so obviously FALSE points, what good is it?

Last edited by Oystein; 7th June 2012 at 03:04 AM.
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 7th June 2012, 03:43 AM   #319
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 36,306
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Huh?

They just re-arranged / grouped 26 points. Why do you think that "they didn't actually reach consensus" follows fromn "they've revised their previous points"? I don't see the logical connection.
Because they've changed their minds already.

No consensus.
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay 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 7th June 2012, 04:20 AM   #320
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,287
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
Because they've changed their minds already.

No consensus.
On what? The arrangement of the 26 points?
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
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 04:27 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.