IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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.
Closed Thread
Old 14th July 2011, 07:53 AM   #81
Major_Tom
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,960
You cite the work of TFK in your own defence?

Where has your mind been for the last year?

i am not interested in "convincing' you of anything.

I post to the point that your hypocrisy is visible for any thinking person to see. We have passed that point a while ago.


So TFK is your main dude? When you say "others", can you give a few names? Others have "explained" these phenomena.

Or is TFK your go-to man here?
__________________
Website

Last edited by Major_Tom; 14th July 2011 at 07:54 AM.
Major_Tom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 08:05 AM   #82
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
You cite the work of TFK in your own defence?

Where has your mind been for the last year?

i am not interested in "convincing' you of anything.

I post to the point that your hypocrisy is visible for any thinking person person who agrees with me to see. We have passed that point a while ago.


So TFK is your main dude? When you say "others", can you give a few names? Others have "explained" these phenomena.

Or is TFK your go-to man here?
ftfy
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 08:09 AM   #83
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
Oystien, pretty much any long time poster on the 9/11 forum knows where ther lists came from.
I am not a poster on the911foruim at all. So I do not know where the lists came from. I am a poster at JREF. YOu are a poster at JREF. On May 19th, you opened a thread a JREF. I replied a few hours later a the JREF. I expect you to discuss the topic with which you opened a thread at the JREF at the JREF.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
Try looking at my website and you will find a menu titled "aircraft impacts" next to the feature lists.
I am not interested in any menu titles at your website. I interested in how you arrived at the selection of features with which you opened your thread here at JREF in May 19th.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
Maybe that is a clue where to find impact information? Think about it.
I am not particularly interested in airplane impact information. I interested in the reasons why you left them out when you opened your thread here at JREF in May 19th.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
Oystien, Achimspok and femr must find your comments about cherry picking observables to be humorous.
I am not interested in the peculiar sense of humour you believe is Achimspok's and femr's. I am only interested in the criteria that lead you to include a small number of particular visual features and leave out a great many other visual features, and all the non-visual features.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
The features lists are not mine. They are a compilation of the work of other people. If you bothered to read the lists you would have seen that many of the features link back to the original discussions.
I am not interested in whose features these are. I am only interested in why you posted those featutes on May 19thm, and not any others.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
If you bother to actually read the 9/11 Forum for comprehension instead of your usual reading habits, you will be able to find most every feature as the topic of its own thread.
I'll be happy to read about and discuss the features, but only after you have explained to me why I should read about and discuss particularly those specially selected visual features, and not any other visual or non-visual features. First things first.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
"Cherry pick" is yet another on those hypnotic mantras you keep repeating to yourself in order to dream up some imaginary defence.
When did I say "cherry pick" with regard to your feature list? I don't think I did. I am also not defending anything at all.
I just want to know whart criteria you used for the selction of features. You are not denying that you DID take your pick, right? The feature list IS a selection from a much larger pool of candidate features, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
In a forum in which observables are studioned carefully, each item on the list would have its own thread. In this forum, most every observable feature worthy of study for WTC1 and 2 is crammed into 1 thread and moved out of the forum.
But it was you who opened the WTC2 feature list thread on May 19th by cramming a number of features into the OP of a single thread.
Now please explain why you put those features in the thread, and not any others!

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
...Notice that the list is compiled from the work of other people after the most complete visual record is gathered and the collapse modes are already identified.

This is why I posted a thread called "OOS Propagation Model" before I posted any feature lists.
Ah! This seems to be hinting at a criterion: You picked those features that support the already identified collapse mode! Does this already identified collapse mode include the reasons for initiation? Are there any besides foires and plane impacts?
May I conclude from the fact that you left out both fires and plane impacts from the feature list that explains the collapse mode that you already concluded that neither fires nor plane impacts played a role in bringing about the collapse of WTC2? If so, it would be nice if you had the guts to clearly say so.
If not, please explain why you left out so many very obvious visual features.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
I am very aware that it is probably beyond your capacity to do so, but please try to understand that the lists are not compiled "out of the blue" but only after readers are aware that [b]the collapse initiationsequence and the MER floor activity are the most important places to look, as determined in the OOS model.
You listed visual feature before, during and after collapse initiation.
But you did not list ALL visual features before, during and after collapse initiation. For example, you left out the visual feature of planes slamming into the tower, of the visual feature of fires burning very near the collapse initiation zone. All I want is a an explanation for this..



Or did you believe on May 19th, when you opened a fresh thread at the JREF, that every reader would already have read and understood everythunbg you ever wrote at the JREF, at the911forum and on your website? What then was the poibt of your thread?

be informed that you may get new readers when you open a new thread, and I expect that YOU can explain YOUR reasons, and I expect you to NOT expect that I already know your mind, or can read it.
If you have reasons and criteria for your selection, you ought to be able to write them down.

How much time and energy have we both wasted in this exchange, when you could have just written down your reasons nearly 3 months ago? I suspect you HAVE NO reasons and criteria, or are ashamed of them. Care to prove me wrong?

Last edited by Oystein; 14th July 2011 at 08:10 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 Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 09:12 AM   #84
W.D.Clinger
Philosopher
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,759
Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
i am not interested in "convincing' you of anything.
If you really intended for your posts here to be unconvincing, then you have succeeded.

Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
When you say "others", can you give a few names?
alienentity
Animal
BasqueArch
Dave Rogers
DGM
Dog Town
Dr. Keith
fess
Grizzly Bear
Hokulele
Mangoose
Myriad
newton3376
Norseman
oody
Oystein
ozeco41
R.Mackey
Reactor Drone
Seymour Butz
tfk
tsig
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 09:52 AM   #85
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...59#post7368159
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 Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 09:59 AM   #86
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
It's a Ban notice, of a suspension?

NVM: Edited to show suspension, only. That was strange.

Last edited by Dog Town; 14th July 2011 at 11:15 AM.
Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 08:19 PM   #87
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
.....

So TFK is your main dude? When you say "others", can you give a few names? Others have "explained" these phenomena.

Or is TFK your go-to man here?
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
Ouch !
Evidence that you shouldn't ask questions you don't know the answer to.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 14th July 2011 at 08:38 PM.
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 09:00 PM   #88
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
.....

I am not interested in any menu titles at your website. I interested in how you arrived at the selection of features with which you opened your thread here at JREF in May 19th.

I am not particularly interested in airplane impact information. I interested in the reasons why you left them out when you opened your thread here at JREF in May 19th.

I am not interested in the peculiar sense of humour you believe is Achimspok's and femr's. I am only interested in the criteria that lead you to include a small number of particular visual features and leave out a great many other visual features, and all the non-visual features.

I am not interested in whose features these are. I am only interested in why you posted those features on May 19thm, and not any others.

I'll be happy to read about and discuss the features, but only after you have explained to me why I should read about and discuss particularly those specially selected visual features, and not any other visual or non-visual features. First things first.

When did I say "cherry pick" with regard to your feature list? I don't think I did. I am also not defending anything at all.
I just want to know whart criteria you used for the selction of features. You are not denying that you DID take your pick, right? The feature list IS a selection from a much larger pool of candidate features, isn't it?

But it was you who opened the WTC2 feature list thread on May 19th by cramming a number of features into the OP of a single thread.
Now please explain why you put those features in the thread, and not any others!

Ah! This seems to be hinting at a criterion: You picked those features that support the already identified collapse model ! Does this already identified collapse mode include the reasons for initiation? Are there any besides foires and plane impacts?
May I conclude from the fact that you left out both fires and plane impacts from the feature list that explains the collapse mode that you already concluded that neither fires nor plane impacts played a role in bringing about the collapse of WTC2? If so, it would be nice if you had the guts to clearly say so.
If not, please explain why you left out so many very obvious visual features.

.....

How much time and energy have we both wasted in this exchange, when you could have just written down your reasons nearly 3 months ago? I suspect you HAVE NO reasons and criteria, or are ashamed of them. Care to prove me wrong?

QED. Excellent confirmation bias textbook proof

__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 14th July 2011 at 09:27 PM.
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 09:27 PM   #89
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
Ouch !
Evidence that you shouldn't ask questions you don't know the answer to.
M_T seems to think that my often repeated question ("what criteria were employed when you selected visual features for your WTC2 feature thread?") is of that kind - that I already know the answer I want to hear.

It isn't so.

I don't know the answer. I have a strong suspicion, but I an open for any surprises.
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 Back to Top
Old 14th July 2011, 10:16 PM   #90
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
M_T seems to think that my often repeated question ("what criteria were employed when you selected visual features for your WTC2 feature thread?") is of that kind - that I already know the answer I want to hear.

It isn't so.

I don't know the answer. I have a strong suspicion, but I an open for any surprises.
The boast that he provides the most thorough analysis of "observables " and yet leaves out the overwhelming amount of "observable" evidence is insolubly contradictory and has no reversible explanation.

The only explanation of this error is that confirmation bias was the cause.
He has avoided a reply hoping your opinion of him will remain in limbo instead of hell.

The source of confirmation bias - What MT believes: Our societies are murdering people to steal their valuable resources.

October 2010 -
Originally Posted by Major_Tom View Post
I have no problem saying that according to the data and visual record of the events at the WTC complex, you were told a big lie about what happened. Our societies are most probably murdering the wrong people by the tens of thousands to steal the available resources and if that is true, we live in an utterly barbaric relationship with our fellow man and nature.
Would be nice if you can address the visuals and data presented to prove me wrong.
Feynman's paint story about "but I am open for any surprises" speaks about self-doubt.

http://blog.everydayscientist.com/wp...nman-paint.pdf'

The answer to your question "what criteria were employed when you selected visual features for your WTC2 feature thread?" you have already answered but self-doubt.

"I've very often made mistakes in my physics by thinking the theory isn't as good as
it really is, thinking that there are lots of complications that are going to spoil it--an
attitude that anything can happen, in spite of what you're pretty sure should
happen." - Feynman

You can lead a MIHOPper to facts but you can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.

__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 14th July 2011 at 10:44 PM.
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th July 2011, 06:06 AM   #91
kmortis
Biomechanoid
Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
 
kmortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Texas (aka SOMD)
Posts: 32,151
Mod WarningDue to continuing and persistant inablity to follow the Membership Agreement and moderator instruction, this thread has been closed. If you care to continue this discussion, the other thread on the same topic has been changed to Moderated status and you can post there.

Do not open other threads on this topic, nor should your opinion of this decision be discussed anywhere but the Forum Management sub-fora. To ignore either of these restrictions will result in further action up to and including banning.
Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:kmortis
__________________
-Aberhaten did it
- "Which gives us an answer to our question. What’s the worst thing that can happen in a pressure cooker?" Randall Munroe
-Director of Independent Determining Inquisitor Of Crazy Yapping
- Aberhaten's Apothegm™ - An Internet law that states that optimism is indistinguishable from sarcasm
kmortis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

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

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 08:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.