Diane's Question for Mark - Page 2

DGM · 1st February 2008, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by pomeroo

I'm sorry that Diane has decided that she isn't quite ready to appear on 'Hardfire.' She strikes me as intelligent and reasonable, which, of course, raises the question of what she's doing on her side of the fence. We can look forward to her participation at a later date.

I'm back to square one. I can't produce any champion of Truth to explain to Mark and Arthur Scheuerman where they're going wrong. Isn't this an astonishing development? How can these people prefer endlessly reciting the same canards on tiny blogs to spreading the gospel to a worldwide audience?

The comical buffoon Jon Gold, incidentally, wouldn't dream of facing Mark or even poor little me. He has richly earned his nickname, "The Running Man."

I don't think you'll find a rational person to debate an irrational subject against someone that knows their techniques. How about a show that features you, Arthur and Mark discussing the leading theories and why they don't hold water? It does not give any of them personally any attention but would get the point across.

Personally I think giving any of them any attention is wrong and could (if they use enough double speak) gain them more members. Remember any publicity is good publicity, If they can't associate it to a certain person they can't directly use it for support.

Again my $.02

DGM · 1st February 2008, 01:40 PM

Ron:
I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case.

pomeroo · 1st February 2008, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

Ron:
I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case.

Not a bad idea, DGM. Maybe we'll try it.

A W Smith · 1st February 2008, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by pomeroo

I'm sorry that Diane has decided that she isn't quite ready to appear on 'Hardfire.' She strikes me as intelligent and reasonable, which, of course, raises the question of what she's doing on her side of the fence. We can look forward to her participation at a later date.

I'm back to square one. I can't produce any champion of Truth to explain to Mark and Arthur Scheuerman where they're going wrong. Isn't this an astonishing development? How can these people prefer endlessly reciting the same canards on tiny blogs to spreading the gospel to a worldwide audience?

The comical buffoon Jon Gold, incidentally, wouldn't dream of facing Mark or even poor little me. He has richly earned his nickname, "The Running Man."

there sure are a lot of not ready for prime time troothers who wont debate

Max Photon · 2nd February 2008, 07:08 AM

Oh well...I gues the Scheuerman episode is hosed.

Open Blinded · 2nd February 2008, 07:59 AM

Diane has an update on her blog

Totovader · 2nd February 2008, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by Totovader

I never understood that sort of ad hominem attack. If Mark really is that incompetent, incapable, or otherwise an easy adversary- then why not destroy him in a debate? He's obviously a well-recognized figure for "our side", but somehow going after an "easy" figurehead just doesn't seem like a good strategy to these people?

Diane I can excuse- she's unprepared... but the rest of the jokers who try and claim that Mark is unqualified as an excuse are only making themselves look worse, and contradicting their entire position.

Diane has quoted the above paragraph on her blog and stated that she never made these comments- she left out the bottom part which would seem to clarify that the first paragraph was not specifically referring to Diane, but rather to Mark's challenges as a whole.

Alt+F4 · 2nd February 2008, 09:52 AM

Wouldn't it be funny if Mark and Diane met on Ron's show and fell in love? They could be the James Carville-Mary Matalin of the conspiracy world.

Max Photon · 2nd February 2008, 10:11 AM

Let's see...what's playing at the Grand Ole Oprah?

Totovader · 2nd February 2008, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by Max Photon

Let's see...what's playing at the Grand Ole Oprah?

Max, why are you posting in this thread?

Newtons Bit · 2nd February 2008, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by Totovader

Max, why are you posting in this thread?

Probably boredom.

pomeroo · 2nd February 2008, 02:25 PM

I didn't want to resurrect the "Hardfire News" thread, so I'll post this here.

Gary Popkin has persuaded (he thinks) Richard Gage to appear on 'Hardfire' via remote hookup by assuring him that I won't be involved. A libertarian named Joseph Dobrian, a very bright, pleasant guy, will host. Mark, are you available to oppose Gage on Thursday, April 10, at 7:15 PM?

Brainache · 2nd February 2008, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by DGM

Ron:
I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case.

Since all the Truthers have chickened out, I think it might be a good idea to get a former Truther to be the devil's advocate. In the other thread I sugested Mikey Metz, but I'm sure there are many of them to choose from.

It's not that I don't think Ron could do it, but a former Truther might be more familiar with the CT positions.

1st February 2008, 01:29 PM	#41
DGM Skeptic not Atheist Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 24,734	Originally Posted by pomeroo I'm sorry that Diane has decided that she isn't quite ready to appear on 'Hardfire.' She strikes me as intelligent and reasonable, which, of course, raises the question of what she's doing on her side of the fence. We can look forward to her participation at a later date. I'm back to square one. I can't produce any champion of Truth to explain to Mark and Arthur Scheuerman where they're going wrong. Isn't this an astonishing development? How can these people prefer endlessly reciting the same canards on tiny blogs to spreading the gospel to a worldwide audience? The comical buffoon Jon Gold, incidentally, wouldn't dream of facing Mark or even poor little me. He has richly earned his nickname, "The Running Man." I don't think you'll find a rational person to debate an irrational subject against someone that knows their techniques. How about a show that features you, Arthur and Mark discussing the leading theories and why they don't hold water? It does not give any of them personally any attention but would get the point across. Personally I think giving any of them any attention is wrong and could (if they use enough double speak) gain them more members. Remember any publicity is good publicity, If they can't associate it to a certain person they can't directly use it for support. Again my $.02
	__________________ "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

1st February 2008, 01:40 PM	#42
DGM Skeptic not Atheist Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 24,734	Ron: I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case.
	__________________ "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

1st February 2008, 04:28 PM	#43
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081	Originally Posted by DGM Ron: I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case. Not a bad idea, DGM. Maybe we'll try it.
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081

1st February 2008, 06:10 PM	#44
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 7,032	Originally Posted by pomeroo I'm sorry that Diane has decided that she isn't quite ready to appear on 'Hardfire.' She strikes me as intelligent and reasonable, which, of course, raises the question of what she's doing on her side of the fence. We can look forward to her participation at a later date. I'm back to square one. I can't produce any champion of Truth to explain to Mark and Arthur Scheuerman where they're going wrong. Isn't this an astonishing development? How can these people prefer endlessly reciting the same canards on tiny blogs to spreading the gospel to a worldwide audience? The comical buffoon Jon Gold, incidentally, wouldn't dream of facing Mark or even poor little me. He has richly earned his nickname, "The Running Man." there sure are a lot of not ready for prime time troothers who wont debate
A W Smith Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 7,032	__________________ 911 resource site by Mark Roberts http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance. Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane? Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

2nd February 2008, 07:59 AM	#46
Open Blinded Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 69	Diane has an update on her blog
Open Blinded Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 69

2nd February 2008, 07:08 AM	#45
Max Photon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,592	Oh well...I gues the Scheuerman episode is hosed.

2nd February 2008, 09:48 AM	#47
Totovader Game Warden Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,321	Originally Posted by Totovader I never understood that sort of ad hominem attack. If Mark really is that incompetent, incapable, or otherwise an easy adversary- then why not destroy him in a debate? He's obviously a well-recognized figure for "our side", but somehow going after an "easy" figurehead just doesn't seem like a good strategy to these people? Diane I can excuse- she's unprepared... but the rest of the jokers who try and claim that Mark is unqualified as an excuse are only making themselves look worse, and contradicting their entire position. Diane has quoted the above paragraph on her blog and stated that she never made these comments- she left out the bottom part which would seem to clarify that the first paragraph was not specifically referring to Diane, but rather to Mark's challenges as a whole.
Totovader Game Warden Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,321	__________________ "It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!

2nd February 2008, 09:52 AM	#48
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 10,017	Wouldn't it be funny if Mark and Diane met on Ron's show and fell in love? They could be the James Carville-Mary Matalin of the conspiracy world.

2nd February 2008, 10:11 AM	#49
Max Photon Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 1,592	Let's see...what's playing at the Grand Ole Oprah?
	Last edited by Max Photon; 2nd February 2008 at 10:12 AM.

2nd February 2008, 11:01 AM	#50
Totovader Game Warden Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,321	Originally Posted by Max Photon Let's see...what's playing at the Grand Ole Oprah? Max, why are you posting in this thread?
Totovader Game Warden Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,321	__________________ "It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!

2nd February 2008, 11:51 AM	#51
Newtons Bit Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 10,022	Originally Posted by Totovader Max, why are you posting in this thread? Probably boredom.
	__________________ "Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein

2nd February 2008, 02:25 PM	#52
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081	I didn't want to resurrect the "Hardfire News" thread, so I'll post this here. Gary Popkin has persuaded (he thinks) Richard Gage to appear on 'Hardfire' via remote hookup by assuring him that I won't be involved. A libertarian named Joseph Dobrian, a very bright, pleasant guy, will host. Mark, are you available to oppose Gage on Thursday, April 10, at 7:15 PM?
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081	Last edited by pomeroo; 2nd February 2008 at 02:26 PM.

2nd February 2008, 02:37 PM	#53
Brainache Nasty Brutish and Tall Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Canberra Posts: 17,465	Originally Posted by DGM Ron: I just had an idea (feeding of my last post). What about you being the devils advocate so to speak. You present the theories and the arguments and Arthur and Mark knock them down. It works logically as a host and man would it piss them off that you had to present their case. Since all the Truthers have chickened out, I think it might be a good idea to get a former Truther to be the devil's advocate. In the other thread I sugested Mikey Metz, but I'm sure there are many of them to choose from. It's not that I don't think Ron could do it, but a former Truther might be more familiar with the CT positions.