Coast to Coast AM Debate, August 21 2010

[DaveThomasNMSR]

Later tonight, I'll be debating Richard Gage of AE911Truth on Coast to Coast AM Radio.

If you're curious when the show runs in your locale, click here.

For me (MDT), it'll be 11:00PM - 3:00AM.

After two hours with just Gage and me, we'll be joined by my colleague, physicist Kim Johnson, and by chemist Niels Harrit, for two more hours.

To listen in, you can find a list of stations that live-stream Coast to Coast AM, here.

By the way, the National Press Club "Debate" has devolved into a "Panel Discussion" featuring Richard Gage, AIA. Probably for the best - they only raised 32% ($3,165 of $9,850) after weeks of begging. I declined to participate in this rigged event, as apparently did everyone else.

So, what are your predictions for the Great Debate? Any pools on how often Gage pitches donating to AE911Truth, or mentions molten metal, etc.?

The debate starts in about 12 hours from now. I've been hard at work in my new role as Founder and Chief Scientist of the fledgling organization "Institute of Theoretical and Experimental 9/11 Physics". Look for six or seven brand-new articles there, shortly before the debate itself.

I'll be busy finishing the massive posting of new articles and movies, and won't be spending all day watching this thread. You know the drill - play nice!

[jhunter1163]

I would say good luck, but you don't need it. You have the actual, small-t truth on your side.

I'm setting the over/under on AE911 Truth references at 25 in the full four hours. Any takers?

[R.Mackey]

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

By the way, the National Press Club "Debate" has devolved into a "Panel Discussion" featuring Richard Gage, AIA. Probably for the best - they only raised 32% ($3,165 of $9,850) after weeks of begging. I declined to participate in this rigged event, as apparently did everyone else.

Funny.

They e-mailed me begging me to attend (listing my name among James Meigs, Leslie Robertson, Dr. Bazant, Ronald Hamburger, yourself, the JREF's Michael Shermer, Dr. Sunder, John Gross and Theresa McAllister), but I didn't think they merited enough attention to even reply in the negative... Amusing that they consider me among such respected company, until you realize they honestly have no idea at all how science works in the first place. Then it makes sense.

If they only raised $3K, that might barely cover travel and lodging for two of us. Put missed time at work on there, and not even one. That's a solid indication of just how pathetic they are.

I thought about replying that Gage promised, some months ago, to respond to my whitepaper on Dr. Griffin -- the one that's been out for three years, and with only the most feeble and easily disposed replies from the entire Truth Movement combined -- and there hasn't been a peep out of him, so why should I travel halfway around the country to find out he still has nothing to say? Instead, I decided, better to just ignore them. I'd only get a bunch of stupid excuses in return.

Good luck on Coast to Coast. Beware the playing field.

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

Funny.

They e-mailed me begging me to attend (listing my name among James Meigs, Leslie Robertson, Dr. Bazant, Ronald Hamburger, yourself, the JREF's Michael Shermer, Dr. Sunder, John Gross and Theresa McAllister), but I didn't think they merited enough attention to even reply in the negative... Amusing that they consider me among such respected company, until you realize they honestly have no idea at all how science works in the first place. Then it makes sense.

If they only raised $3K, that might barely cover travel and lodging for two of us. Put missed time at work on there, and not even one. That's a solid indication of just how pathetic they are.

I thought about replying that Gage promised, some months ago, to respond to my whitepaper on Dr. Griffin -- the one that's been out for three years, and with only the most feeble and easily disposed replies from the entire Truth Movement combined -- and there hasn't been a peep out of him, so why should I travel halfway around the country to find out he still has nothing to say? Instead, I decided, better to just ignore them. I'd only get a bunch of stupid excuses in return.

Good luck on Coast to Coast. Beware the playing field.

It sounds as though they wanted you there quite badly. This will happen more and more as time goes by. Eventually people may begin to think you are ducking debates against strong opponents when you keep declining . .

And they have rightly placed you in that pantheon of luminaries that you mention in my opinion. We don't see many of those guys in public 9/11 debates either these days. All in all I think you have been fairly categorised as a member of that set.

Dave Thomas is actually the only member of your group who has the guts to represent you all on public radio before an audience of about three million or so.

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

Later tonight, I'll be debating Richard Gage of AE911Truth on Coast to Coast AM Radio.

If you're curious when the show runs in your locale, click here.

For me (MDT), it'll be 11:00PM - 3:00AM.

After two hours with just Gage and me, we'll be joined by my colleague, physicist Kim Johnson, and by chemist Niels Harrit, for two more hours.

To listen in, you can find a list of stations that live-stream Coast to Coast AM, here.

By the way, the National Press Club "Debate" has devolved into a "Panel Discussion" featuring Richard Gage, AIA. Probably for the best - they only raised 32% ($3,165 of $9,850) after weeks of begging. I declined to participate in this rigged event, as apparently did everyone else.

So, what are your predictions for the Great Debate? Any pools on how often Gage pitches donating to AE911Truth, or mentions molten metal, etc.?

The debate starts in about 12 hours from now. I've been hard at work in my new role as Founder and Chief Scientist of the fledgling organization "Institute of Theoretical and Experimental 9/11 Physics". Look for six or seven brand-new articles there, shortly before the debate itself.

I'll be busy finishing the massive posting of new articles and movies, and won't be spending all day watching this thread. You know the drill - play nice!

How many hours to kickoff now Dave ?

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

Later tonight, I'll be debating Richard Gage of AE911Truth on Coast to Coast AM Radio.

If you're curious when the show runs in your locale, click here.

For me (MDT), it'll be 11:00PM - 3:00AM.

After two hours with just Gage and me, we'll be joined by my colleague, physicist Kim Johnson, and by chemist Niels Harrit, for two more hours.

To listen in, you can find a list of stations that live-stream Coast to Coast AM, here.

I find that my local C2C outlet (WOR - NYC) doesn't do weekends. Can someone recommend a radio station that is a strong clear signal in the Northeast?

[Arus808]

you can try my local station

http://www.kfi640.com

10 pm PST

[fourtoe]

Yo BS, are you calling in to ask them a question when they take calls? I am, Gravy pointed out Gage's dishonesty with eyewitness accounts on his ppt TWO YEARS ago on Hardfire and he still is pulling this kind of crap.

I was gonna ask the usual, "what are you doing to get KSM out of jail" question but obviously this is gonna focus more on the science-y stuff.

ETA: Is there gonna be a chat or anything going on during the debate?

And thanks for the link Arus!

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by BigAl

I find that my local C2C outlet (WOR - NYC) doesn't do weekends. Can someone recommend a radio station that is a strong clear signal in the Northeast?

Try this Al. The 'listen live' button.

http://wokv.com/

[Safe-Keeper]

Quote:

It sounds as though they wanted you there quite badly. This will happen more and more as time goes by. Eventually people may begin to think you are ducking debates against strong opponents when you keep declining . .

Others argue that if you do show up for debate, you show to their side that the issue really is not set in stone and that there is a legitimate controversy.

Originally Posted by Brian Dunning of Skeptoid

I've been the lone representative of science in the room, the one they introduce as "a real trooper for agreeing to come into the lion's den." I've received the condescending smattering of applause from the room where every single person is against me and everything I have to say, but they've "shown me that they're good people too and will treat me respectfully in spite of how misguided I am." Nice folks. And then I'd walk back to my car and every time I'd say to myself "That was a friggin ridiculous waste of time." And I guarantee that their writeup of the event in their newsletter would say I was a nice guy, I was a real trooper to come and talk, and they probably planted within me a seed that would eventually bloom into full-blown science denial, and they'd love to have me back someday to see how that seed has germinated. Going to debate at an event sponsored by the pseudoscience group is always a ridiculous waste of your time. You serve merely as a masturbation enabler for them. Next time, send them a stack of dirty magazines instead.

If you accept, they spew rhetoric for an hour and then trumpet that they "won" the debate, or that the issue is not settled. If you decline, they declare to have won by walkover. Seems to me to be a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" deal to me.

[TexasJack]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

If you accept, they spew rhetoric for an hour and then trumpet that they "won" the debate, or that the issue is not settled. If you decline, they declare to have won by walkover. Seems to me to be a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" deal to me.

So, I guess the best alternative is Mackey's--ignore it entirely. They'll probably claim some sort of victory, but they can't say you said no.


For me, it would be like accepting a sponsored debate by flat-earthers. There's really nothing to gain from it, so why bother?

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by TexasJack

So, I guess the best alternative is Mackey's--ignore it entirely. They'll probably claim some sort of victory, but they can't say you said no.


For me, it would be like accepting a sponsored debate by flat-earthers. There's really nothing to gain from it, so why bother?

If you take that tack we will have a field day saying (with perfect justification) that you refuse to defend the OCT against an organisation of ,more than 1,200 professional architects and engineers.. Then you can explain to the population why you think it best just to ignore us. Perhaps they will understand.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by bill smith

If you take that tack we will have a field day saying (with perfect justification) that you refuse to defend the OCT against an organisation of ,more than 1,200 professional architcts and engineers.. Then you can explain to the population that you think it best just to ignore us. Perhaps they will understand.

That would only work if the "population" was actually listening to you. If your only "preaching to the choir" then it doesn't matter.

[TexasJack]

Originally Posted by bill smith

If you take that tack we will have a field day saying (with perfect justification) that you refuse to defend the OCT against an organisation of ,more than 1,200 professional architcts and engineers.. Then you can explain to the population that you think it best just to ignore us. Perhaps they will understand.

There's no reason to defend something that isn't being attacked in the first place. You, like flat-earthers, do a great job of sinking further and further into oblivion with your irrational, illogical, and unscientific offerings. So keep up the work Bill, you're one of its champions in this regard.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by bill smith

If you take that tack we will have a field day saying (with perfect justification) that you refuse to defend the OCT against an organisation of... 1,200 ZERO professional architcts and engineers..

Corrected that for ya!

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by DGM

That would only work if the "population" was actually listening to you. If your only "preaching to the choir" then it doesn't matter.

Well three million sets of ears tonight DGM. Whatever happens we will have a minimum of hundreds of thousands of new converts by tomorrow. You know it.Potentialy even millions of new converts.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by bill smith

Potentialy even millions of new converts.

You're calling them CONVERTS now, eh?

[jhunter1163]

Quote:

Well three million sets of ears tonight DGM. Whatever happens we will have a minimum of hundreds of thousands of new converts by tomorrow. You know it.Potentialy even millions of new converts.

They're playing your song, Bill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry4iwzS4Na0

[TJM]

Originally Posted by BigAl

I find that my local C2C outlet (WOR - NYC) doesn't do weekends. Can someone recommend a radio station that is a strong clear signal in the Northeast?

Adding another stream link:

http://www.ksfo560.com/default.asp

Hit the "listen live button.

@KFC

Last time Dicky boy was on C2C, I was in the queue of callers but never got on. Here now, some advice:

Originally Posted by AJM8125

Oh who the **** is screening these calls??

Originally Posted by Rogue1stclass

They are getting exactly the kinds of calls they want. This isn't a debate, it's a freakshow, and the callers are part of the fun.

My advice to you would be to come off like a full blown moonbat so the screener gets you on the air quicker.

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by AJM8125

Adding another stream link:

http://www.ksfo560.com/default.asp

Hit the "listen live button.

@KFC

Last time Dicky boy was on C2C, I was in the queue of callers but never got on. Here now, some advice:





My advice to you would be to come off like a full blown moonbat so the screener gets you on the air quicker.

Really good thinking AJ. Luckily you guys won't have too many problems in that direction.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by bill smith

Well three million sets of ears tonight DGM. Whatever happens we will have a minimum of hundreds of thousands of new converts by tomorrow. You know it.Potentialy even millions of new converts.

Would that estimate be based on the last time the "truthers" graced the C2C airways?

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by DGM

Would that estimate be based on the last time the "truthers" graced the C2C airways?

Ask Dave. I think he my have said that three million listeners is typical. Two million will do though.

[TexasJack]

Unfortunately, Bill, the converts you are talking about are going to be nutjobs, so I guess you have will more nuts, making truthers nuttier.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by bill smith

Ask Dave. I think he my have said that three million listeners is typical. Two million will do though.

What about the number of converts? I have just as much evidence as you that Dave will convince them all.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by TexasJack

Unfortunately, Bill, the converts you are talking about are going to be nutjobs, so I guess you have will more nuts, making truthers nuttier.

That would explain this last year of "truth".

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by TexasJack

Unfortunately, Bill, the converts you are talking about are going to be nutjobs, so I guess you have will more nuts, making truthers nuttier.

You should have more confidence in Dave Thomas. Maybe he will make it all go the other way. I hope he's not reading this. You will be making his heart sink.

[bill smith]

How long now ?

[DGM]

Originally Posted by bill smith

You should have more confidence in Dave Thomas. Maybe he will make it all go the other way. I hope he's not reading this. You will be making his heart sink.

I think Dave would understand. I don't believe "nut-jobs" are his target audience.

[Safe-Keeper]

Quote:

If you take that tack we will have a field day saying (with perfect justification) that you refuse to defend the OCT against an organisation of ,more than 1,200 professional architcts and engineers.. Then you can explain to the population that you think it best just to ignore us. Perhaps they will understand.

False dichotomy (thanks heavens for the built-in Firefox spell checker). You're making it sound as if we can either debate you, or sit there twiddling our thumbs while wondering what's on TV.

Empirical questions, such as "Who flew the planes into the towers", and the aptly misnamed "9/11 truth" mess in general, isn't handled by debates, it's handled by scientific investigation. When you were given math problems to solve in high school, you didn't get up on a podium and declare that life is meaningless if x does not equal 60, you got out your calculator, pen and paper and solved the problem. When track runners compete in the Olympics, the referees don't hold formal panel debates to determine how fast they run, they check their stop watches and camera recordings. When scientists (true scientists, that is) want to establish who killed 3000 people on 9/11, they investigate the attack.

The 9/11 truth movement is not being ignored. It has had its claims shot down by actual scientists for a decade. Science doesn't need to waste its time with pointless debates. Anyone curious about what really happened can read the scientific literature. You'd probably get more out of a fistfight.

Quote:

You have the actual, small-t truth on your side.

But debates aren't about establishing who is right, any more than ski jumping is about determining who is best at playing the violin. Skilled debaters aren't good at determining and spreading facts, they're good at rhetoric and coming across as convincing. In debates, they are up against people who are experts at the field being debated, but not necessarily skilled at all in the field of debating. Now, you can reply, "that may be true, but can't the side of reason send its own master in rhetoric, a professional debater, perhaps?". Sure, we could pool our money and hire someone. But then it would be just that -- a professional debate, a fight to determine who has the sharpest tongue. A battle of wits, as it were.

Science isn't about wits. It's about learning.

[Sam.I.Am]

I doubt that bill has considered who the audience is. I know that I occasionally listen for the chuckles at the idiocy presented and when I do listen I hear a lot of truckers call in. Now then, either truckers are a really loony group of people or they listen to keep from falling asleep at the wheel.

I'll leave it up to the lurkers, posters, families victims and anyone else who finds this post in a google search to decide for themselves why the audience might be listening in at O'dark thirty. Either they believe the topic is important or they can't go to sleep for whatever reason and infomercials or Limbaugh reruns just aren't their cup o' tea.

[Safe-Keeper]

Quote:

I doubt that bill has considered who the audience is.

Quite the contrary. If bill is on the "truther" side, then he has probably figured that Coast to Coast AM is the perfect place to fish for converts.

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

False dichotomy (thanks heavens for the built-in Firefox spell checker). You're making it sound as if we can either debate you, or sit there twiddling our thumbs while wondering what's on TV.

Empirical questions, such as "Who flew the planes into the towers", and the aptly misnamed "9/11 truth" mess in general, isn't handled by debates, it's handled by scientific investigation. When you were given math problems to solve in high school, you didn't get up on a podium and declare that life is meaningless if x does not equal 60, you got out your calculator, pen and paper and solved the problem. When track runners compete in the Olympics, the referees don't hold formal panel debates to determine how fast they run, they check their stop watches and camera recordings. When scientists (true scientists, that is) want to establish who killed 3000 people on 9/11, they investigate the attack.

The 9/11 truth movement is not being ignored. It has had its claims shot down by actual scientists for a decade. Science doesn't need to waste its time with pointless debates. Anyone curious about what really happened can read the scientific literature. You'd probably get more out of a fistfight.

But debates aren't about establishing who is right, any more than ski jumping is about determining who is best at playing the violin. Skilled debaters aren't good at determining and spreading facts, they're good at rhetoric and coming across as convincing. In debates, they are up against people who are experts at the field being debated, but not necessarily skilled at all in the field of debating. Now, you can reply, "that may be true, but can't the side of reason send its own master in rhetoric, a professional debater, perhaps?". Sure, we could pool our money and hire someone. But then it would be just that -- a professional debate, a fight to determine who has the sharpest tongue. A battle of wits, as it were.

Science isn't about wits. It's about learning.

You can either debate us or you can explain to the people why you will not defend the oficial story even though you are known to support it. It's as simple as that.

You can say that the thousands of scientists and building professionals who support the millions strong Truth movement and are often members of it are crazy if you ike. That sounds crazy in itself as will be clear to anybody.

So to say that you will not debate these motivated and eminently qualified individuals puts you in a very difficult position which we are ready to capitalise on in a New York minute should you fail to step up to the mark.

In any case these particular debates are about persuading or swaying people with superior detail. There are more things in Heaven and Earth than mathematical calculations as you should know. And fortunately we have masses of such detail. RRichard Gage has a 90% conversion rate at his lectures which tells it's own story.

And the bottom line is- if you are not scared to debate us let us set up some televised public forums where the debates can proced on coast to coast television. Or let us have a full-scale independent investigaton. I have a model for that that we can look at another time by the way.

[332nd]

Originally Posted by bill smith

You can either debate us or you can explain to the people why you will not defend the oficial story even though you are known to support it. It's as simple as that.

You can say that the thousands of scientists and building professionals who support the millions strong Truth movement and are often members of it are crazy if you ike. That sounds crazy in itself as will be clear to anybody.

So to say that you will not debate these motivated and eminently qualified individuals puts you in a very difficult position which we are ready to capitalise on in a New York minute should you fail to step up to the mark.

In any case these particular debates are about persuading or swaying people with superior detail. There are more things in Heaven and Earth than mathematical calculations as you should know. And fortunately we have masses of such detail. RRichard Gage has a 90% conversion rate at his lectures which tells it's own story.

And the bottom line is- if you are not scared to debate us let us set up some televised public forums where the debates can proced on coast to coast television.Or let us have a full-scale independent investigaton. I have a model for that that we can look at another time by the way.

Who the hell is stopping you?

[PlanosLie]

DaveThomasNMSR,

What side are you on?

[Safe-Keeper]

Originally Posted by bill smith

Thank you for the illustration. This, folks, is why we have nothing to gain debating these people. For example, you speak of the "thousands of engineers and millions of supporters of your theory" -- ignoring not only how vastly outnumbered those mere thousands and millions are, but also that science isn't done by counting votes. It doesn't matter in science if you're one person strong or a thousand, if you're wrong, you're wrong.

This is the kind of tactics we would expect to see in a "debate" on 9/11 truth. Not facts, just rhetoric and boasting. I pass.

Quote:

In any case these particular debates are about persuading or swaying people with superior detail. There are more things in Heaven and Earth than mathematical calculations as you should know. And fortunately we have masses of such detail. RRichard Gage has a 90% conversion rate at his lectures which tells it's own story.

Exactly. It tells us we should not enable you to spread your nonsense by engaging you in "debate".

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by PlanosLie

DaveThomasNMSR,

What side are you on?

He believes the government on 9/11. Bin Laden and the 19 Muslims.

[bill smith]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Thank you for the illustration. This, folks, is why we have nothing to gain debating these people. For example, you speak of the "thousands of engineers and millions of supporters of your theory" -- ignoring not only how vastly outnumbered those mere thousands and millions are, but also that science isn't done by counting votes. It doesn't matter in science if you're one person strong or a thousand, if you're wrong, you're wrong.

This is the kind of tactics we would expect to see in a "debate" on 9/11 truth. Not facts, just rhetoric and boasting. I pass.

Exactly. It tells us we should not enable you to spread your nonsense by engaging you in "debate".

I'll write you down as one who advocates ignoring the Truth Movement and it's thousands of highly qualified professionals then shall I ?

[R.Mackey]

Originally Posted by TexasJack

So, I guess the best alternative is Mackey's--ignore it entirely. They'll probably claim some sort of victory, but they can't say you said no.

For me, it would be like accepting a sponsored debate by flat-earthers. There's really nothing to gain from it, so why bother?

Bonehead Truthers, as usual, are missing the point.

Gage has already ducked the debate. I wrote a 300 page expose of Truther mistakes. Gage promised, to another poster here, in person, to respond to it.

He hasn't. He either can't find enough time as he gallivants around the world, on the donations of wide-eyed Truther followers, or he's not smart enough to do so.

There's no point trying to cajole me into traveling to DC, on my own dime, with only three weeks warning, if he can't be bothered to respond to my own written debunking. Or to the literally hundreds of published papers that all say, in so many words, he's totally insane.

And yet, in the eyes of Truthers, it's me who's at fault here.

You can't win arguing with crazy people. I no longer bother. They should at least give me credit for not making fun of them, baiting them, or taking cheap shots at them 24/7. Ignoring them is honestly better than they deserve.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by bill smith

He believes the government facts on 9/11. Bin Laden and the 19 Muslims.

Sorry Bill, had to correct you one more time.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR

So, what are your predictions for the Great Debate?

my prediction?

no one will care. this story is over.