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.
Tags 911 conspiracy theory , flight 77 , flight data recorder , johndoex , rob balsamo

Reply
Old 3rd February 2007, 08:10 AM   #1
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,877
JohnDohX Challenges Gravy, Anti-Sophist to a Debate

Over at 9-11 Blogger:

This is my open invitation for public debate regarding the Flight Data Recorder of American Flight 77 provided by
The National Transportation Safety Board (www.ntsb.gov).

Quote:
I challenge the following:

- Anti-Sophist (anonymous persona on JREF),
- Mark Roberts (a person who feels we do not need to question our govt regarding 9/11 and does anything in his power to 'neutralize' 9/11 arguments including harrassment at Ground Zero)
- William Seger (internet persona of Democratic Underground who loves to cherry pick)
- The NTSB
- The FBI
- Anyone who thinks analyzing the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon is a "Honey Pot" or a "Trap"
- Any mainstream media outlet who wishes to tackle the subject of American 77 Flight Data Recorder as provided by the NTSB.
Only, you know, he doesn't want to do it in a forum (like his or ours) where he'll be embarrassed in front of his acolytes:

Quote:
All of the above i have challenged to a debate in the past, using real names, in a real forum (not the internet), to email me with their number to set up the debate and/or recorded call. None have stepped up to the plate.
Hoo-boy would you give your phone number out to a kook like Rob?

I doubt that Pomeroo would want to host this debate; the "Pilots" just aren't significant enough to warrant the effort.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 February 2007, 08:20 AM   #2
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
That idiot is still using the FDR from Flight 77 found in the Pentagon rubble to prove that Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat 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 February 2007, 08:20 AM   #3
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Since he's not employable and the sales of his crap aren't yielding the income he wants, he needs to generate more publicity.

Clearly he's not interested in bringing justice. Instead he's interested in marketing himself and generating more blood money.

I know you're reading this Rob, how about you grow a pair and go to the authorities with your "evidence"? You won't though will you, because you know you are a scam artist praying on those dumber then even you.
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames 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 February 2007, 08:32 AM   #4
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,877
I get the feeling that Gravy's going to spend the rest of his life responding to challenges from the latest hotshot.

__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

Last edited by Brainster; 3rd February 2007 at 08:36 AM.
Brainster 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 February 2007, 08:34 AM   #5
VespaGuy
Graduate Poster
 
VespaGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,034
Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
Since he's not employable and the sales of his crap aren't yielding the income he wants, he needs to generate more publicity.
That's a shame. I really thought that the Pilots for Trooth BBQ apron was going to be a hot item. http://www.cafepress.com/911pilots.96981588
__________________
"You are claiming it wasn't one. That is a positive claim." - Russell Pickering
VespaGuy 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 February 2007, 08:56 AM   #6
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by VespaGuy View Post
That's a shame. I really thought that the Pilots for Trooth BBQ apron was going to be a hot item. http://www.cafepress.com/911pilots.96981588
anyone else think of krusty the clown?
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe 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 February 2007, 09:04 AM   #7
JAStewart
Graduate Poster
Tagger
 
JAStewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,521
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
That idiot is still using the FDR from Flight 77 found in the Pentagon rubble to prove that Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon?
I think that this pretty much sums up why this debate is pointless.
__________________
Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl

Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60
JAStewart 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 February 2007, 09:17 AM   #8
babazaroni
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 787
Given JDX's fascination with recorded calls, he will use cherry picked snippets from the debate for Pandora's Box, Part 3.

Did we ever disuss Part 2?
babazaroni 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 February 2007, 10:47 AM   #9
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
JDX needs to be careful what he wishes for. As we all know, and the Troothers seem to be trying to forget, Gravy for one is more than willing to take them on in a recorded, broadcast debate.

Not sure JDX is worth the trouble, though. It's not like his antics have gained any kind of attention, except among folks like us who enjoy the entertainment.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 11:02 AM   #10
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,156
Originally Posted by R.Mackey View Post
JDX needs to be careful what he wishes for. As we all know, and the Troothers seem to be trying to forget, Gravy for one is more than willing to take them on in a recorded, broadcast debate.

Not sure JDX is worth the trouble, though. It's not like his antics have gained any kind of attention, except among folks like us who enjoy the entertainment.
Very true.

And it could unintentionally boost his BBQ apron sales. Which means twoofer bucks that should rightfully be aimed at you and me will be squandered by folks who cannot even spell BBQ.

"9/11 Aprons Are For An Outside Job!"

"9/11 Aprons Are For An Outside Job!"

Let's make our own aprons, Mack, and corner the Twoofer Apron-Buying dollar.
ConspiRaider 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 February 2007, 11:56 AM   #11
ComsatAngel2017
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 897
Given Gravy's past record on public debate with Twoofers, I believe JDX would rapidly find a way to weasel out of any agreed debate - "No! He wants to use Facts! and Evidence! he's a NWO shill, can't debate, gotta go - "

NB. I missed the posts that revealed the One True Name And Identity of JDX, even after trying a search for them. Who is he? (or was he?)
ComsatAngel2017 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 February 2007, 01:38 PM   #12
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
This could be like a rebroadcast of the Judy Wood interview. Hey someone get a videocam and rent a conference room somewhere!
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 03:00 PM   #13
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
How could we make this happen?

Surely this can be accomplished without phones.

Lyte Trip 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 February 2007, 03:09 PM   #14
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
I don't really understand the purpose of such a debate. Everything JDX has ever said on the issue has been demonstrated to be false, already. Does he have something new to say?

Would the debate consist of him repeating the same tried debunked nonsense and me repeating the debunkment that's already been said 100 times? What exactly does that accomplish?

I've been asking JDX/UnderTow/snowygrouch for months now to put forth a compelling analysis backed up by the evidence and I've never seen a single thing worth considering. Each of them, seperately, has made promises that such analysis was "in the works" and nothing has come from it. Now, all the sudden, after UnderTow and snowygrouch both made grandiose promoises of new analysis and vanished into thin air, JDX challenges people to a debate. He's had nothing new to add to this conversation for months other than reworking his debunked nonsense into a video with spooky music and attempting to being profitting from it.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist 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 February 2007, 03:36 PM   #15
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,960
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
I don't really understand the purpose of such a debate. Everything JDX has ever said on the issue has been demonstrated to be false, already. Does he have something new to say?

Would the debate consist of him repeating the same tried debunked nonsense and me repeating the debunkment that's already been said 100 times? What exactly does that accomplish?

I've been asking JDX/UnderTow/snowygrouch for months now to put forth a compelling analysis backed up by the evidence and I've never seen a single thing worth considering. Each of them, seperately, has made promises that such analysis was "in the works" and nothing has come from it. Now, all the sudden, after UnderTow and snowygrouch both made grandiose promoises of new analysis and vanished into thin air, JDX challenges people to a debate. He's had nothing new to add to this conversation for months other than reworking his debunked nonsense into a video with spooky music and attempting to being profitting from it.
Indeed.

It appears to me that this is nothing but a lame attempt by JDX to garner attention for purposes of promoting his video and the other items for sale on the PseudoPilotsForTwoof site. Sales, I imagine, are not exactly brisk.
LashL 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 February 2007, 03:50 PM   #16
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Why not challange to a debate on the value of 2+2?
Makes as much sense as any of these troofer "Debates"
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn 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 February 2007, 03:51 PM   #17
Panoply_Prefect
Graduate Poster
 
Panoply_Prefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
How could we make this happen?

Surely this can be accomplished without phones.

Easy, using software like Teamspeak it would be a simple task to set up a discussion, even with more than two participants. No need for exchanging telephone numbers, just a server URL. And no phone-fees.

Plus, its dead easy to record it.

Cheers,
SLOB
Panoply_Prefect 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 February 2007, 03:58 PM   #18
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
I'm more than happy to debate JDX in any format that doesn't leave my personal information in the hands of people I consider to be mentally unwell.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist 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 February 2007, 04:19 PM   #19
SirPhilip
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,444
This title has all the earmarks for drawn out, seriously boring s-it over a month period. Now don't disappoint me.
SirPhilip 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 February 2007, 04:22 PM   #20
CurtC
Illuminator
 
CurtC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,785
If you've ever seen Michael Shermer debate Kent Hovind, you'll already know why a live audio debate with a Troother is a bad idea. Any Troother can regurgitate ten lies per minute, but each one of those might take five or ten minutes to properly explain why it's a lie.

Any debate needs to be in a written forum. Why don't we do it here? I guess it's because JDX has been banned, huh?
__________________
Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.
CurtC 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 February 2007, 04:24 PM   #21
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,935
JDX reminds me of the kind of guy who's willing to get beat to a pulp by a gorilla, hoping a few people in the audience might throw a nickel his way afterward. What a lame act...
__________________
"Stellafane! My old partner in crime!" - Kelly J
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 04:45 PM   #22
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
I made two replies there. JDX's limited reading comprehension probably means I'll have to make many more.

Quote:
You challenged me to a debate in the past? Funny, I never received an email from you. You've also posted on the JREF forum, where I post every day, and I never heard a peep from you.

How about you post your challenge to me here, so people can see that you're not lying?

Perhaps you're just shy, Rob, since you called for me to be EXECUTED AS A TRAITOR, and only apologized under duress when you were caught posting under a different pseudonym and begging JREFers to join Pilots for Truth.

Pathetic.

I'll be glad to debate you in a public forum on all the flight 77 evidence. Do you accept?
He avoided both questions.

Quote:
Rob, you said, "All of the above i have challenged to a debate in the past, using real names, in a real forum (not the internet), to email me with their number to set up the debate and/or recorded call. None have stepped up to the plate."

I asked you to post your previous challenge to me, so that people know you're not lying. Please do so, or retract your claim.

Rob Balsamo, posting as Loose Change Forum Moderator johndoex:

“Mark Roberts deserves to die a traitors [sic] death for trying to suppress 9/11 families from seeking the Truth.”

Can you name a single instance in which I tried to suppress a 9/11 victim from seeking the Truth? No, you can't, because it's never happened. It's just another sad lie you told.

How about this one: "Supporting a terrorist? Don't do that again...i will not take it lightly...that is slander..and i will find you."

Tsk, tsk, Rob. Such violent "patriotic" fantasies you have. Here's another:

"If hes trying to take over my ship. .and all he has is a boxcutter? Im gonna grab my crash axe and chop him up... while tossing fire extingushers to passengers. .you? Or do you cower and say.. "Please dont cut me Mr. Big Bad Terrorist" –Rob Balsamo

And you presume to lecture me about respect for 9/11 victims?

Why don't you present your armchair hero's fantasies to the families of these men:

Jason Dahl

Leroy Homer

John Ogonowski

Thomas McGuinness

Chic Burlingame

David Charlebois

Victor Saracini

Michael Horrocks

Go ahead, Rob. Report back to us on the support you get from the Burlingame and Charlebois families after you explain how their husbands and fathers cowered and begged, whereas you – while strapped in your seat – would have singlehandedly defeated all the hijackers.

Oh, but I thought there were no hijackers. Huh.

Sick.



I have no expertise in determining the possible sources of possible errors in the sensing and recording devices of 757s, and neither do you.

The errors in your arguments have been pointed out to you in detail by JREF forum members who have experience designing, testing, and maintaining such equipment. One of them is a 757/767 avionics technician. Another built such instruments for the Air Force. I defer to their expertise.

Not surprisingly, the additional "evidence" that your followers arrogantly promised to deliver, never materialized. If you have something new that you think is important, present all your data so that experts in the relevant fields – not you and I – can review it.

You say you've "challenged" the NTSB to a debate. Is that how science is done? Have you presented your data to them? If so, who reviewed it and what were their conclusions? After all, you can't very well claim that you stand for the capital T "Truth" if you don't present your arguments and data to the experts who are best able to analyze them.

You claim flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. Do you agree to a public debate on all flight 77/Pentagon attack issues? Yes or no?
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard
Gravy 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 February 2007, 05:13 PM   #23
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
I've been waiting for him, UnderTow, and snowygrouch to produce a piece of analysis that is worth debunking... I'm tempted to go dig up all the "promises" we've been made about "shocking things" in the pipeline that have never materialized.

All of JDX's claims can pretty much be boiled down into two issues:

1) The flight-path of the animation is wrong.

JDX, in all his videos, neglects to mention that the CSV data is completely consistent with the official story and the only discrepancy exists in the NTSB's animation. This issue comes from the map in the animation being rotated the wrong way.

Many conspiracy theorists falsely believe that the FDR data is inconsistent with the light-pole flightpath. JDX, in none of his videos, takes the CSV file's final magnetic heading and plots it on a map to find out what path the FDR actually says. If he had, he'd see it matches the official story completely and the only anomaly exists in whomever put the map into the animation and rotated it the wrong direction.

2) The altitude was too high to hit the lightpoles.

This has been severely destroyed by pretty much everyone and has been largely dismissed by most conspiracy theorists. He is -so- hung up on the correction issues of the barometric pressure that he neglects the larger issues. At the speeds being discussed, the altimeter is completely out of it's operating point and has both lag (hysterisis) and steady-state error (positional error).
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire

Last edited by Anti-sophist; 3rd February 2007 at 05:15 PM.
Anti-sophist 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 February 2007, 06:26 PM   #24
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,960
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
I've been waiting for him, UnderTow, and snowygrouch to produce a piece of analysis that is worth debunking... I'm tempted to go dig up all the "promises" we've been made about "shocking things" in the pipeline that have never materialized.

All of JDX's claims can pretty much be boiled down into two issues:

1) The flight-path of the animation is wrong.

JDX, in all his videos, neglects to mention that the CSV data is completely consistent with the official story and the only discrepancy exists in the NTSB's animation. This issue comes from the map in the animation being rotated the wrong way.

Many conspiracy theorists falsely believe that the FDR data is inconsistent with the light-pole flightpath. JDX, in none of his videos, takes the CSV file's final magnetic heading and plots it on a map to find out what path the FDR actually says. If he had, he'd see it matches the official story completely and the only anomaly exists in whomever put the map into the animation and rotated it the wrong direction.

2) The altitude was too high to hit the lightpoles.

This has been severely destroyed by pretty much everyone and has been largely dismissed by most conspiracy theorists. He is -so- hung up on the correction issues of the barometric pressure that he neglects the larger issues. At the speeds being discussed, the altimeter is completely out of it's operating point and has both lag (hysterisis) and steady-state error (positional error).
Anti-Sophist,

I love reading your posts about this topic, and I thank you for putting it into layman's terms such as you have done above, for those of us who get a bit lost in some of the more technical lingo sometimes.

I can follow very complex processes and explanations and technical data when I concentrate on it, and I did read and understand your paper - which was brilliant - but these straightforward posts in layman's terms such as the one I just quoted, are wonderful as they explain highly complex things in easy terms, that anyone can comprehend.

Bravo, sir.
LashL 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 February 2007, 06:28 PM   #25
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
I wish someone would do an article on all the criminal truthers. I mean look at how many truthers are now claiming to have evidence to prove 9/11 was carried out by the USG, yet none of them will present it to law enforcement. Isnt that aiding and abetting, or interfering with a criminal investigation or something...

We have Lyte Trip and Merc, JDoeX and his gang, and I am sure there are others in their group, all witholding this evidence...any why.

Shameful

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 07:00 PM   #26
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,810
If JohnDoe really is interested in truth he would have found experts in that field to examine the data and his findings in relation to them. He has no more claim to being an expert in interpreting the data and understanding its limitation and error variations than I do to being able to analyze the computer data on my car engine at the mechanics. He has a pilots license and I doubt that interpretation of raw data from a FDR is part of what he had to learn. I have a valid drivers license does that mean I am qualified to interpret engine performance data.
eeyore1954 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 February 2007, 07:12 PM   #27
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092
A couple months ago, I posted on DU about JDX's using the NTSB animation with the misaligned Pentagon graphic to "prove" the plane didn't fly over the light poles -- when he knew that the heading in the FDR data didn't show that path at all. In the midst of trying to obfuscate and change the subject to the altitude data and otherwise deflect why he was doing that, he started demanding that I give him my phone number so he could call me and we could "chat" about it. Then, in the same post where he asked for it again, he said this:

Originally Posted by JohnDoeX
Im prepared to plow down anyone that gets in my way of questioning my govt.. get it? ...

People within our organization have sworn to defend the Constitution from ALL enemies.. foreign or domestic. We are prepared to give our lives for it. Are you prepared to give yours if you stand in our way?
Uh, no thanks, I think I'll pass on "chatting" offline with this particular nut.

(ETA: This current thread on DU may be the reason for JDX's implosion: http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=125x138502 )

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 3rd February 2007 at 07:34 PM.
WilliamSeger 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 February 2007, 07:48 PM   #28
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,810
ALso if JohnDoeX is interested in the truth how is that accomplished in a debate with a bunch of CT's and people from JRef listening. The CT people will believe it if he says the data proves the airplane actually flew into K2 in the Himalayas and they are not qualified to know if what he is saying makes any sense (of course neither am I nor would I suspect most of the people here). The difference here is most people are willing to admit where they are not experts unlike on the LC Board where they all realize even the simplest understanding of physics disproves the NIST report. Of course another difference here is people do understand physics and there are experts in many different fields who put forth logical and scientific arguments.


Present your information and interpretation in front of experts JohnDoe. Try to find the truth if you are really looking for it.
eeyore1954 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 February 2007, 08:06 PM   #29
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
In the midst of trying to obfuscate and change the subject to the altitude data and otherwise deflect why he was doing that, he started demanding that I give him my phone number so he could call me and we could "chat" about it. Then, in the same post where he asked for it again, he said this:

Originally Posted by JohnDoeX
Im prepared to plow down anyone that gets in my way of questioning my govt.. get it? ...

People within our organization have sworn to defend the Constitution from ALL enemies.. foreign or domestic. We are prepared to give our lives for it. Are you prepared to give yours if you stand in our way?
Uh, no thanks, I think I'll pass on "chatting" offline with this particular nut.
That's our JDX, all right. Six months ago he had a similar fit, threatening to "introduce the Second Amendment" to whomever dared to question His Royal American Highness. ooooh, scary.

Some tough guy. Looks to me like his bluffed challenge has been called, but I'm sure he won't dare to show up... Frankly, given his cowardice even on his own forum, I rather doubt he'd have the will or the capacity to carry out even the most feeble confrontation in real life.

But I don't blame you in the least. I wouldn't want a degenerate like JDX prank calling me at 3 AM either.

So, John Doe X, we know you're lurking and reading here. Are you going to follow through, or what? Looks like you have some takers for your "debate."
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 08:08 PM   #30
boloboffin
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,986
So who's keeping JDX from questioning his government? All we ask that he make sense when he does so.
boloboffin 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 February 2007, 08:28 PM   #31
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,935
Originally Posted by R.Mackey View Post
That's our JDX, all right. Six months ago he had a similar fit, threatening to "introduce the Second Amendment" to whomever dared to question His Royal American Highness. ooooh, scary.

Some tough guy. Looks to me like his bluffed challenge has been called, but I'm sure he won't dare to show up... Frankly, given his cowardice even on his own forum, I rather doubt he'd have the will or the capacity to carry out even the most feeble confrontation in real life.

But I don't blame you in the least. I wouldn't want a degenerate like JDX prank calling me at 3 AM either.

So, John Doe X, we know you're lurking and reading here. Are you going to follow through, or what? Looks like you have some takers for your "debate."
I actually think JDX is perfectly aware of what he's doing when he resorts to these rather pathetic attempts to appear "scary." Notice he only seems to do it when he's totally overmatched and obviously knows it. Suddenly he'll inject the veneer of potential violence into his overall nuttiness, pretending he just might be, you know, dangerous or something, and hoping his opponent will back away. Typical coward move.
__________________
"Stellafane! My old partner in crime!" - Kelly J
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2007, 08:38 PM   #32
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
A quick warning to jdx. That crap about charging a hijacker who has a knife isn't going to stand up.

It took the combined efforts of all three crew members to subdue ONE mentally unstable person on a FedEx flight(DC-10) and they very nearly lost.

It has also been noted that you have removed that little error about Chic Burlingame being well over 6 foot tall after someone who claims to have known the man pointed out that he was 5'10" and slight and one of your own people found a picture of him that shows he was not 6' tall.
jaydeehess 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 February 2007, 08:41 PM   #33
boloboffin
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,986
Not to mention the seating in a cabin give the pilot and co-pilot (low, strapped in) a distinct disadvantage over anyone stepping up between them with any kind of blade.
boloboffin 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 February 2007, 09:02 PM   #34
Anti-sophist
Graduate Poster
 
Anti-sophist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,542
Originally Posted by LashL View Post
Anti-Sophist...
Thanks for the kind words.

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger
(ETA: This current thread on DU may be the reason for JDX's implosion: http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=125x138502 )
You were specifically named, as well, in this recent little "challenge".


The fundamental problem with JDX is he has nothing new to say. He depends on his 'experts' and/or 'computer guys' to do the analysis and he just makes the claims. To date, none of them have produced anything new or interesting, yet he continues to talk a big game.

I noticed his new demand for a debate has a bunch of interesting rules like.. he's allowed to bring whoever he wants, including his unnamed "expert".

If this unnamed expert has something new to add, I wonder why he doesn't just publish something worth reading as opposed to remaining unnamed to appear as a surprise guest in a debate.

If this unnamed expert has nothing new to add other then supposed qualifications, that equally remains unintersting. All the qualifications in the world don't change the numbers.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. -Voltaire
Anti-sophist 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 February 2007, 09:23 PM   #35
babazaroni
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 787
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
I noticed his new demand for a debate has a bunch of interesting rules like.. he's allowed to bring whoever he wants, including his unnamed "expert".

If this unnamed expert has something new to add, I wonder why he doesn't just publish something worth reading as opposed to remaining unnamed to appear as a surprise guest in a debate.
This supports my contention that he is only interested in the debate to provide recorded material for Pandora Part 3.

His 'expert' will dump something into the debate that may not be debunkable quickly, and those he debates will look clueless or not make the best response.

He loves this sort of thing with the ambush calls in his other videos.
babazaroni 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 February 2007, 09:24 PM   #36
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,877
Wisdumb claims to be an ex-Navy SEAL in that thread.

Brainster's rule for identifying military imposters: If they claim to have been a SEAL or a Ranger or a member of some other elite force, they're probably lying; if they claim to have been a radioman or in a supply unit they're probably telling the truth.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 February 2007, 09:45 PM   #37
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,092
Originally Posted by Anti-sophist View Post
If this unnamed expert has something new to add, I wonder why he doesn't just publish something worth reading as opposed to remaining unnamed to appear as a surprise guest in a debate.

If this unnamed expert has nothing new to add other then supposed qualifications, that equally remains unintersting. All the qualifications in the world don't change the numbers.
I think JDX's videos and phone call recordings prove that his only interest is in putting on a show for the rubes. But unfortunately for his budding career, he's a P.T. Barnum without the brains. He would really like to tap into the market LC opened up, but can't quite get a handle on anything that catches on, so he's getting frustrated. Obviously, trying to debate on the net isn't working for him (and for obvious reasons), so I think he's just fishing for an arena where he might have better luck putting on some Short Attention Span Theater for the twoofers.
WilliamSeger 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 February 2007, 10:12 PM   #38
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Wisdumb claims to be an ex-Navy SEAL in that thread.

Brainster's rule for identifying military imposters: If they claim to have been a SEAL or a Ranger or a member of some other elite force, they're probably lying; if they claim to have been a radioman or in a supply unit they're probably telling the truth.

A SEAL or Ranger will have docuementation to back that up. A technical expert will have papers. At any rate a 'surprise' expert cannot be ckecked on while on air and thus their claimed qualifications are inadmissible. You should be able to demand the qualifications of any 'expert' ahead of time so as to be able to confirm them. jdx would require it of you.

jdx should not be allowed to set all the rules. That is what he craves. He is a little dictator on his site.


For my 2 cents worth though, a verbal debate on the FDR is useless. No one can check calculations in a verbal debate so all that will be put forth are each other's conclusions. We already know what they are.

Instead there should be IMO, a website that has both arguements side by side on each page. Not one after the other but side by side , with calculations where applicable. All calculations should have degrees of error clearly shown(ie. DME data is +/- 1/10th nautical mile IIRC)

A final page could include conclusions and arguements concerning the approach of the opposing side.

jdx is looking for emotion while claiming to be using facts. Requiring him to stick to facts only and leaving emotion out of the mix will disarm him. In fact any emotional response by you will offer him a way to change this to an emotion based debate.
jaydeehess 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 February 2007, 10:15 PM   #39
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
Quote:
Obviously, trying to debate on the net isn't working for him (and for obvious reasons),
You mean that he can't brow-beat people on forums that he does not personally control and thus his own forum is more and more a circle jerk with morons like Hayduke?
jaydeehess 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 4th February 2007, 11:52 AM   #40
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
UnderTow's repsonse

UT:

Originally Posted by Anti-Sophist
I've been asking JDX/UnderTow/snowygrouch for months now to put forth a compelling analysis
Strange, where does this phantom request reside. This person is a loud mouth brat.

His entire statement is a self-inflated ego pump-fest.

Originally Posted by AntiTruth
Now, all the sudden, after UnderTow and snowygrouch both made grandiose promoises of new analysis and vanished into thin air,
SAY What?? What FORUM is this guy reading??

What a load of bs and nonsense.

And finally, because so much of it just isn't worth it

Originally Posted by AntiT
At the speeds being discussed, the altimeter is completely out of it's operating point and has both lag (hysterisis) and steady-state error (positional error).
oH rEALLY .. ! ?! PROVE IT
Lyte Trip 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 07:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.