9/11 Truth for Dummies: Wrap Your Head Around One Thing

[TheQuietRiot]

If she doesn't want to answer your questions, that is her right. You'll just have to deal with it.

Nobody has said she has to answer our questions.

But don't you even consider it a little ironic that she is complaining about a lack of rational discussion yet will not participate in that discussion herself?

Instead doing the exact opposite and posting Youtube videos.

She complains about not getting treating seriously when she only has herself to blame.

 

[Zanting]

Wow...you guys are so predictable...it would actually be funny if 3000 people hadn't been killed that day...and countless other innocent lives since.

And no...I don't want to engage in fruitless arguments. Sorry if that offends you, but it is simply a waste of time and energy. Your reality is simply very different from mine. I accept that. Perhaps you would like to extend the same respect.

But you may want to take a look at recent poles. You are now in the minority. Gee, I wonder why so many people just don't believe the official story anymore.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Wow...you guys are so predictable...it would actually be funny if 3000 people hadn't been killed that day...and countless other innocent lives since.

And no...I don't want to engage in fruitless arguments. Sorry if that offends you, but it is simply a waste of time and energy. Your reality is simply very different from mine. I accept that. Perhaps you would like to extend the same respect.

But you may want to take a look at recent poles. You are now in the minority. Gee, I wonder why so many people just don't believe the official story anymore.

If you don't want to engage in discussion then it begs the question why you are on a discussion forum talking about 9/11 in the first place.

And no, we are not in the minority. Both professionally and publicly the "truther" movement is still and always has been the minority.

 

[Btodd]

Wow...you guys are so predictable...it would actually be funny if 3000 people hadn't been killed that day...and countless other innocent lives since.

Ah, so you admit that almost 3000 people died that day. So those were the real flights that crashed, and those were real victims.

So, who was flying the planes in this 'inside job'? Who did the suicide mission for the benefit of the Bush Administration?


Btodd

 

[Zanting]

If you don't want to engage in discussion then it begs the question why you are on a discussion forum talking about 9/11 in the first place.

And no, we are not in the minority. Both professionally and publicly the "truther" movement is still and always has been the minority.

Discussion is one thing....fruitless, time wasting arguments are another.

Like I said...you should check the latest stats...I didn't compile them silly...so if you want to argue them...go to the source.

Ben Swann Reality Check: More Americans "Rethinking" 9/11? - YouTube

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Discussion is one thing....fruitless, time wasting arguments are another.

Well since you never gave me an answer to my original question it doesn't look like you are after a discussion either.

Like I said...you should check the latest stats...I didn't compile them silly...so if you want to argue them...go to the source.

There are potentially thousands of sources you could be working from.

It isn't hard to simply post a link into the thread so people know what stats you are talking about.

 

[Btodd]

Even though it's irrelevant how many people believe something when determining if the belief is valid, the only source in that video was a poll taken by Rethink 911 (which I obviously don't trust as an unbiased source). If I heard the results correctly, they are in the minority even in their own poll.


Btodd

 

[Zanting]

Well since you never gave me an answer to my original question it doesn't look like you are after a discussion either.



There are potentially thousands of sources you could be working from.

It isn't hard to simply post a link into the thread so people know what stats you are talking about.

Guess you didn't watch the video. They, and their source are in it.

 

[Zanting]

Even though it's irrelevant how many people believe something when determining if the belief is valid, the only source in that video was a poll taken by Rethink 911 (which I obviously don't trust as an unbiased source). If I heard the results correctly, they are in the minority even in their own poll.


Btodd

Obviously many do view the evidence as valid, stats included. And why would that be a surprise. More and more people in my everyday life bring it up now. Using the, as usual, "discredit" the source/witness/whistleblower/engineer/scientist etc. doesn't say anything.

Obviously all sources and experts other than the ones you adhere to will be biased in your opinion and produce defunct data. You've made that abundantly clear on many occasions. That doesn't make it true on any level, or make the data unreliable.

Like I said...fruitless, waste of time argument. Not a discussion.

 

[Btodd]

Obviously many do view the evidence as valid, stats included. And why would that be a surprise. More and more people in my everyday life bring it up now. Using the, as usual, "discredit" the source/witness/whistleblower/engineer/scientist etc. doesn't say anything.

That wasn't a personal attack (you're quite sensitive); it was merely articulating that appealing to the number of people who believe something as some sort of evidence for it being true is a logical fallacy. It's called 'Argumentum Ad Populum'. That would apply to anything I believe as well, if I made such an argument. I was merely pointing out that the (single) source you cited when saying that people like me are in the minority did not even show us in the minority, and it's not an unbiased source. We have no idea about the methods of that (single) poll, whom they targeted for it, etc. It is absolutely useless in establishing what happened on 9/11. Questions like the one I asked you earlier, though...are entirely useful, because they put both scenarios to the ultimate test of which view provides the most complete narrative of what happened, which is supported by more evidence, and the least amount of assumptions. But you didn't care for that question, calling it 'fruitless'.

Obviously all sources and experts other than the ones you adhere to will be biased in your opinion and produce defunct data. You've made that abundantly clear on many occasions. That doesn't make it true on any level, or make the data unreliable.

Like I said...fruitless, waste of time argument. Not a discussion.

You don't actually discuss anything. You question the official story, ask us to defend it...we do, and when we ask you to defend your side, you consider that some sort of illegal move on our part. I'm sorry that you cannot provide any plausible narrative for such a simple question as the one I asked, but that's your problem. I'm no stranger to this; it's how the entire Truth Movement works. "We ask the questions around here!", etc. I'll answer any question put to me to the best of my ability...I'm not afraid of anything.


Btodd

 

[LostMarbels]

So where'd the plane, passengers and crew of the real plane go?

Evidence please.

This is what I've been asking.

 

[Btodd]

This is what I've been asking.

Apparently, this question is off-limits, even if you claim to be seeking the truth.


Btodd

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

This is what I've been asking.

That's one of the problems with trutherism - it just keeps asking questions - lots and lots of questions. But it never attempts to answer anything.

So you get these kinds of conversations:-

Truther: How do we know it was a plane that hit the pentagon?
Non-truther: Here's a photo of airliner debris at the Pent
Truther: How do you know it was airliner debris, or it could have been placed there?
Non-truther: But if it wasn't true, then the real airliner and passengers must have disappeared. Do you have any evidence of that?
Truther: Well, I'm asking that too - do you know where the plane went?

And round and round we go. Another old poster to these forums was a master at it - always posting questions but refusing to answer any.

 

[Trackball]

You are now in the minority. Gee, I wonder why so many people just don't believe the official story anymore.

From Homer to Harry Potter in human history, there is always the hero, seeking the "truth." His mission - to reach places that taboo for mortals - Minotaur's labyrinth or secret government agencies - and bring out the knowledge and share it with all of us.

 

[Zanting]

That wasn't a personal attack (you're quite sensitive); it was merely articulating that appealing to the number of people who believe something as some sort of evidence for it being true is a logical fallacy. It's called 'Argumentum Ad Populum'. That would apply to anything I believe as well, if I made such an argument. I was merely pointing out that the (single) source you cited when saying that people like me are in the minority did not even show us in the minority, and it's not an unbiased source. We have no idea about the methods of that (single) poll, whom they targeted for it, etc. It is absolutely useless in establishing what happened on 9/11. Questions like the one I asked you earlier, though...are entirely useful, because they put both scenarios to the ultimate test of which view provides the most complete narrative of what happened, which is supported by more evidence, and the least amount of assumptions. But you didn't care for that question, calling it 'fruitless'.



You don't actually discuss anything. You question the official story, ask us to defend it...we do, and when we ask you to defend your side, you consider that some sort of illegal move on our part. I'm sorry that you cannot provide any plausible narrative for such a simple question as the one I asked, but that's your problem. I'm no stranger to this; it's how the entire Truth Movement works. "We ask the questions around here!", etc. I'll answer any question put to me to the best of my ability...I'm not afraid of anything.



Btodd

You actually thought I took that personally?

Sorry you feel that way! You're very selective about what you want to discuss. All you seem interested in is the planes. Why is that?

 

[TheQuietRiot]

You actually thought I took that personally?

Sorry you feel that way! You're very selective about what you want to discuss. All you seem interested in is the planes. Why is that?

Actually, you seemed to have missed this...

Btodd wrote,

I'll answer any question put to me to the best of my ability...I'm not afraid of anything.

So no, he is clearly not very selective.

What is it you want to discuss Zanting?

 

[Zanting]

Actually, you seemed to have missed this...

Btodd wrote,



So no, he is clearly not very selective.

What is it you want to discuss Zanting?

No...I didn't miss it. And He indeed has persisted on discussing the planes...why not just start another thread? It is a very interesting topic and loaded with controversy all on it's own, which certainly warrants it's own thread.

Making assumptions regarding my reasons for not discussing the planes on this thread has been amusing, since I have clearly stated my view that it is off topic.

The OP regarding the collapse of the buildings I have discussed to it's conclusion with Btodd, and as I have already stated several times...no, I do not wish to engage in fruitless, off topic, circular arguments. That is my choice. So to continue a discussion on the OP is mute.

I'm not sure why you seem to feel you have to jump in to support Btodd. If you have not read the discussion we have had at length, then you obviously have no idea why I concluded further discussion on the topic initiated by the OP.

If you wanted to discuss what the OP presented directly, that is one thing, but all you have done thus far is reiterate Btodd. I refer to that as the goading tag team on CF, since it happens quite frequently with certain responders. And it usually is very successful at inciting responders and derailing topics. Experience on CF has taught me not to engage in those kinds of antics.

And, of course, these are my opinions based on personal experience and on observations of many other threads pertaining to controversial topics.

I am well aware that Btodd knows the controversy surrounding the topic of the planes, so what is his problem with starting a new thread? Or yours for that matter quietriot?

 

[TheQuietRiot]

No...I didn't miss it. And He indeed has persisted on discussing the planes...why not just start another thread? It is a very interesting topic and loaded with controversy all on it's own, which certainly warrants it's own thread. Making assumptions regarding my reasons for not discussing the planes on this thread has been amusing, since I have clearly stated my view that it is off topic. The OP regarding the collapse of the buildings I have discussed to it's conclusion with Btodd, and as I have already stated several times...no, I do not wish to engage in fruitless, off topic, circular arguments. That is my choice. So to continue a discussion on the OP is mute. If you wanted to discuss what the OP presented directly, that is one thing, but all you have done thus far is reiterate Btodd. I refer to that as the goading tag team on CF, since it happens quite frequently with certain responders. And it usually is very successful at inciting responders and derailing topics. Experience on CF has taught me not to engage in those kinds of antics.

And, of course, these are my opinions based on personal experience and on observations of many other threads pertaining to controversial topics.

I am well aware that Btodd knows the controversy surrounding the topic of the planes, so what is his problem with starting a new thread? Or yours for that matter quietriot?

It seems you have issues with your reading comprehension. Btodd actually agreed in post 235# to start a new thread if you would kindly respond to his questions in that thread.

Originally Posted by Zanting
On the contrary...I simply haven't given you a response you're willing to accept. Start another thread with your explantion about the planes.
On the contrary, you refuse to give a response to a very simple, straightforward question that has to do with the collapse of the towers. Are you saying that if I start a new thread and ask you this question again, you will provide a direct answer to the question? Because if so...I will.

Surprisingly, you didn't respond to him.

Also..

I'm not sure why you seem to feel you have to jump in to support Btodd. If you have not read the discussion we have had at length, then you obviously have no idea why I concluded further discussion on the topic initiated by the OP.

Any man who shares a love of George Carlin is worth defending

 

[cow451]

I am well aware that Btodd knows the controversy surrounding the topic of the planes, so what is his problem with starting a new thread? Or yours for that matter quietriot?

I am going to be Mr. Helpful and start a thread (in News and Current Events) on the planes. Please join in.

 

[Zanting]

I am going to be Mr. Helpful and start a thread (in News and Current Events) on the planes. Please join in.

Thanks