• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

9/11 dialogue recommendation

Loss Leader said:
I'm not sure how you have a dialogue with a person who is mentally ill. I find that many CTists demonstrate symptoms of psychiatric illnesses. There are borderline personalities, narcisists and full-blown psychotics. I mean, watching a plane hit a building and then disbelieving that a plane hit a building is just not healthy.

There is no ability to reason with a person whose organ of reason is defective.

Perhaps if there were some way to vet some of these people, a conversation could be possible. There are some who are simply wrong. Otherwise, it will be a futile and mutually frustrating experience.
Click to expand...

*lol* Sorry, but you have to stay at this forum. :D






ETA:


... with chris alfred ... :D
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57426
 
Although the policy of always making sure the other guy looks like the ******* is a good one, of what value is it to discuss anything over at LCF?
 
As I have said to Russell. When he comes here, I believe in engaging in rational discussion with him. He openly admits that alot of what convinces him is not solid evidence, but rather inconsistencies he cannot explain combined with "Gut feelings". That is fine, for him, so be it, he is entitled to feel the way he feels. I however, put little weight in opinion that is founded in hearsay, speculation, and "gut feelings" that result from unexplainable inconsistencies. As a result, while our discussions are civil, they rarely result in anyone's mind changing.

From what I have seen now that LC is open to public viewing again (I applaud those who made that decision), it is still ripe with invective, though less so than before. If I wanted to be slandered, name called, and verbally beaten up on, I would join. I must say, that is not what I wish, and hence I shall not.

As for the "Gravy is our leader" comment made by the troll PD over at LC...I would say this.

Gravy, and a few others here, have been at this a long time, and have dedicated a huge amount of their time and energy to researching the various aspects of 9/11. If that makes him a leader, so be it, I offer him the title. Do I take advantage of his knoweldge to learn, and to assist in discussions on 9/11, of course...why not. If he has done the research, why double do it. From what I have seen, he is honest, and has his heart in the right place.

Could I "survive" without him...ya, I think so, but I would have to bury myself in this stuff much more intensely. I can hold my own in most areas of discussion.

PD is juvenile, and for a grown adult with a masters degree in math, he seems to be socially retarded. This, unfortunately, is a flaw I find more and more in some of the more outspoken CTers. Luckily, there are those like Russ who provide a more mature approach to their side of things.

Russ. Get rid of the trolls like PD, and I may join. I know you are unlikely to do so, so I will likely talk to you only over here.

TAM
 
???

Oliver, having been presented with all evidence, what do you think?
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Although the policy of always making sure the other guy looks like the ******* is a good one, of what value is it to discuss anything over at LCF?
Click to expand...

Uhm? Why are you talking to them if they come here?
It´s a bigger challenge over there ... :)
 
T.A.M. said:
From what I have seen now that LC is open to public viewing again (I applaud those who made that decision), it is still ripe with invective, though less so than before. If I wanted to be slandered, name called, and verbally beaten up on, I would join. I must say, that is not what I wish, and hence I shall not.
Click to expand...

Nobody attacked me so far beside ROX and PD - but Russel
also says stop if it´s getting to much and PD stopped to
hunt the witch after this thread:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=566
 
Oliver said:
Uhm? Why are you talking to them if they come here?
It´s a bigger challenge over there ... :)
Click to expand...


You mean a bigger headache...!

Do you go down to the local loony bins just to hang with the crazies?

If its not One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest its probably a bad idea...
 
Overman said:
You mean a bigger headache...!

Do you go down to the local loony bins just to hang with the crazies?

If its not One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest its probably a bad idea...
Click to expand...

Well, the "one flew over" scenario isn´t really fair
if you get bombed with thousands of questions and
answers. That´s the same problem i have right now.

So i would appreciate some support - and it´s funny
if people over there also think that PD´s a nut... :D

(but psssst ... he´s reading in here ...)
 
Oliver said:
(but psssst ... he´s reading in here ...)
Click to expand...

Of course he is...I never doubted it for a moment.

He wants to play in our sandbox..... but he always ends up taking a dump in one corner and getting sent home.

(sorry if anyone was eating when I typed that )
 
Oliver said:
Well, the "one flew over" scenario isn´t really fair
if you get bombed with thousands of questions and
answers. That´s the same problem i have right now.

So i would appreciate some support - and it´s funny
if people over there also think that PD´s a nut... :D

(but psssst ... he´s reading in here ...)
Click to expand...


The best place to start is probably by teaching them basic logic.

Premise
Premise
Conclusion

type stuff.

Then slowly work your way into logic and fallacies. Make them do examples. Provide test questions.

After that you can start into the basics scientific method and general reasoning. After that you then get more specific with nuances in science, and why its methodical approach works best.

After they understand all of these things you may be able to work yourself into a decent debate.

Good luck.
 
Another quote from one of your threads:

I believe the Northwoods document was released due to a Freedom of Information Act request. Does anyone know for sure? They may not have wanted to release it, but they had to.
Click to expand...

So, they believe that the Big Bad NWO Conspiracy Guys have no problem rigging buildings to explode, killing thousands, but they balk at ignoring a FOIA request? I can't fathom a mindset that can contain both thoughts simultaneously.
 
*BUMP* For those who missed it...

BTW: Lowrider PD is mocking Abby again...
 
Every time I read something about Northwoods, I get so angry I want to spit my soda.

For the LAST time, CTists:

NORTHWOODS WAS NEVER IMPLEMENTED AND THE GUY WHO PRESENTED IT TO KENNEDY WAS REMOVED FROM HIS POST!

They say Northwoods proves that the government is capable of planning to kill its citizens. There's also a contingency plan to invade Canada, but I don't see THAT happening.

The government, or any large organization, are capable of a LOT of things. That doesn't mean that they DO them.

[/rant]

I feel better now. Sorry about the soda on your monitors.
 
The only thing I learned from this film is that yes, indeed, the no-planers are finally taking their toll on our otherwise sane movement...
Click to expand...

OH? They do have comedians at LC!
 
Horatius said:
So, they believe that the Big Bad NWO Conspiracy Guys have no problem rigging buildings to explode, killing thousands, but they balk at ignoring a FOIA request? I can't fathom a mindset that can contain both thoughts simultaneously.
Click to expand...

I've seen many, many similar posts:

1. Does the federal government lie or tell the truth? FEMA LIED when it said downtown Manhattan air was safe but the FBI told the TRUTH when it said it couldn't connect OBL to 9/11.

2. Bush & Co. are willing to murder 3,000 innocent people but they are too scared to testify under oath to the 9/11 commission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom