Truthers...what is your best piece of evidence ?

[DC]

Well- if I was wrong, I would expect that you would have a better rebuttal than this... and you have never been able to come up with anything better than this, really.

See if you can think about an answer. Even if you don't post it- just think about my question.

you cant be wrong, that is not possible, not happening !

 

[Drudgewire]

but you people cant handle it if truthers dont act all the same.

I'm not addressing all twoofers. I'm addressing the one who said "I don't have any evidence thousands of people were killed in a massive cover-up, but you guys are jerks for harping on it."

 

[DC]

I'm not addressing all twoofers. I'm addressing the one who said "I don't have any evidence thousands of people were killed in a massive cover-up, but you guys are jerks for harping on it."

who are you quoting? cant find that post.

 

[Totovader]

you cant be wrong, that is not possible, not happening !

I'm not about to go off on this tangent with you- but your post is so incredibly ironic that I really do need to emphasize that you need to stop and think about what you have just posted over the last few minutes. You pretend to be interested in debate. You're not.

 

[Drudgewire]

I'm not about to go off on this tangent with you- but your post is so incredibly ironic that I really do need to emphasize that you need to stop and think about what you have just posted over the last few minutes. You pretend to be interested in debate. You're not.

Yup, reason I'm having to click "read posts by ignored member" to respond to these. It usually takes my second cup of coffee to be sharp enough not to make this mistake.

BRB, I need to go to the coffee machine.

 

[DC]

I'm not about to go off on this tangent with you- but your post is so incredibly ironic that I really do need to emphasize that you need to stop and think about what you have just posted over the last few minutes. You pretend to be interested in debate. You're not.

with you? no sure not, never claimed that, i cant stand you and your arrogance i expressed that several times.

 

[Totovader]

with you? no sure not, never claimed that, i cant stand you and your arrogance i expressed that several times.

I see- so if you don't feel like responding- or even absorbing- the information handed to you by others... you just call them "arrogant" and that allows you to just block out that information?

Interesting. I wish I had the arrogance to do that...

I want to see if you can get back on topic: you said that you don't have any evidence- can you respond to my post above where I addressed that? Or does my "arrogance" somehow mean that you don't have to respond?

 

[DC]

I see- so if you don't feel like responding- or even absorbing- the information handed to you by others... you just call them "arrogant" and that allows you to just block out that information?

Interesting. I wish I had the arrogance to do that...

I want to see if you can get back on topic: you said that you don't have any evidence- can you respond to my post above where I addressed that? Or does my "arrogance" somehow mean that you don't have to respond?

i did not call the others arrogant, i called you arrogant, that is my oppinion about you.
just like your oppinion about me is that i am an idiot

we just should stop posting to eachother. i cant stand you, sorry. there are others that do never agree with me, but i can get along with them.

but you? no sorry, i totaly dislike you, i dont mean that offending, its just my oppinion about you.
we really should stop posting to eachother, less hard words and mod actions needed then

 

[Totovader]

i did not call the others arrogant, i called you arrogant, that is my oppinion about you.
just like your oppinion about me is that i am an idiot

we just should stop posting to eachother. i cant stand you, sorry. there are others that do never agree with me, but i can get along with them.

but you? no sorry, i totaly dislike you, i dont mean that offending, its just my oppinion about you.
we really should stop posting to eachother, less hard words and mod actions needed then

Then put me on ignore- if the questions are too tough or you don't like being wrong, then I suggest you do everything in your power to avoid reading what I have to say. I will not- however- succumb to your threats- it will not stop me from posting them.

I would think that an adult would be able to keep their "oppinions" and other off-topic nonsense to himself.

So, again- you completely ignored my last post and instead went on one of your usual "I hate you" tangents to avoid the facts which I present... and which you are forced to dismiss as "arrogance". Go ahead and take me down a notch: answer the following post...

Where did you try?

There is no debate if you don't have any evidence, DC. No one is interested in discussing things that are complete fantasies and are not grounded in reality. You can talk about flying cows and invisible dogs all day long, but unless it ties back to reality its nothing more than fiction, and it's utterly pointless.

Can you possibly try and understand this? By admitting that you believe in something that has absolutely no evidence you are committing the ultimate conspiracist suicide: you are openly admitting that facts and evidence do not matter to you- and they therefore cannot change your mind... you are admitting that logic and reason are of no use to you- because you can tell the "truth" using nothing more than your own personal whims.

The fact that your fantasies have no evidence and can't stand on their own does not bother you. It should. It really should.

 

[DC]

Ill do my best to not press "View Post" anymore

 

[Totovader]

Ill do my best to not press "View Post" anymore

That's your prerogative- and I can see why someone in your position would need to do that.

Just to be clear, the post you are ignoring- the information that is so deadly to your fantasy that you have to lash out at me instead of actually think for one minute is the following:

Where did you try?

There is no debate if you don't have any evidence, DC. No one is interested in discussing things that are complete fantasies and are not grounded in reality. You can talk about flying cows and invisible dogs all day long, but unless it ties back to reality its nothing more than fiction, and it's utterly pointless.

Can you possibly try and understand this? By admitting that you believe in something that has absolutely no evidence you are committing the ultimate conspiracist suicide: you are openly admitting that facts and evidence do not matter to you- and they therefore cannot change your mind... you are admitting that logic and reason are of no use to you- because you can tell the "truth" using nothing more than your own personal whims.

The fact that your fantasies have no evidence and can't stand on their own does not bother you. It should. It really should.

Instead of attacking me or coming up with excuses- maybe you can actually address this kind of stuff for once.

Or maybe someone else can. Red- you aren't stupid enough to admit that you have absolutely no evidence, are you? Why not? Are you capable of realizing that having no evidence takes away any ounce of credibility- and tosses out the rules of knowledge altogether?

If both "sides"- or rather, if scientists- said "I don't need any evidence to believe this"... what kind of world would this be? Well- there would be no debate, because there would be nothing to debate. So when people like DC pretend to be interested in debate, but are unable or unwilling to debate- that's why: it brings us right back to square one.

If you have no criteria whatsoever for belief- then there is nothing with which to correct, challenge, or modify your belief structure. In other words, there's no way you can be right, and there's no way you can be wrong. It's no different than one priest yelling at another one that he's a lunatic because he talks to God.

Science, logic, and reason dissolve that fantasy by replacing faith with knowledge. No more floating abstractions, no more games of "who can out yell" or "who can insult the most", and what it really comes down to: who can believe the hardest. Science doesn't care about that. Any rational person shouldn't, either.

 

[RedIbis]

The fact that your fantasies have no evidence and can't stand on their own does not bother you. It should. It really should.

So you're saying that for a theory to be true, it must have evidence behind it. Do you think it's necessary for there to be physical evidence? In other words, if my theory is premised on Column 79, do you think this column should exist, be available for examination, and any theory premised on this column without producing it is invalid?

 

[funk de fino]

Where did you try?

There is no debate if you don't have any evidence, DC. No one is interested in discussing things that are complete fantasies and are not grounded in reality. You can talk about flying cows and invisible dogs all day long, but unless it ties back to reality its nothing more than fiction, and it's utterly pointless.

Can you possibly try and understand this? By admitting that you believe in something that has absolutely no evidence you are committing the ultimate conspiracist suicide: you are openly admitting that facts and evidence do not matter to you- and they therefore cannot change your mind... you are admitting that logic and reason are of no use to you- because you can tell the "truth" using nothing more than your own personal whims.

The fact that your fantasies have no evidence and can't stand on their own does not bother you. It should. It really should.

I quoted it for you DC because it is a very good post. You really should read it, think about it and see where it leaves your opinion of how you have been acting. If you refuse to reply to this honestly that leaves the rest of us with one option of how we think you are acting.

I trusted you enough to supply docs that I probably should not have so I am not doing this just to have a go at you. I just feel you should read and digest the post regardles of who wrote it.

 

[Totovader]

So you're saying that for a theory to be true, it must have evidence behind it. Do you think it's necessary for there to be physical evidence? In other words, if my theory is premised on Column 79, do you think this column should exist, be available for examination, and any theory premised on this column without producing it is invalid?

What I'm saying is that you are ignoring my previous post, where I address this:

Fair enough: that's not addressing my point- you're just reiterating your fallacy, and that doesn't help your case.

Is it a good idea to abandon logic in order to hold on to these fantasies of the so-called "Truth Movement", Red? Is it somehow better to ignore the evidence and reject fundamental scientific principles? Do conspiracy theories have something better (more reliable, more truthful, more factual) than reason?

You were asked for your best piece of evidence- what you responded with is something that is not evidence. I have to assume- from that- that you think the answer to each of the questions above would be "yes, science is inadequate to understand the universe- conspiracy theories are more equipped to understand the truth".

The reason you are doing that is because you're trying to insert a red herring instead of sticking to the issue.

 

[RedIbis]

What I'm saying is that you are ignoring my previous post, where I address this:



The reason you are doing that is because you're trying to insert a red herring instead of sticking to the issue.

You've ignored every single one of my questions. All of which are simple, direct and based on what you have previously posted. You have a propensity for verbosity, and I'm trying to condense this discussion to a very simple point.

I asked:

So you're saying that for a theory to be true, it must have evidence behind it. Do you think it's necessary for there to be physical evidence? In other words, if my theory is premised on Column 79, do you think this column should exist, be available for examination, and any theory premised on this column without producing it is invalid?

 

[DC]

that I probably should not have

why? i thought you trusted me enough? did i forward them to anyone? did you seem them pop up on the internet?
or is it just because i am a so called truther that you assume i wil not respect your privacy and will forward those docs to someone else?

you are disapointing me now

 

[funk de fino]

why? i thought you trusted me enough? did i forward them to anyone? did you seem them pop up on the internet?
or is it just because i am a so called truther that you assume i wil not respect your privacy and will forward those docs to someone else?

you are disapointing me now

your poor grasp of english has let you down again DC

i am saying that it goes against the grain to supply any truthers with info like that because of the past actions of a lot of them. see my sig for example and the CIT and pft morons actions.

it was against this better judgement that i decided to trust you because you did not seem to be like them. i put faith in you and you repaid it. To be honest i really should not have supplied those docs to anyone

i have yet to see any back up when turbofan/pft socks question my credentials though. i thought you may have stood up for me.

by trying to get you to read and think about what toto has posted is because i think it is something you should think really hard about regardless of whether you like him or not

 

[Totovader]

You've ignored every single one of my questions. All of which are simple, direct and based on what you have previously posted. You have a propensity for verbosity, and I'm trying to condense this discussion to a very simple point.

I asked:

You asked in an attempt to ignore my post and insert your own red herring. My question came first- if you are going to pretend to be annoyed by someone ignoring your questions- then you should taste the irony and address my points first.

Your "very simple point" is a red herring.

 

[RedIbis]

You asked in an attempt to ignore my post and insert your own red herring. My question came first- if you are going to pretend to be annoyed by someone ignoring your questions- then you should taste the irony and address my points first.

Your "very simple point" is a red herring.

Wrong. Your first attack against me in this thread was when you claimed that I didn't answer your questions, which as I pointed out to you would be a bit difficult since you didn't actually ask any questions.

It was then you proceeded to ignore the simplest possible question.

 

[DC]

your poor grasp of english has let you down again DC

i am saying that it goes against the grain to supply any truthers with info like that because of the past actions of a lot of them. see my sig for example and the CIT and pft morons actions.

it was against this better judgement that i decided to trust you because you did not seem to be like them. i put faith in you and you repaid it. To be honest i really should not have supplied those docs to anyone

i have yet to see any back up when turbofan/pft socks question my credentials though. i thought you may have stood up for me.

by trying to get you to read and think about what toto has posted is because i think it is something you should think really hard about regardless of whether you like him or not

i cant stand up for you (i hope you know what i mean)
i do belive those documents are real, and i belive you worked on the technical part of the airplanes, and it also involved FDR's. but it is not realy enough for me to assure others that it is true.

i dont say it is faked docs, or they arent yours. there is just no way i can be sure. so i will not say, yes that guy is an expert.