• 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.

Mark Roberts Interview on Skeptic Zone

RedIbis said:
You will cease responding to me when the questions become too difficult.
Click to expand...

Takes one to know one :)
You sir are a joke. How about you grow a pair and start answering the questions here, or at least try to understand what's being said to you.
 
"Take our indifference," the Daily Mississippian's editorial board wrote in an open letter to the Klan on Sept. 16, "as the ultimate symbol of your failure."
[/quote}

Beautifully put.
I would only add "and our laughter" after "indifference".
Click to expand...
 
"I've stated on several occasions what it would require to falsify my beliefs that 9/11 was not an inside job. A steel-frame high-rise would have to be destroyed with impact damage and fire the same way WTC1,2 and 7 were destroyed. This would include destroying a building from the top-down to match the destruction of WTC 1 and 2(crush-down/crush-up). And destroying a steel-frame high-rise from the bottom-up to match the destruction of WTC7(implosion)."

Stundie!!

:dl:
 
tanabear said:
Why isn't Mark Roberts interested in pointing this out?
Click to expand...

Because he's part of teh jooh conspiracy! He was one of the hundreds of joohs that weren't in the tower that day, because they had been tipped off!

tanabear said:
Because he isn't interested in the truth.
Click to expand...

He can't handle the truth! (I should know, I've meet him in person)

tanabear said:
He is interested in promoting ideological conformity to the government's position.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He gets $10,000 a week and an endless supply of Tony's frozen pizza to be a part of the cover up.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
Yeah Yeah Yeah Right. We all hate the jews here on the truther side. Please.

Got anything else? Why not?
Click to expand...
It's been repeatedly pointed out that this is an ignorant and dishonest strawman statement.

So don't behave this way. At least imagine how a rational adult would behave and emulate that. Fair enough?

"Got anything else?" You mean all the evidence on our side, whereas you have none? Is that what you mean?

If you think I'm wrong, why not name some of the significant claims that the "truth" movement gets right. You've had plenty of time to think about this.

And while you're at it, please briefly state your position about what happened on 9/11 and what evidence would change your mind.
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
It's been repeatedly pointed out that this is an ignorant and dishonest strawman statement.

So don't behave this way. At least imagine how a rational adult would behave and emulate that. Fair enough?

"Got anything else?" You mean all the evidence on our side, whereas you have none? Is that what you mean?

If you think I'm wrong, why not name some of the significant claims that the "truth" movement gets right. You've had plenty of time to think about this.

So do it.
Click to expand...

Are you telling me that my doubts about 9/11 are automatically based in anti-Semitism? Is this what you have digressed to?

You are so over.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
Are you telling me that my doubts about 9/11 are automatically based in anti-Semitism?
Click to expand...
Second time: It's been repeatedly pointed out that this is an ignorant and dishonest strawman statement.

If you disagree, then point out where I in any way said or implied this, truther. Are you up to that challenge?
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Please point out where I in any way said or implied this, truther. Are you up to that challenge?
Click to expand...

I thought the evidence was on your side? Did I misinterpret you? What is your point here about anti-Semitism and the truth movement? In a sound bite please.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Good grief! Did you even read his response before you posted that?
Click to expand...
I can't tell you how much it saddens me to see every single truther demonstrate their irrationality in this thread about my talk about truther irrationality.

I would think that someone with a shred of self-awareness would try hard not to behave that way, to prove me wrong. Instead, they seem to be going out of their way to prove me right.
 
Gravy said:
I can't tell you how much it saddens me to see every single truther demonstrate their irrationality in this thread about my talk about truther irrationality.

I would think that someone with a shred of self-awareness would try hard not to behave that way, to prove me wrong. Instead, they seem to be going out of their way to prove me right.
Click to expand...

No kidding. It's like he responded based on what he wished you said instead of on what you actually said.

But that's the movement in a nutshell.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
I thought the evidence was on your side? Did I misinterpret you?[
Click to expand...
You did. That statement was in response to your question "Got anything else?" as you can see from how my response was formatted.

What is your point here about anti-Semitism and the truth movement? In a sound bite please.
Click to expand...
Since I've stated it clearly here, I won't repeat myself again. I suggest you read before jerking your knee again.
 
Gravy said:
It's been repeatedly pointed out that this is an ignorant and dishonest strawman statement.

So don't behave this way. At least imagine how a rational adult would behave and emulate that. Fair enough?

"Got anything else?" You mean all the evidence on our side, whereas you have none? Is that what you mean?

If you think I'm wrong, why not name some of the significant claims that the "truth" movement gets right. You've had plenty of time to think about this.

And while you're at it, please briefly state your position about what happened on 9/11 and what evidence would change your mind.
Click to expand...

Oh please. WHAT EVIDENCE? You attack people who don't trust this present administration based on much more then 9/11. And then you point to their government collected evidence and sponsored reports as if that would convince anyone of anything.

And from what I can see here you go off on some nonsense that implies much of it is based in anti-Semitism.

You got the evidence on your side? Then don’t invoke Godwin’s law. Don’t even imply it.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
Oh please. WHAT EVIDENCE?
Click to expand...
Homeland, Insurgency, I already linked to my website in this thread, where you'll find links to thousands of pieces of evidence. When I asked you to read before jerking your knee I was serious. Why did you immediately do so again?

Have you read the 9/11 Commission report? Have you read the NIST reports? If not, please do. If so, please list some significant things they got wrong.

You attack people who don't trust this present administration based on much more then 9/11.
Click to expand...
Please support this accusation with facts or retract your statement. That's what rational people do. You want to be rational, don't you?

And then you point to their government collected evidence and sponsored reports as if that would convince anyone of anything.
Click to expand...
Had you read this thread as I asked you to, you would have seen my links to mountains of evidence not collected by the government. Repeating ignorant and false accusations will never make them true.

And from what I can see here you go off on some nonsense that implies much of it is based in anti-Semitism.
Click to expand...
Get back to me when you've read the thread and learned what a strawman argument is.

You got the evidence on your side? Then don’t invoke Godwin’s law. Don’t even imply it.
Click to expand...
No one here has done that. I provided evidence that several early, prominent truth movement leaders were and are anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers. Had you read the thread you'd know that.

How can you not be embarrassed by your behavior, in a thread that is specifically about the behavior you're displaying?


Second and final time, Homeland Insurgency:

If you think I'm wrong, why not name some of the significant claims that the "truth" movement gets right. You've had plenty of time to think about this.

And while you're at it, please briefly state your position about what happened on 9/11 and what evidence would change your mind.
 
Last edited:
It's like Homeland is really hoping Gravy is going to "slip up" or something to verify his strawman.

Ain't happening.
 
When will Mark Roberts be providing evidence for some of his more ridiculous claims, like the claim that there weren't many cameras at the pentagon in 2001?

Why does Mark Roberts seem to think that the destruction of steel at ground zero is fine? Bill Manning didn't think it was fine. Yes, I know Bill Manning was talking about it from a fire safety standpoint, not explosives.
 
How many times have we told people here that Bill Manning's comments were pre-NCSTA, and that he was fully satisfied by the creation and eventual result from the NIST Team?

A hundred?

A thousand..?
 
R.Mackey said:
How many times have we told people here that Bill Manning's comments were pre-NCSTA, and that he was fully satisfied by the creation and eventual result from the NIST Team?

A hundred?

A thousand..?
Click to expand...


Do you have a qoute from him showing his full satisfaction?

If he was angry that the steel was destroyed, what exactly made him unangry? Was the steel undestroyed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom