Merged Interesting Analysis of Changing Media Attitudes toward 9/11 Alternative Theories

ergo said:
First of all, you're using studies from four and five years ago. :eye-poppi

Secondly, responses to the controlled demolition hypothesis do not determine overall numbers for 9/11 truth.

2006: 1 in 3 Americans suspect government complicity.

2007: 1 in 3 Americans doubt or are "not sure" about the official story.

Further:
Click to expand...
Sure, vote for what you want physics to be, vote on the popular answer, be as wrong as you can be, make it up. I don't care if most the country thinks the WTC was destroyed by CD, it makes them wrong. Rather be right than fall for lies like 911 truth has, even if they have a majority voting for the answer, the wrong answer.

If the 99 percent of the country says 2+2=22, it means they are wrong, and if they all vote to say it is so, it makes them dumber than dirt. Replacing science with a vote, good for you truther guys, on the path for eternal failure, like Bigfoot believers, you got the same evidence, zero. Another math term that seems to baffle 911 truth.
 
Last edited:
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Ergo, I provided the sources you asked for. And they clearly show a drop in support by more than 30 million Americans between August 2006 and August 2007.

Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

You are referring only to responses to the controlled demolition hypothesis.

Why the numbers may have dropped between 2006 and 2007 I can't say for sure. A poll is a snapshot, and results can fluctuate wildly depending on what's going on in the world or in domestic politics or in concerted media campaigns at any given moment. I think it was precisely those years, especially 2007, that we saw an intensified effort, aided by mainstream media, to discredit 9/11 inquiry. For example, it was in those years that the terms "conspiracy theorist" and "tinfoil hat" seemed to be most in vogue, and those are terms obviously used to marginalize alternative views. It was a nastier climate back then, perhaps partly because Bush was still in power, and perhaps partly because the final report on WTC 7 had not yet come out in its full absurdist glory.
 
walkyrie said:
The george bush Official Theory about 9/11 is SINKING,

Australian Herald Sun Poll: 70% Support Kevin Bracken statements about 9/11 INSIDE JOB


http://911truthnews.com/herald-sun-poll-70-support-bracken-on-911/
Click to expand...

It's a shame the website can't even properly attribute the article: it's the *MELBOURNE* Herald-Sun. LOL also at a random survey that doesn't even quote the comments that they're being asked about... Very scientific.

Is this the best you've got?
 
You whip out the rolleyes whenever you get WTFPWN3D (is that better?) as a sloppy ham-fisted face-saving maneuver (have you found that peer-reviewd paper yet?).

I accept your concession of defeat.
 
Come to think of it, I don't think the Zogby poll had any question about controlled demolition, so in addition to your not understanding stats, your comparison is invalid.
 
ergo said:
Come to think of it, I don't think the Zogby poll had any question about controlled demolition,
Click to expand...

You think that because you lack the reading comprehension and knowledge of the subject matter to understand that yes, there was a question in the Zogby poll on precisely that topic.
 
*Sigh*

No, SoT. They did not make any reference to controlled demolition or explosives.

Anyway, I said it all here, in case anyone's confused.
 
ergo said:
They did not make any reference to controlled demolition or explosives.
Click to expand...

Now you're skipping the rolleyes and going straight to lying like a truther.

BTW, this is a link to my post where I copied the question straight from Zogby. Not Your link to your own post where you cut the question out.

You people just can't stand others revealing information that you don't want people to know, do you?

Why do truthers spend so much time trying to hide information, Ergo?
 
Last edited:
It's the same link. Still no reference to "controlled demolition" or "explosives" in any of the questions.

But I had forgotten about this poll, that Scott likes so much to cite.

This was in 2010, and it looks like the credibility of the controlled demolition hypothesis is back up to 15%, with an additional 11% "not sure". A little more than 1 in 3.
 
SoT, your comparison was invalid.

Try a newer poll.

From 2010, and it looks like the credibility of the controlled demolition hypothesis is back up to 15%, with an additional 11% "not sure". A little more than 1 in 3.
 
Clayton Moore said:
More thorough subjugation or self-realization?


It seems that the US has a level of aristocracy whose power over the mainstream media that is unmatched in democracy world.
Click to expand...

but I'm sure they at least know grammar.

(psss... it should be "unmatched in the democratic world." Go back to school. K? Bye)
 
Case Study 6: Germany's Weekly TV Guide, "TV Hören und Sehen," August 31, 2009

"TV Hören und Sehen", with a paid circulation of nearly a million copies, is owned by the Bauer Media Group, which publishes 308 magazines in 14 countries. The TV magazine features interviews and articles by prominent German authors...
Click to expand...


This is a fair characterisation, though I'd like to add two qualifications: 1. Circulation is steadily going down and was probably below 900,000 by august 2009; 2. The "prominent German (and other) authors" are a "feature" that does not fully describe the character of this magazine.

"TV Hören und Sehen" is indeed a mainstream TV guide and magazine, the second largest in Germany. As such, it is geared towards family entertainment, with hardly a discernible political stance. In fact, Bauer published not a single news magazine; they are solely engaged in entertainment. Their German magazines target women (fashion, celebrities), youths (fashion, love...), TV (several magazines besides TVHuS), sports, travel, astrology, home living, cooking - but no news, no business, no finance, no politics, no science (not even pop sci). They do not have any serios news room or investigative journalists.

This is a case of 9/11 "Truth" serving as entertainment, and entertainment only.

Now don't get me starting on what is all so very wrong with the excerps quoted by the above link.
 
It's been over ten years. Twoofers haven't produced ****. They will never produce anything of merit because their personal fantasies do not count as credible. They keep saying "The clock is ticking." Sorry lunatics, but the clock is going to keep ticking, and the world is going to keep moving on without you. You enjoy yourselves in fantasy land.
 
ergo said:
It's the same link. Still no reference to "controlled demolition" or "explosives" in any of the questions.

But I had forgotten about this poll, that Scott likes so much to cite.

This was in 2010, and it looks like the credibility of the controlled demolition hypothesis is back up to 15%, with an additional 11% "not sure". A little more than 1 in 3.
Click to expand...

That's an online poll from this site that could be spammed by truthers.

It proves that even with spamming, truthers still couldn't manage more than 15% pro-inside-jobitty job, and that numbers are still going down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom