• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Laser Beams and Holograms - does anyone actually believe this obvious bull ...?

scooby said:
Look - when are you lot going to make your minds up about the age of the planet - because these bush-truthers, your crowd - think its about 8000 years old ....

Welcome to the Rapture Ready Message Board.
www.rr-bb.com

This is what you have, on your team.

It's hilarious - when are you Bush followers, acolytes of the official story, going to clean your act up?
Click to expand...

Okay, first you claim that we've lumped the troothers into a group, then you show quotes that don't support your view and several of them contradict your view. Then you lump us up in a group like the one you were yelling that we were putting you in.

You're welcome.
 
Last edited:
Scooby is definately starting to lose it.

Being rude and insulting, condescending to and belittling everyone, making sweeping generalizations.

When someone gets away from facts and into personal BS you know they are losing the fight.
 
scooby said:
Look - when are you lot going to make your minds up about the age of the planet - because these bush-truthers, your crowd - think its about 8000 years old ....

Welcome to the Rapture Ready Message Board.
www.rr-bb.com

This is what you have, on your team.

It's hilarious - when are you Bush followers, acolytes of the official story, going to clean your act up?
Click to expand...

Strawman. The JREF and the RRMM are not affiliated in any way. Just because the majority view there regarding 9/11 is that the 'official story' is correct, is does not mean that they arrived at that conclusion through any critical reasoning process, nor does it mean they are correct in any other assertions. They are certainly not, "on [our] team."

Respond to the actual issue I made in my post:

You didn't even get through an entire sentence without introducing a fallicious strawman argument.

One of the most common criticisms of the 'Truth Movement' is that they are unable to agree on any single theory, and that it is common for the different theories to be mutually exclusive.

Ready to withdraw that statement?


So - are you ready to withdraw your statement yet?
 
Gravy said:
I'm not with Popular Mechanics, but my great-grandfather was William Randolph Hearst, so I guess that's a connection if paranoiacs want to make something of it.
Click to expand...

Seriously? That's pretty cool if you're being serious...hope you aren't yanking the ol' chain there!
 
Mobyseven said:
Seriously? That's pretty cool if you're being serious...hope you aren't yanking the ol' chain there!
Click to expand...
I don't have a yacht, but if you're near San Simeon and don't have the price of admission, give me a ring. :)
 
scooby said:
Another common criticism of the believers in the official story - the WTC7 Deniers - something almost the same as Holocaust Denial in my book - a common criticism is their drug abuse, some of your most prominent members are nothing more than junkies, here's one ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

When are you going to quit the drugs, work out the age of the planet, and dump the intelligent design ********?
Click to expand...

This is your conspiracy theory on desperation mode.

Any questions?
 
scooby said:
You're not one of the d******ds from Popular Mechanics are you?

Do not use personal insults.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
Click to expand...

Can I have a retraction please - apparently he's not one of the dickheads from Popular Mechanics.
 
Z said:
Scooby, why are you spinning your tires like this? You're throwing out empty strawman after empty strawman, and only making yourself seem even more silly and foolish than ever before. You debunk your OWN OP!!! Then you toss out more obviously false strawmen like claiming that we lump all Twoofers as a unified group - Well, I suppose if you count lumping them all together as idiots...

Now you're trying to claim that JREF is associated with RaptureReady???

Ladies and gentlemen, THIS is a prime example of why the education system needs a complete overhaul. Not only can this fellow not read plain English, he absolutely lacks anything vaguely resembling critical thinking skills.

Skeptics, Scooby. Skeptics. Means they accept nothing without reasonable proof. The Rapture is right up there with 9/11 controlled demolitions and space beam weapons. Yes, RR folk support Bush - He believes in that crap. WE DO NOT SUPPORT BUSH. That the official story of the events on 9/11 agrees with him is no more indicative of support than if Bush looked at the clear daytime sky and noticed it was blue, just like we did.

What do you expect of people, Scoob? That we should look at Bush's other beliefs and decide that, because we disagree with his religious or ethical or moral standings, that we should also disagree with his understanding of gravity or how to bake a cake or whether the towers collapsed due to fire damage? Bush also believes in a somewhat spherical Earth... OMG! We must become Flat Earthers!!!

I can only assume that you're so ashamed and embarrassed at having been debunked time and again that you've decided instead to shoot for a personal banning. Sad that you're trying it on the JREF boards, a place that is fairly notorious for NOT banning at the drop of a hat!

Really, Scoob - why don't you turn that youthful fury and anger and energy into something constructive and useful, and go to work actively protesting our involvement in the Middle East? 9/11 wasn't an inside job, but it's certainly being used wrongly as an excuse for continued presence in a place we do not beling. Go fight that! Quit wasting valuable time and energy shooting empty shells at imaginary strawmen!

Either that, or get a girlfriend. Believe me, you'll lose a LOT of that extra energy once you discover girls. Or, should I say, you'll be USING a lot of it.
Click to expand...

Look, its not my problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the official story, also believe that the earth is about 8000 years old and that 911 was a sign from God that the Messiah is returning to earth.

Do you believe in these theories?

That Osama Bin Laden and 19 men in sandals - defeated the US military and brought down 3 buildings with 2 planes (a miracle of sorts I'll concede) and that it was a sign from God that the end of the world is nigh?
 
scooby said:
Look, its not my problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the official story, also believe that the earth is about 8000 years old and that 911 was a sign from God that the Messiah is returning to earth.
Click to expand...

Neither is it our problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the conspiracy theory, also believe in laser beams from space and holographic planes.

Dave
 
scooby said:
It is claimed on here that the 911 Truth movement is a homogenous collection of arguments
Click to expand...

No, it is not. Quite the contrary, it has, repeatedly, been pointed out that the truth movement cannot even agree internally. We are even making jokes about it.

represented by the theory that a space-beam weapon was used to disintegrate the WTC and Holograms were used instead of planes and real planes were used and explosives were used to bring down the WTC.

*snip*
So in summary, there's a lot of bull**** bandied around on here - back to the question in the thread title - who, if anyone, thinks that there is any merit to the theory that a top secret space-beam weapon destroyed the world trade center, and that holograms were used instead of real planes?
Click to expand...

I suggest you ask TruthSeeker 1234 that question. And this lady, what's her name, who raised a complaint against the NIST.


And if anyone does, do they have any suggestions as to how we might verify the existence of this unknown technology?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen them do that, no.

Because you see, in stark contrast to the work of Prof Steve Jones and David Ray Griffin - the space-beam weapon theory presents a problem. No such device is known to exist, and until its existence can be proven, no further progress can be made along this line of inquiry.
Click to expand...

I quite agree, and I congratulate you for not buying into such nonsense. And I understand you feel its a problem for the truth movement, but this isn't the place to bring that up.

This is an open debate forum, and if somebody wants to defend outrageous claims like 911 space weapons, he is free to do so, and we are free to take up the debate with him.

Likewise, YOU are free to take up whatever claims YOU make about 911, and people will most likely be willing to debate you.

However, you cannot tell us which representatives of the 911 CT movement we can or cannot debate with.

If somebody tells you that space weapons are silly, all you have to answer is: Yes, I agree. End of discussion.

Hans
 
Pardalis said:
Hey bubba, this is a skepticism forum.
Click to expand...

It's supposed to be.

I'm just wondering what all these dinosaur hunters are doing here.
Are you a skeptic?

An empirical skeptic... ?

A scientific (or empirical) skeptic is one who questions the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to a systematic investigation. The scientific method details the specific process by which this investigation of reality is conducted. Considering the rigor of the scientific method, science itself may simply be thought of as an organized form of skepticism. This does not mean that the scientific skeptic is necessarily a scientist who conducts live experiments (though this may be the case), but that the skeptic generally accepts claims that are in his/her view likely to be true based on testable hypotheses and critical thinking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptic

Critical thinking, hypothesis, scientific method - its got it all.

Please explain, using these principles, the problems you found with the official story?

There are many and they raise questions which to this day no answers have been provided for by the US Govt. They are completely unresolved, and until they are resolved - nobody knows what really happened on 911. It's not as hard as you might think - and should be trivia for an empirical skeptic. Some of the glaring howlers are very easy to spot.

So - give us your list of problems with the official story - skeptic.
 
DarkMagician said:
Okay, first you claim that we've lumped the troothers into a group, then you show quotes that don't support your view and several of them contradict your view. Then you lump us up in a group like the one you were yelling that we were putting you in.

You're welcome.
Click to expand...

No, first you lump all the 'truthers' into one group, then I lump all the 'believers' into one group.

Now it seems that your group, the believers, the WTC7 Denying armageddonists - has got bigger problems than my group.

Ditto ipso ergo getto out of that-one-o. :D
 
scooby said:
OK, so maybe its the wrong term.

The 911 Truth movement is protrayed here as a single group of people with a single set of ideas, advanced in unison. This is not the case.
Click to expand...

Wrong. "Truthers" are indeed seen as a group, united in the belief that 911 did not happen as the official story says. Other than that, we are perfectly aware that there are very different views within that group.

Nobody with any brains supports Judy Wood and the space beam theory, but regardless, they will be challenged here on the implication that they do.
Click to expand...

Well, excuse me, but we can't go around keeping a careful account of that each of you currently believes. You have to explain that yourselves. If somebody calls you a no-planer and you aren't, all you need to do is expalin your postion, end of story.

Hans
 
scooby said:
Please explain, using these principles, the problems you found with the official story?
Click to expand...


I have no major problems with the official account of the 9/11 events, the 9/11 Commission, and the FEMA and NIST reports are sound and credible, and hold up to scrutiny.

You are the one who is claiming that it's not true.
 
scooby said:
No, first you lump all the 'truthers' into one group, then I lump all the 'believers' into one group.

Now it seems that your group, the believers, the WTC7 Denying armageddonists - has got bigger problems than my group.

Ditto ipso ergo getto out of that-one-o. :D
Click to expand...
First you create a straw man, then you demonstrate the absurdity of it. I suppose if we all just kept silent, you could argue all by yourself.

Hans
 
Mobyseven said:
Strawman. The JREF and the RRMM are not affiliated in any way.
Click to expand...

They are affiliated in exactly the same manner as the no-planers and space-beamers are affiliated with Prof Steve Jones and David Ray Griffin and supporters.

Might I also point out, that the views held here by people such as yourself, represent a minority view within the ranks of the believers, who number in the millions ...

"We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. That their beliefs are bonkers does not mean they are marginal. American pollsters believe that 15-18% of US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure included 33% of Republicans."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1195568,00.html

No you do not speak for them - they, speak for you.

Now I did hope that I might be able to rationalise with some of your members here, as at least they are not the extremists of the movement, or so they claim - but sadly that does not appear to be the case - all I see here is blind belief.

I mean for example - there are people here who are entirely content with the NIST report into the collapse of WTC7 - even though it hasn't even been written yet!

:dl:

I mean what planet are you people on?
And how old is it again?
 
Last edited:
scooby said:
Look, its not my problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the official story, also believe that the earth is about 8000 years old and that 911 was a sign from God that the Messiah is returning to earth.
Click to expand...

We get what you are trying to do Scooby. Despite your inept and clumsy methods of doing it. You are trying to make us think that pointing the scientific failures of some folks, not even loud ones despite your claims, who don't fall for the CT stories.

Unfortunately, the similie fails miserably, like most everything you try to do here. Since you are not very good at thinking these things through I will explain why. I'll try to use small words to help you:

If you were to take a crticial thinker from JREF and a Creationist nutter from Rapture Ready and ask them if water is wet, they would both agree. Does that mean that they both must be on the same side in Creationist issues? Of course not!

Now understand this:What you erronously refer to as 'The Official Story' which is actually your poor term for what most folks call 'reality' is the equivelant of water being wet. i.e. it is simple reality, and only a few nutters think otherwise.

Now if you ask the JREFer and the Creationist why the water is wet, you will get different answers. The Creationist will probably say that Gawd made it that way while the JREFer will mention the molecular nature of liquids, etc. Neither of these opinions change the fact that the water is wet.

Now, in your clumsy, oafish, and incompetent manner (which for some reason you seem to think is being very clever), you have tried to force these Creationist folks onto the critical thinkers that doubt your fairy tales of magic explosives. You do this because for some reason you are upset that the self- declared leaders of your movement have demonstrated that they are badcrap crazy, and that far too many folks buy into it.

But again, your ineptness and clumsiness shines through. I doubt many of us have heard of Rapture-Ready, let alone give a damn about their opinions on the matter. By comparison, Judy Woods is the darling and representative of one of the most 'famous' 911 troother movements around.

Don't like it? Don't blame us. We were told to pay attention to these Scholars for 911 Truth, and we did. They turned out to be bucketheads, and your most prominent members.

So that is why your little game of trying to associate us with Creationist nutters failed. Most folks around here grasped this intuitively, but you obviously need a bit more work to figure things out. Sorry I did not include any colorful pictures for your benefit.

Since you have failed once again to make a clumsy and oafish point I will end with a phrase that still applies to just about everything you try with the trooth movement:

You're not very good at this, are you?
 
Dave Rogers said:
Neither is it our problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the conspiracy theory, also believe in laser beams from space and holographic planes.

Dave
Click to expand...

It isn't just that there is inconsistency between different believers. There is also inconsistency in their beliefs that they barely bother to try to resolve. For example, Griffin asking why the buildings fell straight down and not sideways, and at the same time demanding to know how debris could be thrown out when gravity moves downwards. Or Scooby deciding that the building could only be destroyed by planes and fire and bombs and thermite.
 
scooby said:
Look, its not my problem that some of your staunchest flag waving members, fellow believers in the official story, also believe that the earth is about 8000 years old and that 911 was a sign from God that the Messiah is returning to earth.

Do you believe in these theories?

That Osama Bin Laden and 19 men in sandals - defeated the US military and brought down 3 buildings with 2 planes (a miracle of sorts I'll concede) and that it was a sign from God that the end of the world is nigh?
Click to expand...
I understand what you're doing here, Scooby. But it would only make sense as demonstrating our "tactics" if we were constantly complaining to you about how all you troofers were constantly lumping us in with flag-waving Bush lovers. And it would also only make sense if we were trying to associate you and Jones and Griffin with no-plane, C4-coated rebar, flyover, and beam weapon theories. We're not. So your effort to highlight our supposed hypocrisy does not fly.
 
Gravy said:
Many times with family. The last time I was solo, while on a bike trip. That was 2002.
Click to expand...

Just to continue with this little de-rail:

I've just been watching the first two seasons of an excellent HBO series called "Deadwood" all about the old West mining town in South Dakota. Just started watching the first episode of season three today. Old George Hearst (William Randolf's daddy) doesn't get too favourable a treatment.
Just thought it was a strange coincidence that you should turn out to be a descendent. (unless of course you are pulling our legs)
 
scooby said:
Please explain, using these principles, the problems you found with the official story?

There are many and they raise questions which to this day no answers have been provided for by the US Govt. They are completely unresolved, and until they are resolved - nobody knows what really happened on 911. It's not as hard as you might think - and should be trivia for an empirical skeptic. Some of the glaring howlers are very easy to spot.

So - give us your list of problems with the official story - skeptic.
Click to expand...
Official explanations are routinely challenged on these forums, even ones related to 9/11. You'll most often see them in the Politics/Current Events forum, though, because the challenges usually don't fall within the generally-accepted definition of a Conspiracy Theory (that of nefarious plots by secret, powerful cabals.)

The challenges related to 9/11 have typically been in a form similar to that of the challenges Gonzalez is currently facing about covering up his role in the dismissal of US attorneys.
 
scooby said:
No, first you lump all the 'truthers' into one group, then I lump all the 'believers' into one group.

Now it seems that your group, the believers, the WTC7 Denying armageddonists - has got bigger problems than my group.

Ditto ipso ergo getto out of that-one-o. :D
Click to expand...

I really want to call Formosa's Law here, if it wouldn't feed scooby's gigantic ego.
 
scooby said:
They are affiliated in exactly the same manner as the no-planers and space-beamers are affiliated with Prof Steve Jones and David Ray Griffin and supporters.
Click to expand...
That's neat, but you don't see us forming groups called "9/11 Official Story Philadelphia" and the like, holding rallies and strategy meetings, and loosely organizing around a "9/11 Official Story Movement".
 
scooby said:
Look - when are you lot going to make your minds up about the age of the planet - because these bush-truthers, your crowd - think its about 8000 years old ....

Welcome to the Rapture Ready Message Board.
www.rr-bb.com

This is what you have, on your team.

It's hilarious - when are you Bush followers, acolytes of the official story, going to clean your act up?
Click to expand...
Argumentum ad hominum (abusive)
Consider now some other examples:
Some politicians claim we should raise taxes, but they are just greedy opportunists trying to gain more of our money to spend on themselves.​
This is an ad hominem abusive, since it attacks a (perceived) quality of the claimant(s) instead of the claim itself. It has the form:
P1: A claims B;
P2: A is a C;
C: Therefore, B is false.​
Click to expand...
 
Brainache said:
Just to continue with this little de-rail:

I've just been watching the first two seasons of an excellent HBO series called "Deadwood" all about the old West mining town in South Dakota. Just started watching the first episode of season three today. Old George Hearst (William Randolf's daddy) doesn't get too favourable a treatment.
Just thought it was a strange coincidence that you should turn out to be a descendent. (unless of course you are pulling our legs)
Click to expand...
Hey, I never said I was proud of it. :o

Scooby's post gave me an idea, though. Perhaps I can use my connections to propose a "Popular Debunking" magazine. It would be like "Mythbusters," only without the zaniness, the action, and the personality. That's not a good title, though. Hearst also publishes Oprah's magazine "O." The new one could be called "Oh?" or "Oh, Really?"
 
chipmunk stew said:
That's neat, but you don't see us forming groups called "9/11 Official Story Philadelphia" and the like, holding rallies and strategy meetings, and loosely organizing around a "9/11 Official Story Movement".
Click to expand...

Well Mr Chipmunk, lately I've been considering forming a skeptic splinter group here in Sydney. We will only follow the teachings of Carl Sagan and do our utmost to discredit those upstarts Shermer and Dawkins.

We will call anyone who disagrees with us a Shillmer or a Dawk.
 
Gravy said:
Many times with family. The last time I was solo, while on a bike trip. That was 2002.
Click to expand...

Interesting...where did the bike trip take you, out of interest? I have some cousins who did service on a base in Nevada (well, second cousins I guess). Was the bike trip a multi-state thing, or just California?

Although Nevada wouldn't be the most hospitable state to ride a bike through I'm guessing...
 
Scooby:

The Republicans and the Democrats both believe that income tax is both legal and necessary. Applying your logic, these two groups are actually part of the same group and mustn't differ in opinion on any other topic.

See the problem with your logic?
 
Mobyseven said:
Interesting...where did the bike trip take you, out of interest? I have some cousins who did service on a base in Nevada (well, second cousins I guess). Was the bike trip a multi-state thing, or just California?

Although Nevada wouldn't be the most hospitable state to ride a bike through I'm guessing...
Click to expand...
That one was New York to San Francisco by way of North Carolina, South Texas, and San Diego. Nevada is doable at the right time of year. I had about 1,500 miles of desert in good weather, except for the wind.
 
Gravy said:
That one was New York to San Francisco by way of North Carolina, South Texas, and San Diego. Nevada is doable at the right time of year. I had about 1,500 miles of desert in good weather, except for the wind.
Click to expand...

PM me anytime if you're going to Nevada and you want to see something...interesting. :)
 
Just thought I'd look up Gravy's Great Great Grandad:

http://www.legendsofamerica.com/WE-DeadwoodHBO3.html

Though Hearst was known to have been a very controlling person in his business interests, there is no evidence that he was the ruthless man the character portrays on the HBO series. In fact, he was described in 19th century literature as a man of scrupulous integrity, a faithful friend, and without pretense or presumption of any kind.
 
Gravy said:
It's a huge beam weapon pointed at the Hubble telescope's mirror, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Now now, you'll spoil the secret.





(Encrypted message to mods: Delete Gravy's post, delete Gravy's account, and then delete Gravy. I repeat, Operation: Delicious With Chips is go.)
 
This a very old thread, and I do apologise for resurrecting it. Hopefully, modern Truthers will grasp my point. (I do tend to read then resurrect old threads, don't I?)


Scooby (who can not be a teenager, any more - many happy birthdays, Scooby!)

The 2023 Premier League was won by Manchester City. (Many grumbles. https://tinyurl.com/5fuew3te) What is being said, in this thread, by JREFers (oldie, baldie icon!) is that Truthers assert that the league may have been won or actually was won by another, any of or many or all of the other clubs.

All of those Truthers who say this are 100% wrong. They disagree with each other but are still wrong. They are all also wrong in the same way, in that they disagree with the 'official story' that Manchester City did actually win.

Actually, forget the idea of 'may have been'. I am not really interested in 'my have been', when we have those footy matches on tape.

PS Liverpool were cheated. We need lots of VAR - 'cos VAR will sort it all out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom