• 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.

911 Audio Debates Thread!

fourtoe said:
I emailed Craig Ranke (who was really cool to respond to me so quickly) who said that he didn't think that the Stern Show thing was a debate.
Click to expand...

I guess it technically wasn't a "debate" in the typical sense of being pre-planned, etc....however there was a fair amount of back & forth. They kept Craig on the line while taking calls from some other listeners. It's short but a great bit of audio. I would be surprised if Craig gave you a link to it....he came off sounding pretty crazy.
 
nicepants said:
I guess it technically wasn't a "debate" in the typical sense of being pre-planned, etc....however there was a fair amount of back & forth. They kept Craig on the line while taking calls from some other listeners. It's short but a great bit of audio. I would be surprised if Craig gave you a link to it....he came off sounding pretty crazy.
Click to expand...

I told him that I just want anything that has to do with arguing/debating 911 but I guess he doesn't want to send me the original video. I JUST emailed him and forgot to explicitly ask if we can still get a recording of that show or a video. Hopefully Walter Ego will pull through and have the full audio.

Another bummer was that the debate Ranke sent me with Summers was in fact only about 15 minutes long, they cut it off for some reason. I asked Ranke a little more about it cause I would like to hear more debates concerning the Pentagon because it seems like just the WTC is what current Truthers want to talk about.
 
fourtoe said:
Gage, Ryan, Harrit and others vs. Thomas, Kay, Mueller and others
Hour 1
Hour 2
Hour 3
I'm still listening to this one, the one host lady keeps on interrupting and saying "stay on topic!" and I thought that was just her showing her bias but she later did it to Gage! I think she's just an idiot because she told Gage to stay on topic when he was making an open argument, he was just introducing the topic! That's what you do in an introduction...also Gage sounds sick, poor guy.
I thought Kay did a great job but the other guy he was with was also kind of all over the place, he reminded me of Michael Shermer against Kevin Ryan: he's a skeptic and looks at 911 too generally and Truthers get super tedious so you gotta be really familiar with the claims.
Click to expand...


Thank you for these links, quite frustrating in places with the quick fire rebuttals and interruptions, but was interesting none the less.
I have to say that the station had some of THE worst "music" I've ever had the misfortune of hearing. I mean what was that crap? It was painful.
 
fourtoe said:
Those appear to be the same link...am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Here's the full audio of the actual debate for those who don't wish to use the embedded player:

http://noliesradio.org/archives/GageVMohrDebate2011-0306_web.mp3

ETA: There appears to be a lot of background noise in the recording...almost as if this was recorded by someone in a separate location with people talking, using a microwave, etc in the background. Not sure what that's all about.
 
Last edited:
nicepants said:
Here's the full audio of the actual debate for those who don't wish to use the embedded player:

http://noliesradio.org/archives/GageVMohrDebate2011-0306_web.mp3

ETA: There appears to be a lot of background noise in the recording...almost as if this was recorded by someone in a separate location with people talking, using a microwave, etc in the background. Not sure what that's all about.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this! I'll listen to it later today.

Craig Ranke has sent me a few links to debates, one of them has already been posted wayyyy at the beginning of the thread but I'll post both because I haven't checked which one:

Ranke vs another Truther John Bursill 2009

Ranke vs. CausticLogic

Ranke and I got into a discussion about how I thought he was the winner of his debate with Anthony Summers. I do think this, but I think Ranke thought that I was admitting that his position is more sound than Summers'. I just thought that Summers should have been more prepared and he was just a crappy debater.
 
alienentity said:
No, it's the same one. I linked to it in both posts, second one just to mention it's not the March debate.
Click to expand...
Ahhh I see.

I guess we aren't gonna hear the Ranke vs. The Howard Stern Show. My email correspondence ended on a pretty bad note.

How come when Compus contacts Fetzer, Fetzer is all nice and helpful and when I contact someone from the Truth Movement I get gornischt.
 
fourtoe said:
...

Gage and Harriet vs. Thomas and Kim Johnson
Link to a YouTube Playlist. I looked through the old thread on this and unfortunately the commercial free version that Sam.I.Am made was uploaded to MegaUpload so I can't get it. I'll pm him about it though.

I liked that the host was critical but the callers were crazy! Thomas and Johnson do a solid job.

...
Click to expand...

I snagged a copy back in the day, and finally got around to putting it on Archive.org. I figured with all those Internet copies, it's got to be Public Domain by now - Coast to Coast doesn't seem to mind the many YouTube versions, for example.

So now, for your listening pleasure, here is the single-mp3/no commercials version nicely done up by Sam I Am back in the day.

Use it Fairly!

Cheers, Dave
 
fourtoe said:
Thanks for posting this! I'll listen to it later today.

Craig Ranke has sent me a few links to debates, one of them has already been posted wayyyy at the beginning of the thread but I'll post both because I haven't checked which one:

Ranke vs another Truther John Bursill 2009
Click to expand...

I have about 20 minutes left of this one and it sounds right up your alley, Compus. I warn you though, it goes nowhere: Ranke would NOT get over the fact that Bursill said bad stuff about him on a forum. Bursill even apologized for it and admitted that it was wrong but...oh man.

DaveThomasNMSR said:
I snagged a copy back in the day, and finally got around to putting it on Archive.org. I figured with all those Internet copies, it's got to be Public Domain by now - Coast to Coast doesn't seem to mind the many YouTube versions, for example.

So now, for your listening pleasure, here is the single-mp3/no commercials version nicely done up by Sam I Am back in the day.

Use it Fairly!

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

Sweet! Thanks Dave.
 
fourtoe said:
I have about 20 minutes left of this one and it sounds right up your alley, Compus. I warn you though, it goes nowhere: Ranke would NOT get over the fact that Bursill said bad stuff about him on a forum. Bursill even apologized for it and admitted that it was wrong but...oh man.
Click to expand...


Yet after this debate and a short period of silence he went back to "say bad stuff" about Ranke as if nothing had happened.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yet after this debate and a short period of silence he went back to "say bad stuff" about Ranke as if nothing had happened.
Click to expand...

So Childlike, whilst we are on the subject of Ranke.....did he ever explain to you how Morin could have seen through a solid building as he would have had to if the plane was on a SOC flightpath?

Pentagonandcitgoannotated.jpg
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yet after this debate and a short period of silence he went back to "say bad stuff" about Ranke as if nothing had happened.
Click to expand...

Oh I wouldn't doubt it. I'm not condoning what he did, trust me. I also think it is lame that he continued to do it even though Ranke spent two hours reminding him about it over and over.

BTW, have you already listened to that recording? What did you think?

sheeplesnshills said:
So Childlike, whilst we are on the subject of Ranke.....did he ever explain to you how Morin could have seen through a solid building as he would have had to if the plane was on a SOC flightpath?

[qimg]http://i643.photobucket.com/albums/uu158/thesmith1_photos/Pentagonandcitgoannotated.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I might be misunderstanding your post but according to NSA, Morin said he he was just at the corner of the building and ran out to see...I think. I decided I needed to do school work at that point and will have to watch it again later.
 
fourtoe said:
Oh I wouldn't doubt it. I'm not condoning what he did, trust me. I also think it is lame that he continued to do it even though Ranke spent two hours reminding him about it over and over.

BTW, have you already listened to that recording? What did you think?
Click to expand...


Yes, when it happened. Bursill was ill prepared, better said he had no idea what he was talking about. The fact that he washed this exchange away shows his dishonesty.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yes, when it happened. Bursill was ill prepared, better said he had no idea what he was talking about. The fact that he washed this exchange away shows his dishonesty.
Click to expand...

Le sigh, I'm so behind in my TM knowledge. Will I ever catch up?

I too thought he was ill prepared. I also thought his arguing that Ranke should publish in a peer-reviewed journal was silly for a couple of reasons 1) I'm not sure what PR journal would publish this, some technical criminal investigation journal? 2) I think he was referring to the Truther journals like the ones from Fetzer or Jones, which don't cut it and 3) Ranke's stuff could be proven via investigative journalism, I think all CIT would need to do is get a credible journalist to write an article about their work, which should be easy considering how adamant Ranke was/still is about his arguments.
 
fourtoe said:
Thanks for posting this! I'll listen to it later today.

Craig Ranke has sent me a few links to debates, one of them has already been posted wayyyy at the beginning of the thread but I'll post both because I haven't checked which one:

Ranke vs another Truther John Bursill 2009

Ranke vs. CausticLogic

Ranke and I got into a discussion about how I thought he was the winner of his debate with Anthony Summers. I do think this, but I think Ranke thought that I was admitting that his position is more sound than Summers'. I just thought that Summers should have been more prepared and he was just a crappy debater.
Click to expand...

How can Ranke win a debate about fantasy and delusions? Yes, Ranke has delusions, he wins?

A debate with 911 truth is like debating Santa's existence. I can get my kids to claim Santa is real, and I have done it; but Santa is not real. Debating a flight path based on Ranke Delusions? And Ranke wins?

If Ranke declares a NoC flight path, and all his witnesses are clearly pointing south; does winning a debate make his flight path real. No, his claims remain insane.

For those who can't think for themselves, the claims made by morons like Ranke, might win them over. Is that winning a debate? 2+2=4, Ranke says 7; Ranke wins the debate, 7 sounds good. That sums up 911 truthers view of the world.

911 truth winning debates of fantasy. Yes, 911 truth wins, their claims are fantasy. Winners


I listened to Ranke http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUZy9GBLvPk
The idiotic video debunks Ranke's witnesses. Witnesses can't draw flight paths when they are tangential to the flight path. You would never ask a witness to draw a birds eye view flight path, it debunks CIT. It proves they are morons and incapable of investigating 911 flight issue.
You can't win a debate using fantasy. Ranke clearly appears insane in the "debate", and has no rational evidence.

How can you be prepared for made up nonsense. The flight path is proved by evidence, hard evidence, not made up nonsense due to stupidity of Ranke. How do you prepare for gish-gallop of woo spewing freely from an idiot on 911 issues, Ranke? Ranke lost, for bringing up nonsense.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
How can Ranke win a debate about fantasy and delusions? Yes, Ranke has delusions, he wins?

A debate with 911 truth is like debating Santa's existence. I can get my kids to claim Santa is real, and I have done it; but Santa is not real. Debating a flight path based on Ranke Delusions? And Ranke wins?

If Ranke declares a NoC flight path, and all his witnesses are clearly pointing south; does winning a debate make his flight path real. No, his claims remain insane.

For those who can't think for themselves, the claims made by morons like Ranke, might win them over. Is that winning a debate? 2+2=4, Ranke says 7; Ranke wins the debate, 7 sounds good. That sums up 911 truthers view of the world.

911 truth winning debates of fantasy. Yes, 911 truth wins, their claims are fantasy. Winners


I listened to Ranke http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUZy9GBLvPk
The idiotic video debunks Ranke's witnesses. Witnesses can't draw flight paths when they are tangential to the flight path. You would never ask a witness to draw a birds eye view flight path, it debunks CIT. It proves they are morons and incapable of investigating 911 flight issue.
You can't win a debate using fantasy. Ranke clearly appears insane in the "debate", and has no rational evidence.
Click to expand...

I tried explaining this to Ranke and he didn't take it too kindly: because this is a debate I think performance is important and Ranke "won" in terms of his being more prepared to debate Bursill (and Hill and even Summers) on his specific topic. Because his ideas are so bizarre people don't bother to look at the CIT work, especially now because they seem to be old news on this forum and in the 911 TM.

So yeah, I agree, his argument isn't sound but he performed better in the debates because his opponents failed to show how they were baseless.

I think a great example is the Shermer v Ryan debate I posted on this thread oh so many years ago. Yeah Ryan was spouting baseless drivel, but Shermer did an awful job of showing this.
 
fourtoe said:
I tried explaining this to Ranke and he didn't take it too kindly: because this is a debate I think performance is important and Ranke "won" in terms of his being more prepared to debate Bursill (and Hill and even Summers) on his specific topic. Because his ideas are so bizarre people don't bother to look at the CIT work, especially now because they seem to be old news on this forum and in the 911 TM.

So yeah, I agree, his argument isn't sound but he performed better in the debates because his opponents failed to show how they were baseless.

I think a great example is the Shermer v Ryan debate I posted on this thread oh so many years ago. Yeah Ryan was spouting baseless drivel, but Shermer did an awful job of showing this.
Click to expand...

How can anyone be prepared for lies and delusions, made up by Ranke or Ryan? Ranke is the winner on understanding and spewing his lies.

The guy was ambushed with crazy claims. Ranke was not debating 911 evidence, he was presenting manufactured fantasy due to Ranke's incompetence. Ranke presented fantasy only morons believe.

Ranke did not fool you, thus he lost the debate.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
How can anyone be prepared for lies and delusions, made up by Ranke or Ryan? Ranke is the winner on understanding and spewing his lies.

The guy was ambushed with crazy claims. Ranke was not debating 911 evidence, he was presenting manufactured fantasy due to Ranke's incompetence. Ranke presented fantasy only morons believe.
Click to expand...

Actually in the Bursill debate there wasn't really any evidence presented. I'm tellin' ya, it was just Ranke complaining about being attacked and discriminated against by Truth Action and 911Blogger(?) and Bursill saying that CIT are too dogmatic about the truth of their findings to the point where he thinks it should be noted that they're not as credible as DRG or Gage...which is setting the bar pretty low.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom