• 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!

Bursill seems to have disappeared from the scene as of lately. You say CIT is old news on this subforum - ever wondered why Craig (aka LyteTrip) is banned here? Do your own research. ;)
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
Bursill seems to have disappeared from the scene as of lately. You say CIT is old news on this subforum - ever wondered why Craig (aka LyteTrip) is banned here? Do your own research. ;)
Click to expand...

When Craig's claims are called delusional, he goes nuts and got banned.
In the audio debates, Craig comes across as insane.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Bursill seems to have disappeared from the scene as of lately. You say CIT is old news on this subforum - ever wondered why Craig (aka LyteTrip) is banned here? Do your own research. ;)
Click to expand...

I've seen Ranke on P4T, so no, I don't wonder at all why he was banned here.
By the way did your "research" ever explain how Mr Morin could see through a building?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Bursill seems to have disappeared from the scene as of lately. You say CIT is old news on this subforum - ever wondered why Craig (aka LyteTrip) is banned here? Do your own research. ;)
Click to expand...

I didn't know he was banned from here, was it within my time? I didn't get super active on this forum until 2009 really...

Do you think it is false to state that he does come off as mean-spirited/emotional in these debates?
 
fourtoe said:
I didn't know he was banned from here, was it within my time? I didn't get super active on this forum until 2009 really...

Do you think it is false to state that he does come off as mean-spirited/emotional in these debates?
Click to expand...

He was banned ~2007. When his insane delusions were challenged he went nuts. He though he was an investigator, as all he witnesses point to the real flight path of 77, he has them draw impossible flight paths. He has no clue how to treat witnesses. They ignore hundreds of witnesses to generate idiotic conclusions. He posts his errors, and it is clear he is making it up as he goes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUZy9GBLvPk this debate is clearly lost by Craig, he posts proof he has insane claims. I can't believe how stupid CIT investigation techniques are; proof, this video debate.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
He was banned ~2007. When his insane delusions were challenged he went nuts. He though he was an investigator, as all he witnesses point to the real flight path of 77, he has them draw impossible flight paths. He has no clue how to treat witnesses. They ignore hundreds of witnesses to generate idiotic conclusions. He posts his errors, and it is clear he is making it up as he goes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUZy9GBLvPk this debate is clearly lost by Craig, he posts proof he has insane claims. I can't believe how stupid CIT is, but the video debate proves it.
Click to expand...

This was the one I told him I thought he won. I was a little nicer about the reason why I thought he won in the email I sent him, though.

The reason why I thought he came off as better was because Summers just did not bother looking into the CIT evidence because he had "bigger fish to fry" relatively speaking. When you're writing a book for the general public, if they know anything about the TM they may recognize Loose Change and/or DRG when talking about the Pentagon so that's what Summers most likely focused on instead of the claims of a group that is on the fringe of a fringe group.

But I still think Summers should have looked into the CIT arguments more if he wanted to come out better (I'm speaking only about in this debate) but I mean, you can either look at ALL the evidence of the Pentagon and be able to take down the majority of the TM in a debate concerning it or you can watch one movie that dismisses all the physical evidence and relies on only the eye witness testimony of 14(?) people instead of the 150+ others who were also there. Summers chose the former which is the smart thing to do.

I really wish that debate wasn't cut off because in the other Ranke debates and in NSA he is pretty dismissive of the other eye witnesses and the physical evidence because he says that it isn't independently gathered evidence and/or is supplied by the government OR the people are brainwashed (including those they interviewed). He gets away with it in the debates I've heard him have with Truthers who just can't believe that at least SOME organizations linked to the government aren't in on some evil plot and therefore can be considered credible. I think that if Summers got a chance to talk about that stuff in more detail THEN he probably would have come out better because an audience unaware of 911CTs or on the fence or whatever don't have to worry about accommodating an evil government plot in their analysis of Rankes' claims.
 
A long time ago I recall an Australian poster on the boards posting a bunch of videos where he goes and talks to a bunch of Truthers outside a Richard Gage lecture. Anyone know what I'm talking about?

I found one of the videos especially funny because the guy walked up to Gage and Luke Rudkowski and totally blew off Gage to talk to Luke. It just made me lol a little.
 
fourtoe said:
....

Summers just did not bother looking into the CIT evidence because he had "bigger fish to fry" relatively speaking. ....
Click to expand...

CIT has no evidence. CIT evidence is made up lies. Every single flight path they have is impossible. That is the funny part, watching them encourage the witnesses to draw a path which they can't do. Then it is ironic all the witnesses agree Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon.
CIT evidence does not exist except in the delusional minds of CIT.

How do you win a debate when you present fake evidence? I am trained in aircraft accident investigation, it is easy for me to see they present idiotic claims, as I watch them mess up their own delusional investigation.

How can Summers look into evidence that only exists in the minds of CIT? There is no debate with evidence, CIT has none to support their insane claims.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
CIT has no evidence. CIT evidence is made up lies. Every single flight path they have is impossible. That is the funny part, watching them encourage the witnesses to draw a path which they can't do. Then it is ironic all the witnesses agree Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon.
CIT evidence does not exist except in the delusional minds of CIT.

How do you win a debate when you present fake evidence? I am trained in aircraft accident investigation, it is easy for me to see they present idiotic claims, as I watch them mess up their own delusional investigation.

How can Summers look into evidence that only exists in the minds of CIT? There is no debate with evidence, CIT has none to support their insane claims.
Click to expand...

You just said a perfect example of all that he had to say: just mention that all of the witnesses that CIT has interviewed all say that the plane hit the Pentagon.*

I don't think I'm explaining my point too well, maybe checking out this link will help out. If not, forget it. I think that I am delving into sophistry in trying to defend freaking Craig Ranke's debating performance at this point.
 
Childlike Empress said:
You say CIT is old news on this subforum - ever wondered why Craig (aka LyteTrip) is banned here? Do your own research. ;)
Click to expand...
I just started, and found this thread...
tumblr_ll18otJCYN1qdezf9o1_500.gif
 
Here's a nice frustrating debate for ya'll. Back in Feb 2009 Jason Bermas went up against James Bennett (JamesB) of ScrewLooseChange.
Here is a link that I believe Walter Ego made available:

http://blip.tv/buddhaglass/final-round-jason-bermas-vs-james-bennett-1758351

I warn you, the host lets Bermas rant on and on. Bermas goes on tangents that end with him talking about the weirdest things.

I think one of the best points brought up in the debate was when Bennett read off a list of books about 911 and asked Bermas whether or not he's read them and Bermas said no to EVERY SINGLE ONE.

But this point seemed wasted on Bermas and the host because Bermas countered by saying, "you're acting like I only read 911 books, the last book I read I think was non-fiction" and the host just goes "hey I'm being open minded here, and if we're assuming that there is this conspiracy then we have to say that whether or not those books got Pulitzers isn't worth ****." Well of course they're worth **** if we assume that there already is a conspiracy!

Bermas seemed really hostile with Bennett, especially compared to his debate with Pat back in 2007.
 
fourtoe said:
I just started, and found this thread...
[qimg]http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ll18otJCYN1qdezf9o1_500.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

CE will now disappear for days, only to reappear speaking on the same topic without addressing the argument (Morin seeing through a building) or Ranke being banned due to the psychotic trip linked above. Plus ça change...
 
fourtoe said:
I can't find his ban announcement, though I haven't really looked too hard.
Click to expand...
I don't think that the members-only areas show up in search. If you go to 'public notices' and search, you find two:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121281&highlight=lyte+trip

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121280&highlight=lyte+trip

I wasn't a member then, but reading some of the threads, it seems like they were a kind of hive poster or collective.
 
Richard Gage gets "interviewed" by Kim Hill
I found this on the AE911T page where they say:
AE911Truth is attacked heavily during this interview, but they prevail! This station is the premier Radio News broadcaster in New Zealand.
Click to expand...

I'd say "attacked" was a little bit of an overstatement but Hill definitely was gonna take no BS. At first I don't think Hill did so well, she mentioned some really outdated information about WTC7 showing that she wasn't really knowledgeable on the specifics of the WTC...

Because of this, Hill asked Gage a lot about the overall CT and it was pretty funny hearing how far Gage has to reach to take into account all the other parts of the conspiracy...Hill was pretty aggressive in getting him to talk about who and why so while Gage usually could get away with "I don't know, we need an investigation" in other interviews or debates Hill was pretty forceful about it. She did better near the end.

IIRC, when this interview was first posted Bill Smith mentioned that Hill sounded like she was drunk during the interview and now I can hear it, I kept imagining some elderly lady sloshing a glass of hard liquor around as she flipped through her interview notes.

What happened to Bill Smith? He was my favorite troll/poe on this forum.


carlitos said:
I don't think that the members-only areas show up in search. If you go to 'public notices' and search, you find two:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121281&highlight=lyte+trip

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121280&highlight=lyte+trip

I wasn't a member then, but reading some of the threads, it seems like they were a kind of hive poster or collective.
Click to expand...

He had sock puppets too? Augh what a creeper.
 
ScottyMate said:
That was fun. Why does every conspiracy theorist start off by saying "Now I'm not a conspiracy theorist" It's so dishonest. He says he wants to stick to "facts" but doesn't take long before he jumps down the rabbit hole.
Click to expand...


For the same reason that Holocaust Deniers start their posts by saying "Now, I'm not denying the Holocaust happened, but..."

Noone would listen to them otherwise.
 
And who's that guy who did a series of "interviews" with Dylan Avery and others on 9/11 last year outdoors? I think they would qualify as "debate" of sorts. I think there's an old thread around here with his videos.
 
chrismohr said:
And who's that guy who did a series of "interviews" with Dylan Avery and others on 9/11 last year outdoors? I think they would qualify as "debate" of sorts. I think there's an old thread around here with his videos.
Click to expand...
Poor Dylan Avery, he just gets too angry in his interviews or debates with people who support the OT. I'll definitely look for them now that you've mentioned it.

You guys are doing a bad thing by bumping my thread, you're gonna go and make me think that I'm not the only one who loves this crap!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom