Dylan Avery Gets Schooled By The BBC (Video)

[Edx]

It impossible to follow his logic, when he neglects key points and twists them around.

Show which points I have neglected, and how I have twisted them around. Just one or two will do.

 

[cisco]

Already replied to this idea many times, but you may have missed it last time you asked 2 pages back. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3415578&postcount=331

Wrong. Your reply is a non sequitur, and one I've responded to (that'll teach me to respond to non sequiturs!)

Why don't you go and read this post from a few pages back and then post a topical reply.

 

[Edx]

Edx:
You have mentioned an interest in the "Patriot act". I for one would like to see what your concerns are and possibly start a discussion on them. Do you have any interest in starting a new thread on this so these concerns can be addressed? If so why don't you?

I would like to, maybe another time. I still need to get around to repling to gumboot on Norad. And considering the crazy reactions I got to what I thought was an at least an understandable criticism of a documentary, ie. its not actually that fair and balanced, Im somewhat apprehensive about jumping in again.

 

[Edx]

Wrong. Your reply is a non sequitur, and one I've responded to (that'll teach me to respond to non sequiturs!)

Why don't you go and read this post from a few pages back and then post a topical reply.

I apologise, I missed that responce.

Is Guy Smith the person Dylan told he was a dropout? Did you ever even consider that he might not have been? I'm sure his [Guy's] answer was nonchalant and not very well thought out because it's an insignificant issue."

Thats very speculative. Guy Smith is the producer, he also is the one that interviewed Dylan. When asked why he called Dylan a drop out, Guy smith says all a drop out means in England is that you didnt go to University. He said "self confessed" therefore before Dylan did tell him he never attended University. Theres nothing in Guys responce to suggest what you're saying.

 

[DGM]

I would like to, maybe another time. I still need to get around to repling to gumboot on Norad. And considering the crazy reactions I got to what I thought was an at least an understandable criticism of a documentary, ie. its not actually that fair and balanced, Im somewhat apprehensive about jumping in again.

Understandable:
One observation that I have made it this thread that you may benefit from if you don't mind. Your point is not completely clear, You need to state more clearly your intentions for your criticisms (like it or not some of your arguments lead to the assumption that you are a full out "truther"). This is a skeptics site that has seen more than it's fair share of "just asking questions" from people that have no intention of listening to answers. I agree that you are getting bombed for opinions that I don't think you hold but most of this you seem to have brought on yourself. Don't be afraid to ask for clarification from other posters as to what they mean (you have fallen into the trap of misunderstanding many times). Also I would suggest not to dwell on the minute details when an argument becomes futile, This only prolongs and obscures the point you were trying to make in the first place.

Good luck with the NORAD argument. Gumboot has done outstanding research on this subject.

DGM

 

[cisco]

Thats very speculative. Guy Smith is the producer, he also is the one that interviewed Dylan. When asked why he called Dylan a drop out, Guy smith says all a drop out means in England is that you didnt go to University. He said "self confessed" therefore before Dylan did tell him he never attended University. Theres nothing in Guys responce to suggest what you're saying.

Nothing . . . except the preinterview where most of the non-televised info is gathered, which is typically done by a different person. I say your theory is just as speculative as mine if not more, and you're jumping to conclusions.

If this really concerns you so much you need to contact the BBC and get to the bottom of it. It would take a fraction of the time and energy you've poured into arguing about it on the internet.

 

[Walter Ego]

I would suggest not to dwell on the minute details when an argument becomes futile, This only prolongs and obscures the point you were trying to make in the first place.

Good advice. Just stick with something simple like 'the Jews did it.'

 

[Edx]

Labeling him a truther is just for the sake of treating others as they treat you. He came in calling people liars, so it's just to show him how it feels.

Why dont you go back and see at what point I started saying the program was "lying".

And since you're just being noble I suppose I can ignore all your posts as all they contain are personal attacks and strawmen because you say you're just trying to teach me some kind of lesson.

were mere side comments that he is using to derail the thread and completely missing the actual posts that they were included in.

No, I was asked why I didnt like the rest of the documentary, so I replied.

He (and maybe you didn't notice either) that Gravy in his comment made some really valid points. Those went ignored. Instead what was focused on? Him making some side comment that didn't really mean much.

Show me one place I ignored something.

Gravy for example is not arguing that he is being sympathetic, he is arguing that the guy is factually wrong.

Jonny, do you really want me to go back and get quotes for you to prove that he did actually argue I was being sympathetic to Dylan and truthers? Unlike you I will back up my accusations.

And I apologize, but it's simply not worht my time to go through 11 pages of this thread to copy/paste the hundreds of examples, especially after I have had to address them repeatedly over and over already.

You're just irony on fire.

Gravy on the last page made like 10 posts all bringing up exact quotes and showing exactly why Ed is wrong in his claim about how the film portrayed Dylan. And the response is "He called him a sympathizer?"

If thats all you saw you didnt really read my reply. Maybe you're just trying to teach me another one of your lessons

 

[Edx]

Nothing . . . except the preinterview where most of the non-televised info is gathered, which is typically done by a different person. I say your theory is just as speculative as mine if not more, and you're jumping to conclusions.

If this really concerns you so much you need to contact the BBC and get to the bottom of it. It would take a fraction of the time and energy you've poured into arguing about it on the internet.

As much as I hate to keep talking about this point, once more...

If we assume that was true you're saying suggesting he didnt know what was in his own script, because he could have replied that someone else told him that Dylan had said he was a drop out. Or, he could have stepped in at the time and asked the researcher/s why they were calling Dylan a drop out when he told Guy he didnt go to University. He could have said or implied any of this in his responce to the comment, but he just said drop out means someone who didnt go to University and so didnt have the negative connotation that it does in the US

 

[Edx]

Good advice. Just stick with something simple like 'the Jews did it.'

Following DGMs advise, are you suggesting that I have ever said that?

 

[tsig]

Why dont you go back and see at what point I started saying the program was "lying".

And since you're just being noble I suppose I can ignore all your posts as all they contain are personal attacks and strawmen because you say you're just trying to teach me some kind of lesson.



No, I was asked why I didnt like the rest of the documentary, so I replied.



Show me one place I ignored something.



Jonny, do you really want me to go back and get quotes for you to prove that he did actually argue I was being sympathetic to Dylan and truthers? Unlike you I will back up my accusations.



You're just irony on fire.



Not true, you didnt read my reply. Maybe you're just trying to teach me another one of your lessons

EDx here's what I've seen you bring up. You were so concerned that Dylan had been called a drop out, then you were concerned that his position on flight 93 was being misconstrued and finally that the "4000 Jews were warned" had not been explained properly and that there was a "grain of truth there" .


When all these things were explained in excruciating detail you just went back to your original assertion.

You seem to want to sit on the the fence and throw rocks both ways.

 

[SatansMaleVoiceChoir]

Labeling him a truther is just for the sake of treating others as they treat you. He came in calling people liars (edit)

And I apologize, but it's simply not worht my time to go through 11 pages of this thread to copy/paste the hundreds of examples, especially after I have had to address them repeatedly over and over already. It's like I covered them like 5 times each throughout the thread and people are saying "show me"? Again, this points to the issuer being that people aren't reading everything (understandably).

You make the claim that he has lied Johnny, but as always the burden of proof is on you to provide examples of Edx's "hundreds" of lies.

I also don't feel my questions to EDx were off-topic; the OP was not much more specific than "here's a video clip"; my questions to EDx were to help me (others) understand his reasoning and motivation behind his complaints about the video.

Regarding Edx's answers to my questions; thankyou, and 'fair enough'.

 

[DGM]

Following DGMs advise, are you suggesting that I have ever said that?

One last piece of advice:
No one wins a pissing contest. (although extra points are added if your's is not in your own penmanship)

 

[tsig]

As much as I hate to keep talking about this point, once more...

If we assume that was true you're saying suggesting he didnt know what was in his own script, because he could have replied that someone else told him that Dylan had said he was a drop out. Or, he could have stepped in at the time and asked the researcher/s why they were calling Dylan a drop out when he told Guy he didnt go to University. He could have said or implied any of this in his responce to the comment, but he just said drop out means someone who didnt go to University and so didnt have the negative connotation that it does in the US

Let it drop-out of this thread.

I feel your repeated use of the same argument in the same words post after post is close to the line

 

[Edx]

I also think the bbc were entitled to use the x-files producer to provide insight into the psychology of truthers. .

Just a small thing, I wasnt suggesting he irrelevant to bring on. Because of the Long Gunmen episode, he certianly was relevabt. But one of my points was because people said they didnt have enough time to cover any of the points I brought up, they I didnt feel it was necessary to tstay on X-Files and Spotniz for around 10 minutes. Im sure they could have cut that down if they wanted to include more information.

 

[Edx]

Let it drop-out of this thread.

I feel your repeated use of the same argument in the same words post after post is close to the line

Believe me I dont like having to repeat myself

 

[tsig]

One last piece of advice:
No one wins a pissing contest. (although extra points are added if your's is not in your own penmanship)

Gee I always thought the rule was " He who drinks the most beer pisses the longest" but then I was never conscious long enough to prove it.

 

[Walter Ego]

EDx here's what I've seen you bring up. You were so concerned that Dylan had been called a drop out, then you were concerned that his position on flight 93 was being misconstrued and finally that the "4000 Jews were warned" had not been explained properly and that there was a "grain of truth there" .


When all these things were explained in excruciating detail you just went back to your original assertion.

You seem to want to sit on the the fence and throw rocks both ways.

We agreed several hundred posts ago the dropout characterization was irrelevant to the discussion but Edx keeps bringing it up. He also complains continuously that he’s being misunderstood.

I started this thread hoping some people would watch my little video and now it’s a runaway train . (Yes, I know I don’t own the thread but still...) Edx began ignoring me pages ago and now I’m doing the same with him. Good luck to the rest of you butting your heads up against the brick wall.

 

[cisco]

As much as I hate to keep talking about this point, once more...

If we assume that was true you're saying suggesting he didnt know what was in his own script, because he could have replied that someone else told him that Dylan had said he was a drop out.

Already covered in my earlier post.

Or, he could have stepped in at the time and asked the researcher/s why they were calling Dylan a drop out when he told Guy he didnt go to University.

You don't know what he told Guy! That's my whole point - you're speculating just as much as anyone else.

He could have said or implied any of this in his responce to the comment, but he just said drop out means someone who didnt go to University and so didnt have the negative connotation that it does in the US

You never responded to my question several pages back: could the term mean something different to an older person?

You also didn't respond to the part in my recent post where I suggested you contact the BBC. Have you started working on that yet?

 

[Edx]

EDx here's what I've seen you bring up. You were so concerned that Dylan had been called a drop out,

Yes, that I felt was unreasonable considering Guy Smith said drop out didnt mean you dropped out of anything and it wasnt something negative in the UK.

then you were concerned that his position on flight 93 was being misconstrued

Yes well I still think it wasnt addressing what Loose Change claimed, and mostly seemed to try and disprove something that wasnt disputed.

and finally that the "4000 Jews were warned" had not been explained properly and that there was a "grain of truth there" .

I have accepted the two original stories may not be connected because I cant prove they are, but they are dealing with similar issues. Israeli warnings of 911, and I have seen both stories and the myth getting mixed up. So I feel that if someone only knew what Conspiracy Files told them, they'd assume that if someone said some employees of an Israeli company got warnings prior to 911, that this the same claim Conspiracy Files debunked. Maybe this was just an honest oversight, but I still think its an oversight.

When all these things were explained in excruciating detail you just went back to your original assertion.

There were more points, but those are 3 yes. You make it sound like I accepted their points? I still dont.