If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II

DGM said:
You could have enough credibility that they believed you. You would have a serious issue in this aspect.
Click to expand...
So you're saying if someone had enough credibility they could commit fraud, and tell the blind that the sky was purple?

This.

This is the ultimate sticky.

You just described EXACTLY what takes place in this forum.

ETA: You also perfectly described the 9/11 CR and NIST reports.
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
So you're saying if I had enough credibility I could commit fraud, and tell the blind that the sky was purple?

This.

This is the ultimate sticky.

You just described EXACTLY what takes place in this forum.
Click to expand...
If you were credible you would not deceive. Your logic is twisted.
 
DGM said:
Wouldn't that make them not credible? How have you (in your non-expert sense) determined this to be a fact?
Click to expand...
Yes. People who claim to be credible experts destroy their credibility by deceiving others. A person loses their credibility when they make claims that contradict obvious, known facts.

I have already given examples, but I will do it again.

A physicist could publish a peer-reviewed paper that gained wide acceptance. This would make them credible. If that same physicist came here and said that g is 100.45 m/s/s/s/s/s/s upwards, they would lose all of their credibility. They might get a chance to explain their statement, and then retract it if it had been made in error, but if they held on to their claim they would lose their credibility.

Now, I know you're argument is "A credible physicist would never make that claim about g." Wrong. Money, or other motivations, could easily cause a physicist to come here and make absurd claims.

Here's a quick example. This former NASA scientist is no longer credible.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/04/26/former-nasa-scientist-global-warming-is-nonsense/

Here's another example, and it's so easy to read between the lines.
http://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-scientists-dispute-climate-change-2012-4
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
My primary goal is to expose the fraud and lunacy of the skeptic community.
Click to expand...

Yet all you've done is troll.

We're not a community, we represent reality; normal people who look at ALL of the facts before drawing conclusions. When new credible evidence is presented we modify our opinions. I will point out (again) that there are many threads on this board where issues have been discussed and minds have been changed.

The problem is that the majority of the threads started on this thread in the past few years have been started by the bottom-feeders of the 9-11 CT element (the only ones left), who've come here from friendly CT message boards to start trouble so they can brag to their online sycophants. A few are clearly mentally ill, but most are just looking for lulz. Getting to the bottom of 9-11 is the last thing on their minds.

Had this place existed 30 years ago I would have been on the other side of things. I drank from the same poisoned well that you and others drink from. I thought that if more people knew the truth (about JFK, UFOs, various shadow organizations) they would see things my way. It never once occurred to me that all of the authors of the various CT books were wrong. I assumed that they had done real research, and came to learn that CTs feed on themselves. The day I realized that I was a fool to buy into those CTs I was angry at myself, and angry at people I had trusted. In the end it was on my shoulders, I let me prejudices override my judgement, and a wasted a lot of time and money on BS.

I should point out that I have identified myself as a ghost hunter, and I've been on this board over a year, and have yet to be given a hard time. The reason being that I don't post anything here that can't be supported by independent research that can be easily linked to. Them's the rules. Needless to say, you won't be seeing me post a thread titled "ZMGOD! Ghosts R for Reelz!" anytime soon.

Why?

Because, unlike you, Tony Z, Yankee, and others I understand the scientific process...and like you guys...I have no evidence to present...so I don't waste people's time with woo. You guys can learn from me.:thumbsup:
 
Axxman300 said:
Yet all you've done is troll.
Click to expand...

Trolling is defined as "making a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them."

Since when is telling the truth offensive or provocative?

we represent reality; normal people who look at ALL of the facts before drawing conclusions. When new credible evidence is presented we modify our opinions.
Click to expand...
Where have you done this?

Getting to the bottom of 9-11 is the last thing on their minds.
Click to expand...
I guess you keep forgetting that I constantly post this link - www.ae911truth.org.

I drank from the same poisoned well that you and others drink from.
Click to expand...
I guess Newton drank out of it, too. It must have caused his delusions about motion.

I thought that if more people knew the truth (about JFK, UFOs, various shadow organizations) they would see things my way.
Click to expand...

LOL. I love it when skeptics compare all of 9/11 to UFO's and JFK. It's the oldest trick in the book, and even the newest lurkers can see right through it.

Stop comparing having a basic understanding of physics to believing in UFO's or ghosts. It's nonsense, and it is easy to see through your lame tactic.

I understand the scientific process
Click to expand...
OK. Prove you understand it. Please explain it in your own words.
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
Of course not. No one can violate the laws of physics, so why try? You know that any experiment you perform will only validate Cole's results. That's why no one will even attempt an experiment to prove Cole wrong. It can not be done.
Click to expand...

Cole proved that his boards-floor could not stop the weight dropped 5 feet.
The towers dropped 12 feet at first collision and continued dropping 12 feet at each collision till the end.
Cole proved the towers collapsed conventionally not by CD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom