I don't really blame some of these people so much. Some of these 9/11 tabloids can be very convincing.
Agreed.
Jonnyclueless said:
And without the proper information, people are easily mislead by these liars. We say, they are too lazy to do research, yet how are they supposed to know they are supposed to do more research.
I don't assume Sheen is too
lazy. I'm expect he has a busy work schedule to keep up. The difference is Sheen is an A-List celebrity, and he knows he is up for ridicule (and more) should his claims be false. With that in mind, it seems careless that someone of his stature would not even try to find another alternative explanation to Silverstein's remark. After all, it's quite an extraordinary revelation that a wealthy business man publicly admitted on television that he ordered a building to be blown up on 9/11. You'd think that maybe, just maybe, there might be a more rational, yet mundane, explanation to it all. And there is.
Sheen claims that he has looked for these answers, and has received none. I contest that his research for refutations must have been brief, at best. A simple google search yields many results relating to the matter, and subsequently offers a far more believable alternative to the narrative that Sheen is endorsing.
Jonnyclueless said:
They don't get to hear both sides of the story. The Woo movement runs around trying to con people, but there is no scientific movement that goes around campaigning and heckling people about facts.
As above. I feel Sheen should have shown more care in his research before going public. There is plenty of information out there.
Jonnyclueless said:
So just because someone like Martin is mislead doesn't make him a bad guy. It's when these people have been shown the real facts and intentionally choose to ignore them that they become truly ignorant. I for one was at one time very convinced of the conspiracy BS. But at the time I hadn't been given the proper information and it took some intelligent people to dispell the myths. Martin may just not have anyone other than Charlie feeding him info. And while some of the Woo ploys may seem silly to the scientific community, they prey on common misconceptions of the public.
The whole "pull it" term is a perfect example. To anyone who doesn't know about these terms it absolutely does sound like a demolition term. The general public if told it is a demolition term is not going to have any way of knowing it isn't without being given the proper information. And the general public isn't stupid because they are lead to believe it's a demolition term.
Just my 2 cents.
I agree, it doesn't make him a bad guy, at all. Just misinformed, and i believe he could have avoided this easily by doing some basic research. I mean, his points are circa 2005, and abandoned by the more reasonable (!) truthers.
