Endgame
It's now been a month and a half since I issued my preliminary declaration.
Hear that? That's the sound of crickets chirping where the CT's position should be.
Once again, let's review the field of Sept. 11th deniers and forum malefactors. The list is a familiar one.
First, the ever-persistent
TruthSeeker1234, who broke his
vow of silence mere hours ago, only to
resurrect his idiotic,
ever shifting farcical debate / TV appearance / book deal. Keep in mind that I
started a bet that he'd never follow through with it -- and then
won that bet when he went
hors de combat. Yet before the echo had even faded, he was back again, crying that he had
"destroyed" all comers here, and that we'd collectively backed out, though this is verifiably
false. Add the fact that he had already admitted to being a
liar, indeed is even proud of the fact, and I ask you all: Given this history, would you trust this man to tell the truth about Sept. 11th? I wouldn't trust him to water my plants.
Oh, and Ace, since I know you're still reading, and you get all
huffy when people give you bad advice, here's some: Go rob a bank. You have my permission. (You may not have the
bank's permission, but that's your problem.) Now please run along.
---
Next, we have the two Killclones,
Skeptic4Sure and
Lyte Trip. The former has been around for some time, often
confused with John Doe X, owing to his
spirited if sophomoric defense of JDX in person
and his
flawed Flight 77 FDR analysis, along with the simultaneous
breakup between JDX and Loose Change and the appearance of
confirmed JDX sockpuppet weedwacker. In light of later
evidence, however, it appears that
Skeptic4Sure is
not John Doe X, but merely a veritable "yes-man" among the Troothers whose potential for sycophancy borders on schizoid. Currently, he and the
flamboyantly public Lyte Trip have engaged in
two identical,
coordinated threads, each touting their supposed
"tidal wave" of evidence that they still
haven't even
released yet.
As of this writing,
68 pages of such baiting... and still no evidence, presumably so they can sell it in the form of another
scurrilous DVD.
There is one major difference between
Skeptic4Sure and
Lyte Trip, though -- whether through bravado or stupidity,
Lyte Trip is prone to more frank and damaging admissions. In particular, he
admits that he won't answer questions just to be difficult, and he actually put forth
an alternate theory of the Pentagon attack. Naturally, there are more problems with this theory than the number of words it contains...
here's the angle that I like, as it succinctly illustrates its self-inconsistency. Yet these obvious flaws don't stop them from libeling an innocent victim, a senior citizen who made the mistake of
granting them an interview only to have his words
twisted by these delusional maniacs.
---
We revisit
Russell Pickering, returned to these forums specifically to
repudiate the actions of
Lyte Trip and
Skeptic4Sure. This is progress for him, although I am still disappointed that he still
clings to his own theories while discounting others that are, in reality, no worse than his -- he still feels it is valid to accuse the FBI, among others, but not valid to accuse motorists in front of the Pentagon. Still, it is heartening to see him take on
Lyte Trip just like one of us, so perhaps he will eventually get his act fully together.
It is also telling that this debate is taking place
here, rather than at his own Loose Change forum -- proof, as if any was needed, of where honest debate can and cannot be found.
---
Finally, we have something very special: An appearance courtesy of "Scholar"
Gordon Ross. Some time ago I
criticized his paper claiming that the World Trade Center collapses would have halted rather than fully collapsed, along with a
critique of a rebuttal he penned after being slammed by Dr. Greening on many of the same issues. These were forwarded to him, but no reply -- until now. And not here, either, not anywhere I would see it, but in his
own little blog:
Gordon Ross said:
Back at the JREF forum we have R. Mackey providing a wealth of entertainment. He seems to assume that involvement in the discussion requires both a supercillious attitude and a modicum of relevant knowledge. This is not an unusual or unfounded assumption given the prevalence of these characteristics among the supporters of the official conspiracy theory, but although he has got the attitude off pat, he does fall down a little on the second stricture, the modicum of knowledge. According to him the towers' cores had no horizontal or diagonal bracing. Flying in the face of the available historical photographs of the build, and the videographic evidence of the collapse, R. Mackey maligns the ability and expertise of the original designers. This careful selection of some facts while ignoring others is not confined to this JREF contributor however, but rather seems to flow throughout the thinking of all the NIST cheerleaders.
This, more than anything else, proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that victory is secure:
- I do know what "supercilious" means, and I make no apologies. It's difficult to discuss charlatans, frauds, profiteers, and liars without disdain. Ad hominem attack noted and ignored. By the way, it's spelled with one L, Gordon.
- I said that the Towers had no bracing? Really? No. Look at my critiques, Gordon. You're lying.
- Where did you get that idea? Well, that's a mistake that TruthSeeker1234 made here, and I corrected several times. Again, I was reviewing your paper, Gordon, and I included no discussion about bracing because you didn't either. Apparently it's not relevant to this problem, or else you would have brought it up.
- Besides this strawman, Gordon, you haven't even addressed a single criticism in either of my critiques. There's some "careful selection of facts" for you.
Indeed, the only attempted refutation of my critiques to date hasn't come from Gordon, hasn't come from
TruthSeeker1234, but in fact came anonymously through
Abby Scott's 9/11 blog. And it was trivial to
dispatch.
Furthermore, this isn't the only paper of Gordon's that we destroyed here. He doesn't even mention his disastrous
seismic paper with Craig Furlong, wherein it turns out that the timing anomaly -- that he and Furlong considered proof of
bombs going off prior to the plane impacts -- was in fact nothing more than the two of them
reading the wrong time off of the seismic traces.
This is significant. What we've learned is this: To take on the very best leaders of the Truth Movement, we don't have to take to the streets, publish journal papers, or go to court -- even sparring here at the JREF is enough to bring down their house of cards. And they know it, too, because rather than publish themselves, Troothers like
Gordon Ross are reduced to
sniveling on their own websites.
Russell Pickering is resigned to argue his case here, because there's no sign of intelligent life at
Loose Change. And
TruthSeeker1234 visits anonymously, hanging on our every word, even after promising to never come back.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is a "movement" without teeth.
Victory is ours. All that remains now is to sort out the salvageable from the clinically insane.
to remind us the best ways to stay focused in our discussions with the new wave.