Re investigate 911?

[Graham S1]

ok. so the onus is not on any particular citizen to "prove" any particular thing about 911. No one really "owns" any particular theory, all the info has grown from a point, some truths, some half truths, and some out and out lies. I have my own opinions on which is which.

The fact is it is easily proven the the "Official Story" is a lie. And that a proper, public enquiry needs to be done, instead of a forced comission, on a limited budget, with limited evidence.

a] Yes, the official story is correct and all foriegn policy based on that day is right.

b] No, we have been told a pack of lies, and the wrong people have been blamed.

edit. can a mod please make this a poll. "yes" or "no" for options. many thanks.

 

[rwguinn]

ok. so the onus is not on any particular citizen to "prove" any particular thing about 911. No one really "owns" any particular theory, all the info has grown from a point, some truths, some half truths, and some out and out lies. I have my own opinions on which is which.

The fact is it is easily proven the the "Official Story" is a lie. And that a proper, public enquiry needs to be done, instead of a forced comission, on a limited budget, with limited evidence.

a] Yes, the official story is correct and all foriegn policy based on that day is right.

b] No, we have been told a pack of lies, and the wrong people have been blamed.

here is the answer to his biggest problem

Please, please Ignore the Trolls.

 

[Ashles]

Here we go again.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

ok. so the onus is not on any particular citizen to "prove" any particular thing about 911. No one really "owns" any particular theory, all the info has grown from a point, some truths, some half truths, and some out and out lies. I have my own opinions on which is which.

The fact is it is easily proven the the "Official Story" is a lie. And that a proper, public enquiry needs to be done, instead of a forced comission, on a limited budget, with limited evidence.

Not so easy that anyone has ever done it, apparently. The "Official Story" makes a whole lot more sense thatn any of the conspiracy theories I have ever heard.

a] Yes, the official story is correct and all foriegn policy based on that day is right.

b] No, we have been told a pack of lies, and the wrong people have been blamed.

False Dichotomy. There exist many, many more possibilities than those two.

 

[Graham S1]

round and round.

yes or no. simple enough question.

 

[senorpogo]

The fact is

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

The Princess Bride forever!

 

[strathmeyer]

The fact is it is easily proven the the "Official Story" is a lie.

If it's easily proven, then how come nobody has done it?

 

[bob_kark]

If it is easily proven, please provide us with evidence.

 

[DavidJames]

You've been asked in this thread to provide evidence for your claims. Are you going to respond or continue to post and ignore the reqeusts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53102&page=14

 

[Nyarlathotep]

round and round.

yes or no. simple enough question.

No not a simple yes or no. It is possible that the official story is right but the subsequent foriegn policy is wrong, or that the story is alie but the right people were blamed. Or that the story is correct but parts have been omitted (intentionally or simply due to not being known), etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.....

 

[Ashles]

round and round.

yes or no. simple enough question.

GrahamS1 -
Yes you are a liar
or
No you are a pervert?

Yes or no?
It's a simple enough question.

 

[rwguinn]

Oh well

 

[Kochanski]

Ok, where is the bridge we have a troll to stick under it.

 

[GrnMtSkeptic]

View attachment 1538Oh well

Is that Alek's second shooter?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Allow me to reiterate my point from another thread

If we were to examine this situation using the scientific process then the official explaination has to be viewed as the current paradigm. You are proposing that that theory is incorrect and are putting forth a competing theory. The burdon of proof is upon you to show that the current theory is wrong. The onus on us is to critically examine and confirm, or disprove, the claims put forth in your competing theory. And, from a debating standpoint, to confirm or disprove your claims of failures in the currently accepted theory.

Your call for a poll on the subject does not lend credibility to either viewpoint, it merely calls for a vote of opinion.

 

[ChristineR]

Let the guy state his case. Graham, you might start by defining "the official story."

As for the foreign policy, it does not seem to me to be based on the official story. The official story does not have Sadaam Hussein masterminding the hijackings, for instance. Please clarify the relationship between foreign policy and what may or may not have happened.

Could you also please clarify what lies you are talking about? For example, I think it's pretty darn clear that four airplanes crashed that day, but apparently you think the pentagon crash was faked? That would be pretty hard to do, with all the people in the general area.

 

[rwguinn]

as posted elsewhere, peer revied analysis and explantation:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

 

[Ducky]

ok. so the onus is not on any particular citizen to "prove" any particular thing about 911. No one really "owns" any particular theory, all the info has grown from a point, some truths, some half truths, and some out and out lies. I have my own opinions on which is which.

The fact is it is easily proven the the "Official Story" is a lie. And that a proper, public enquiry needs to be done, instead of a forced comission, on a limited budget, with limited evidence.

a] Yes, the official story is correct and all foriegn policy based on that day is right.

b] No, we have been told a pack of lies, and the wrong people have been blamed.

edit. can a mod please make this a poll. "yes" or "no" for options. many thanks.

False Dichotomy.

Please read up on your logical fallacies. You can find them here.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

False Dichotomy.

Please read up on your logical fallacies. You can find them here.

I also find these sources useful:
http://www.daltonator.net/durandal/creationism/fallacies.shtml
http://www.galilean-library.org/int16.html
http://www.math.toronto.edu/mathnet/falseProofs/fallacies.html and
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

 

[strathmeyer]

Oh well

It's obvious that isn't a real kitten. It's a puppet or stuffed animal. Real kittens would never hurt anyone.

I mean, look at how cute they all. We all know that evolution is bunk and the Flying Spaghetti Monster intelligently designed everything so that cute things were nice and soft and cuddly, not cold bludded killers. Just look at my proof:

WHAT MORE PROOF DO YOU IDIOTS NEED?