The TruthSeeker1234 $1000.00 Challenge

[Calcas]

Will you accept a prescription from your doctor without him first explaining how the viruses multiply on a cellular level? Or do you accept the word of experts on the subject and trust the medication will work? Do you make him show you photographs first, to explain it to you in laymen terms?

See, any lay explanation of the official story will sound like this:

"Virtually all experts in the field, including private ones with no attachment to the federal government or George Bush, agree that planes and fires could and did cause the towers to collapse, and I agree that they have the expertise to make that judgment."

We have to be willing to accept the words of experts or else resign ourselves to know nothing. There are not enough years in a human life to become an expert in every subject. If you therefore refuse to ever take what 99% of experts on a subject are saying as truth, then you cannot accept even the most basic principles on which society functions.

After all, how do we know the sun is 93 million miles away? Have we measured it ourselves? How do we know how far it is to Tokyo? Have we gone out with a ruler and walked off the distance?

No. For everything we know, we rely on experts. Education itself is nothing but an absorption of what other experts have learned. To say you refuse expert testimony because it is from experts and thus relying on language and data too complex for you to understand is expressing an active devotion to ignorance that can never be broken.

Damn good post.

Not just here, but in life.

 

[Alareth]

I have a new proposition. Lets just AmyWilson him. I've got some great new recipies I'd like to share.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Three sentences is not enough. You have presented no evidence and no logic, just three assertions. It would thus be trivial to destroy your non-argument, but as such would not make for an informative or entertaining exercise.

Plus, you have declined to debate. You cannot debate and not debate at the same time.

The goal is a book-length debate, about 100 pages, 50/50. It is not a debate with all of you. It is a debate with one of you. Thusfar no one has come forward.

Get over to Chipmunk Stew's thread and get to debating, coward.

 

[David Wong]

So TS1234 is just dominating this section of the forums, right? I count six threds on the front page either started by him or about him or his debate or his refusal to debate.

What sucks is that those threads aren't being driven by his wealth of information or by the evolution of the Truth movement itself and its changing theories, but rather by his simple relentless re-statement of his position over and over and over. "I don't believe the official story. I don't believe the official story. I don't believe the official story."

It keeps getting re-packaged over and over again but it doesn't seem like the TS1234 vs. JREF debate has moved even one inch since he turned up.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

David Wong made an analogy

Will you accept a prescription from your doctor without him first explaining how the viruses multiply on a cellular level? Or do you accept the word of experts on the subject and trust the medication will work? Do you make him show you photographs first, to explain it to you in laymen terms?

Here is a far more apt analogy involving doctors and bacteria.

3 men are found dead with what appear to be entry and exit bullet wounds to the chest. There is a straight line path of internal damage from one wound to the other in each case.

Official investigators find that all three men died of flesh-eating bacteria, and various theories are put forth to explain how flesh eating bacteria could imitate gun shot wounds. This had never before happened in all of medical history, and now it has happened three times in one day. Great volumes of official material are published showing how bacteria act at the cellular level. The majority of doctors agree with the official story.

The official investigations are closed with no attempt to look for any bullets.

It is noticed that one man was the life insurance beneficiary of all three dead men. He also owns a gun whose caliber is consistent with the wounds. He is also the district attorney who was in charge of the investigation.

Some doctors come forward and say that no, in fact, these deaths are just what they appear to be, that is gunshot wounds. One doctor is able to examine the body, and finds gunpowder residue on the skin. Quickly, he is put on paid leave.

Now, in that situation, YOU may choose to accept the official story, but I don't. I think the D.A. shot the three men and covered it up. There is a point where my reason overwhelms my desire to trust experts.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

So TS1234 is just dominating this section of the forums, right? I count six threds on the front page either started by him or about him or his debate or his refusal to debate.

My refusal to debate? I'm so anxious to debate anyone willing to defend the official story I'm willing to PAY for it. The problem is nobody is willing or able to put forth a credible postive case. Everyone here seems to believe the official story, but no one really seems to know what it is.

A few seem to have the science chops to lay it out there - Kent, Mackey, Gravy, but are having fun loudmouthing me instead of laying the theory out there.

David Wong, would you like to debate me according to my challenge?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Arkan said

Get over to Chipmunk Stew's thread and get to debating, coward.

ChipmunkStew provided nothing. No evidence. No reasoning. Nothing. I have clarified the terms of the debate challenge, and if anyone is able to meet the challenge, then it will proceed.

 

[chran]

Butter Cookies

INGREDIENTS (Makes 2-3 dozen cookies))
1/2 cup unsalted butter, at room temperature
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1 1/2 cup white flour
1 large egg
1 tsp vanilla extract
1 1/2 tsp baking powder

PROCEDURE
(1) Beat the butter with the sugar.

(2) Add the egg and vanilla and beat until you get a
uniform mixture.

(3) Mix the flour and baking powder and gradually
blend them into the mixture. When you're done,
you should have a rather sticky dough.

(4) Shape the dough into balls, about 1 inch in diame-
ter. Roll them in sugar and place them on an
ungreased cookie sheet, leaving about an inch of
space between cookies, so that they don't stick
together when they expand.

(5) Bake in preheated oven at 350 deg. F for 20
minutes.

(6) Remove from oven, let them cool for a while, and
start eating right away.

(http://www.masterstech-home.com/the_kitchen/Recipes/Cookie_Recipes/ButterCookies.html)

 

[Loss Leader]

Here is a far more apt analogy involving doctors and bacteria.

OK, I'm with you for this teacup ride.

3 men are found dead with what appear to be entry and exit bullet wounds to the chest. There is a straight line path of internal damage from one wound to the other in each case.

Official investigators find that all three men died of flesh-eating bacteria, and various theories are put forth to explain how flesh eating bacteria could imitate gun shot wounds.

Great analogy. Except if the men are the World Trade Center, the bullets are the planes. So your analogy is backwards. The official (or "real") story is the same as the apparant cause - plane crashes. In your analogy, the official story is the opposite of the apparant cause.

This had never before happened in all of medical history, and now it has happened three times in one day.

Once again, your analogy is backwards. 767s have never hit 110-story skyscrapers built on a central core concept before. It would be as if, in your analogy, no one had ever been shot before. So nobody knows how a building might react to being hit with a jetliner.

In contrast, buildings have been controlled demo-ed before. People know how it is done, what it looks like, and how such a controlled demolition would behave.

So the CT-ists are the doctors scrambling to explain how bacteria can resemble bullet wounds, not the other way around.

[n.b. Man, you're dumb.]

The official investigations are closed with no attempt to look for any bullets.

Except, in the real world, thousands of people saw the first bullet and millions saw the second. We also know the names and addresses of all of the people riding the bullets. We have radar information about the speed and trajectory of the bullets. We heard the bullet hijackers talking about their plans on an open frequency. And, afterwards, the guy who hired the shooters got on TV and admitted it.

It is noticed that one man was the life insurance beneficiary of all three dead men.

No insured or insurance agency made money from the events of 9/11. They all lost millions per for a total of billions.

He also owns a gun whose caliber is consistent with the wounds.

American and United Airlines, owners of the guns that shot the bullets, agree that this was the work of 19 terrorists. If, by "he," you mean the insured, Larry Silverstein does not own American or United.

He is also the district attorney who was in charge of the investigation.

Actually, many of the people in charge of the investigation were DEMOCRATS. They hate George Bush. One of them ran for President against him and almost won. If they had any evidence of foul play, they would have been able to sweep the White House, both houses of Congress, and probably the three seats open on the Edina, Missouri sanitation commission.

Some doctors come forward and say that no, in fact, these deaths are just what they appear to be, that is gunshot wounds.

Your analogy would be correct if instead of "doctors," you said "guys educated in completely different areas operating way, way outside their fields."

One doctor is able to examine the body, and finds gunpowder residue on the skin. Quickly, he is put on paid leave.

Lord, I wish someone would pay you to leave.

Now, in that situation, YOU may choose to accept the official story, but I don't. I think the D.A. shot the three men and covered it up. There is a point where my reason overwhelms my desire to trust experts.

Actually, that's not reason. It's suspicion. And it's unfounded suspicion. So, um, good luck being nuts.

 

[Bell]

INGREDIENTS (Makes 2-3 dozen cookies))
1/2 cup unsalted butter, at room temperature
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1 1/2 cup white flour
1 large egg
1 tsp vanilla extract
1 1/2 tsp baking powder

PROCEDURE
(1) Beat the butter with the sugar.

(2) Add the egg and vanilla and beat until you get a
uniform mixture.

(3) Mix the flour and baking powder and gradually
blend them into the mixture. When you're done,
you should have a rather sticky dough.

(4) Shape the dough into balls, about 1 inch in diame-
ter. Roll them in sugar and place them on an
ungreased cookie sheet, leaving about an inch of
space between cookies, so that they don't stick
together when they expand.

(5) Bake in preheated oven at 350 deg. F for 20
minutes.

(6) Remove from oven, let them cool for a while, and
start eating right away.

(http://www.masterstech-home.com/the_kitchen/Recipes/Cookie_Recipes/ButterCookies.html)

Shouldn't you have warned to use kitchen mittens when taking the cookies out of the oven? We don't want people to burn their fingers, now do we?

 

[chran]

Shouldn't you have warned to use kitchen mittens when taking the cookies out of the oven? We don't want people to burn their fingers, now do we?

Ssssh! It's teh conspiracy!

 

[Gravy]

My refusal to debate? I'm so anxious to debate anyone willing to defend the official story I'm willing to PAY for it. The problem is nobody is willing or able to put forth a credible postive case.

Then why is it you were unable to defend your claims with facts or answer simple questions about them in the weeks leading up to your "challenge," genius?

Have you not noticed that we've been trying to debate with you since your first post here, but that you change the subject or start a new thread every time the questions get too tough?

Two more simple questions that will be ignored by TS.

 

[Abbyas]

3 men are found dead with what appear to be entry and exit bullet wounds to the chest. There is a straight line path of internal damage from one wound to the other in each case.

Official investigators find that all three men died of flesh-eating bacteria, and various theories are put forth to explain how flesh eating bacteria could imitate gun shot wounds.

Wait, the truth movement is Quincy, now?

 

[R.Mackey]

A few seem to have the science chops to lay it out there - Kent, Mackey, Gravy, but are having fun loudmouthing me instead of laying the theory out there.

Loudmouthing you?

This is the thanks I get for writing a two page answer to a basic structural mechanics question that you asked?

Even aside from breaking every promise, bending every rule, and now demanding someone co-author a book for you for under a nickel a word -- you act like that, and wonder why nobody will "debate" you? Maybe it's your attitude.

 

[LashL]

For the third time,

OK. Rebuttal of LashL.

LashL has offered no explanation, no evidence no recounting of events, no indication that he even knows what the subject is. He has offered none of his own words.

As evidence, he has offered a single link to a government homepage. Please see the following Exciehomepage, please read every linked article, and every article linked within every linked article.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/

Clearly everything cited in the NIST report has been shown to be either false or irrelevant. Furthermore, the most interesting observations were not accounted for at all. Thus NIST is in gross violation of the scientific method, which requires that all relevant observations and data are accounted for.

THus we must reject LashL. QED.

When there is nothing to refute, it does not satisfy the terms. You guys know what I want, your'e being silly.

My response:

Excuse me, but please provide a link to the post of mine that you purport to be refuting.

You claim to be quoting or citing me but you have not linked to or quoted my post and I do not know what post you're talking about. I suspect that, though, given your history, that if it exists, you have taken it entirely out of context.

You have shown yourself to be a fraud and a liar repeatedly. I suspect that you're just doing the same tap dance that you do whenever you find yourself in a corner and when you hope that your tinhat friends won't notice how badly you're representing them here.

But, back to the main point. Please post a link to the post of mine that you are purporting to rebut. I have no idea what post you're talking about.

And for future reference, here's a Message Board 101 hint: any time you are purporting to 'rebut' someone's post, you should actually cite it.

Once again,
Please provide a link to the post of mine that you are purporting to rebut.

And after you do that, don't forget that the debate you asked for, nigh begged for, is still waiting for you:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65027

You still have not responded to point out what post of mine you purport to be rebutting.

I'm still waiting.

Either provide evidence to support your claim or retract it.

 

[LashL]

OK, I'm with you for this teacup ride.



Great analogy. Except if the men are the World Trade Center, the bullets are the planes. So your analogy is backwards. The official (or "real") story is the same as the apparant cause - plane crashes. In your analogy, the official story is the opposite of the apparant cause.



Once again, your analogy is backwards. 767s have never hit 110-story skyscrapers built on a central core concept before. It would be as if, in your analogy, no one had ever been shot before. So nobody knows how a building might react to being hit with a jetliner.

In contrast, buildings have been controlled demo-ed before. People know how it is done, what it looks like, and how such a controlled demolition would behave.

So the CT-ists are the doctors scrambling to explain how bacteria can resemble bullet wounds, not the other way around.

[n.b. Man, you're dumb.]



Except, in the real world, thousands of people saw the first bullet and millions saw the second. We also know the names and addresses of all of the people riding the bullets. We have radar information about the speed and trajectory of the bullets. We heard the bullet hijackers talking about their plans on an open frequency. And, afterwards, the guy who hired the shooters got on TV and admitted it.



No insured or insurance agency made money from the events of 9/11. They all lost millions per for a total of billions.



American and United Airlines, owners of the guns that shot the bullets, agree that this was the work of 19 terrorists. If, by "he," you mean the insured, Larry Silverstein does not own American or United.



Actually, many of the people in charge of the investigation were DEMOCRATS. They hate George Bush. One of them ran for President against him and almost won. If they had any evidence of foul play, they would have been able to sweep the White House, both houses of Congress, and probably the three seats open on the Edina, Missouri sanitation commission.



Your analogy would be correct if instead of "doctors," you said "guys educated in completely different areas operating way, way outside their fields."



Lord, I wish someone would pay you to leave.



Actually, that's not reason. It's suspicion. And it's unfounded suspicion. So, um, good luck being nuts.

Quite right on all counts, LossLeader. I was about to respond to his inapt analogy but you beat me to it.

"Truthseeker" is sounding more like "petgoat" from DU all the time. Goatboy has a real penchant for using ridiculous analogies such as this. They always seem to involve murders and autopsies (and often his grandmother).

In fact, goatboy used one very similar to the one posted above by troofyboy and was quickly excoriated by a skeptic who pointed out how non-analagous his analogy was, and who pointed out the obvious that goatboy missed. It was hilarious.

The one above looks like a reworked version of the goatboy analogy that humiliated him, and it looks like troofyboy thought he'd corrected it sufficiently to avoid being humiliated on yet another wholly inapt analogy.

He was wrong.

 

[Stellafane]

David Wong made an analogy
Here is a far more apt analogy involving doctors and bacteria.

3 men are found dead with what appear to be entry and exit bullet wounds to the chest. There is a straight line path of internal damage from one wound to the other in each case.

Official investigators find that all three men died of flesh-eating bacteria, and various theories are put forth to explain how flesh eating bacteria could imitate gun shot wounds. This had never before happened in all of medical history, and now it has happened three times in one day. Great volumes of official material are published showing how bacteria act at the cellular level. The majority of doctors agree with the official story.

The official investigations are closed with no attempt to look for any bullets.

It is noticed that one man was the life insurance beneficiary of all three dead men. He also owns a gun whose caliber is consistent with the wounds. He is also the district attorney who was in charge of the investigation.

Some doctors come forward and say that no, in fact, these deaths are just what they appear to be, that is gunshot wounds. One doctor is able to examine the body, and finds gunpowder residue on the skin. Quickly, he is put on paid leave.

Now, in that situation, YOU may choose to accept the official story, but I don't. I think the D.A. shot the three men and covered it up. There is a point where my reason overwhelms my desire to trust experts.

If applying this "analogy" to the events of 9/11 makes the slightest bit of sense to you, then I have no choice but to conclude that you're seriously delusional.

 

[Darat]

Following on from TruthSeeker1234's breach of my warning regarding using the JREF Forum to further his/her commercial interests she/he has been suspended for 7 days. I am also closing this thread. To re-iterate my previous warning:

The JREF Forum is not an appropriate forum for discussing any potential commercial enterprise or soliciting support for such an enterprise.

As Forum Admin let me make it clear that any suggestion of payment for participating in a thread is not acceptable. Unless otherwise agreed in advance with the Moderating Team there are no exclusions on who can or cannot participate in any particular debate.
​

I am also closing this thread as it would seem to be that she/he was also using this thread to continue to solicit for his/her commercial venture.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat