ZEITGEIST, The Movie

Ahhh failings in logic. It really needs to be taught more often.

Even if we take the absurdity of "Minorities are almost always in the right" as truth, being in a minority doesn't make you right. And being right doesn't make you in the minority.

More like "Minorities are in the right, when they are right. Majorities are in the right when they are right. Sometimes their paths cross."

Being a small band of idiots doesn't make you right just because you're in a small band.
I didn't state it as gospel though, just to make the point that the 'majority' are not always right. Is THAT allowed SMZ?
 
I actually registered there twice, once as CJOK, and then as LOUIS CYPHERE. Here is one of the 5 threads I startedhttp://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=423566

Does that make it easier for you to decide which pigeon-hole you are going to put me in? ;)
Absolutely. You were banned for sock puppetry.

To be specific, no, you didn't engage in any particularly trollish behavior. You were gently and unofficially admonished for a statement that sounded trollish once. Other than that, as far as I could see, moderator action included closing a thread in the wrong forum, a warning for a personal attack, and a request that you be patient and not bump your own threads.

But you're only allowed one account. Violation of that rule results in instant banning. You have no leg to stand on.
 
Ahhh failings in logic. It really needs to be taught more often.

Even if we take the absurdity of "Minorities are almost always in the right" as truth, being in a minority doesn't make you right. And being right doesn't make you in the minority.

More like "Minorities are in the right, when they are right. Majorities are in the right when they are right. Sometimes their paths cross."

Being a small band of idiots doesn't make you right just because you're in a small band.

Did someone say small band?...
 

Attachments

  • normal_New_Crew.jpg
    normal_New_Crew.jpg
    89.5 KB · Views: 7
That costs money. We've eliminated government and business as sources. Where is the funding coming from? $150 million by public subscription?Dave
Why not, it'd only cost you 50 cents each? You'd just have to find someone trustworthy enough to collect it!
 
Last edited:
Why not, it'd only cost you 50 cents each? You'd just have to find someone trustworthy enough to collect it!
So would my request for a search to find the elusive green unicorns of the Rockies, but most people with sense realize the concept of "everyone can chip in for complete wastes of time and money" doesn't fly in the real world.
 
Absolutely. You were banned for sock puppetry.

To be specific, no, you didn't engage in any particularly trollish behavior. You were gently and unofficially admonished for a statement that sounded trollish once. Other than that, as far as I could see, moderator action included closing a thread in the wrong forum, a warning for a personal attack, and a request that you be patient and not bump your own threads.

But you're only allowed one account. Violation of that rule results in instant banning. You have no leg to stand on.
I still think it's their loss, not mine!:cool:
 
Don't tell me you've all been waiting for me to reply? Well sorry to keep you in suspense. It's that NIST reports fault. I've been toiling through the OT'ers Bible for the last two days, and all I've gotten for my efforts is a major headache! Look, heating a specific length of metal to an estimated temperature, under circumstances that it's far too expensively prohibitive to recreate, doesn't sound all that thorough to me really, but hey, I'm just an average "Joe"! Now, the actual computer simulations that were done using undeniable variables such as structural integrity, aeroplane velocity, etc. would be interesting to view. Are they available for viewing by the public? Does anybody know the amount of repeat simulations NIST did, and what parameters were applied? If they were included in that report, I must have somehow overlooked them!
 
Last edited:
Absolutely. You were banned for sock puppetry.

To be specific, no, you didn't engage in any particularly trollish behavior. You were gently and unofficially admonished for a statement that sounded trollish once. Other than that, as far as I could see, moderator action included closing a thread in the wrong forum, a warning for a personal attack, and a request that you be patient and not bump your own threads.

But you're only allowed one account. Violation of that rule results in instant banning. You have no leg to stand on.

So what was I banned for with my first account, seeing as you seem to know so much? I couldn't have violated the 'multiple account' rule as CJOK, could I?

p.s. I've just looked up the meaning of 'sock puppetry', and fail to see how it applies.Do you mind retracting this meaningless accusation?
 
Last edited:
As is mentioned repeatedly, most conspiracies... even the ones that make great pains to prove they're not trying to implicate the firemen or cops, still must be based on every single person in government being completely without honor, and dishonest enough to willingly take part in the murder of thousands of their fellow countrymen.
Whatever gave you that idea? Have you never heard of "Attack Scenario 404?"
I don't know if that's the case but the odds seem pretty great.
Yes, and sometimes the long-shot comes in!
Conversely, a rudimentary look at the twoofers shows deceit, doublespeak, baseless accusations towards anyone who disagrees with them and a complete refusal to accept any science or unbiased review of their "facts" as anything other than being in on it.
I hope you are not including me with that motley crew?
 
no facts, perfect record for 9/11 truth continues

Whatever gave you that idea? Have you never heard of "Attack Scenario 404?"

Yes, and sometimes the long-shot comes in!

I hope you are not including me with that motley crew?
When will you ever post a fact on 9/11?
 
sock puppetry here on this forum, refers to the act of utilizing more than one account on a forum simultaneously, or after being banned on one account, joining the same forum with a different account.

TAM:)
 
sock puppetry here on this forum, refers to the act of utilizing more than one account on a forum simultaneously, or after being banned on one account, joining the same forum with a different account.

TAM:)
Did you find out why I was banned the first time though?
 
it doesnt matter why you were banned. Anyone who is banned, and then re-registers again, is by the definition we use here, a sock puppet.

TAM:)
 
Now, the actual computer simulations that were done using undeniable variables such as structural integrity, aeroplane velocity, etc. would be interesting to view. Are they available for viewing by the public? Does anybody know the amount of repeat simulations NIST did, and what parameters were applied? If they were included in that report, I must have somehow overlooked them!
You don't seem to be very forthcoming with information for this query. Is my ignorance so shameful that no-one deems it worth replying to, OR is this business regarding the 'sock puppetry' merely a diversionary tactic? In my opinion, most of the sophistry employed by the "OT'ers" on this forum, smacks of Bacon's quote,"For what a man would like to be true, that he more readily believes"
 
Last edited:
Can't... breathe... Too... much... irony...
Oh, so do you think I WANT to believe it's "possible" that a group of monsters masquerading as human-beings are plotting to **** all our lives up while we are tapping away on our keyboards? And it's not necessarily the big, bad bogeyman 'al Quaida'! Now, who's the deluded one again? ;)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom