The motto should be changed to "more ignorance"!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I follow a philosophical route when it comes to being "100 percent right"

I am only fully sure of my own consciousness. Nothing else.

So the wtc 7 video is a fake? It did not fall very quickly?

I'm not supposing the wtc 7 video has to be true. I'm open to variations such as conspiracy nuts posting a fast forwarded video, or manipulating it in another way. I'm open to these things.

Just saying, if it is a real video, those who think debris from another tower can take it down in that manner.. Need a long lesson in math, physics, demolition, and engineering. Because all of those topics will tell you that debris from the sky will not free fall all four corners of a building straight down.

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I follow a philosophical route when it comes to being "100 percent right"

I am only fully sure of my own consciousness. Nothing else.

So the wtc 7 video is a fake? It did not fall very quickly?

I'm not supposing the wtc 7 video has to be true. I'm open to variations such as conspiracy nuts posting a fast forwarded video, or manipulating it in another way. I'm open to these things.

Just saying, if it is a real video, those who think debris from another tower can take it down in that manner.. Need a long lesson in math, physics, demolition, and engineering. Because all of those topics will tell you that debris from the sky will not free fall all four corners of a building straight down.

This isn't a 9/11 discussion thread, so I really don't want to break down all your truther arguments. However, you saying these people need to relearn math, physics, demolition, and engineering isn't true. All of those fields agree with what I am saying. A popular link that truthers like to link is the link to the site with all the engineers who disagree with the 9/11 truth movement. The first problem with that link is that any engineer can join it, not just structural engineers. The second problem is that there are THOUSANDS more engineers who disagree with them. Presenting that link is a misuse of statistics. It is taking a number that looks large and trying to say, "see I have a large number, I'm right." Except you can't display a number like that without context.

Though, I am willing to consider that you are willing to learn. If you REALLY want to deny ignorance. Go to Google and think of your favorite truther argument (say the building 7 argument) and do a Google search with the word "debunked" in the search phrase. Then read the various pages that go over why that argument doesn't hold water, along with the math and science involved. Make sure you read it with an open mind too. In other words, read it while considering it may be true. Don't read it while already assuming it is false. Once you are done, move onto the next truther argument and do it again. Once you have exhausted all the truther arguments that you are aware of, if you STILL believe in the 9/11 conspiracy you will at least be intellectually honest about it. Though, I think it is unlikely that you'd still believe in the conspiracy after reading all of that.

One more thing about this exercise. DO NOT click on a single truther website to get your information. Those websites are biased towards the truther movement, so they are likely to not have researched their claims fully or are misrepresenting facts as strawmans. You HAVE to go to the source to get the real meat and potatoes of the opposing argument. Keep in mind that you don't have to come away believing the official story after this exercise. You can still totally believe in the truther movement (though I find that unlikely because there is much evidence exposing the truther movement as frauds that if you were to read honestly, you'd realize that as well) when you are done.

Until you have completed this exercise, I cannot call you someone looking to deny ignorance; you are just a sheep that is part of someone else's flock.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Looking things up, I am open to both sides still and will research further. Both sides have their own arguments, and excuses - like BBC broadcasting earlier than something happened can be attributed to it being known what was coming - but should I assume that's true? Also, the conspiracy side just misrepresent some things, or shorten videos based on their message and such - but should I say one lie is just linked to a Web of lies and that's all? Further reading might give me a better a idea.

In my honest opinion, though, the only way to one hundred percent make sure that we know what we say and share is true, is to only share about things we were involved in. I am human, you are human - and being such, I'll likely always have the opinion that we are wrong about something, and that we might share that wrong with others.

a reply to: deadlyhope

There is no reason to be 100% sure about anything. Believe the account with the most evidence for it. Occam's Razor states that the explanation with the least amount of assumptions is likely the truth. Any claim that doesn't have evidence backing it up is an assumption.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Good way to put it.