Typical Dialogue: JREF'er vs Truther

reply to post by Conspiriology



Now-THAT was FUNNY!
I love it.........i would love to see the look on his face when that punch
line there was delivered and completely sunk in....

classic!
thank-you.....i can't wait to share that one with my dad - that is like his favorite type humor


TextText

Originally posted by jprophet420
Ah but now you are using fuzzy logic. The function of a 1/2in drill bit is to drill a 1/2 inch hole.

You are speculating on what will be done with the hole.

Typical truther.
/sarcasm
I think you get the point however.

I never said ANYWHERE what will be done with the hole. You are answering a logical fallacy that was never introduced anywhere in that illustration moreover THE only thing ANYONE speculates is that the DRILLBIT will be used to MAKE a half inch hole.

Typical skeptic debunker, thinks they know everything until someone like me who is too smart to think we know everything,

shows those who think they know everything, that,

they don't.

- Con

[edit on 17-1-2008 by Conspiriology]

I didn't understand the analogy at first but now that I do, I love it. It's like saying someone who ate a sandwich didn't just want a sandwich- they ultimately wanted to end their hunger pangs.

If we confine ourselves to a box, yes- the people wanted drill bits. When we think outside the box, we see they only wanted them as a end to the means- holes.

Good one! It's not always black and white.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

My God what does it take? OK, so the guy could have used a better analogy, but the one he did fits the purpose well. The INTENT is what we are talking about, the initial desire. The TOOL used to accomplish that desired goal is another issue. But the point is this:

The Randi bunch are a pathetic band of losers that try to debunk anything and everything...except the debunkable; that they avoid like the plauge or give such ridiculously outrageous excuses for that only a drone and dullard, intellectually speaking, would believe it.

Randi denies the existence of any other dimension except this one, the one he can see and smell and taste and feel. He is limited to the things he can see himself doing, and anything beyond that is verboten territory and they start insulting and totally changing the subject when they hit the wall.

I ignore them totally, as that is what they deserve; as long as we discuss them and give them any credence at all in the media we feed the machine of lies. Randi is a waste of time, at his best. At worst, he is a disinfo agent and tends to keep people looking downward rather than upward..if you follow.

reply to post by eyewitness86


Wow.. eyewitness.... why don't you head over there and take the million dollars he is offering.

At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

www.randi.org...


Those that don't appreciate the members at the JREF forum are usually not able to think critically. I for one use that site for links to factual data. The "conspiracy" forum is made up of many professionals including doctors, scientists, Engineers, chemists, etc. For the most part, their credentials have been verified by staff at the forum. I have noticed that they are rude to "truthers" that start threads without providing evidence.

The search option there is prett good and allows you to access a ton of TRUE information.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by eyewitness86

 

Wow.. eyewitness.... why don't you head over there and take the million dollars he is offering.

At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

www.randi.org...

Oh, brother, is that a sucker bet worded the way it is. There was nothing "......paranormal, supernatural, or occult power...." occurring on 9/11/2001.

Nothing occurred by any means that was not already physically researched and developed to sophistication since the 1950s. The theories were around long before the 1950s, including Tesla's and Einstein's already proved theories on anti-gravitation, anti-matter, and electromagnetic engery all proved by human designed machines.

I saw the initial post as an excellent analogy of what goes on in these forums all over the Internet. To some people, critical thinking comes naturally. To others, it does not.

Oh, brother, is that a sucker bet worded the way it is. There was nothing "......paranormal, supernatural, or occult power...." occurring on 9/11/2001.

Orion...no one said there was. I was replying to Eyewitnesses statement where he said this:

Randi denies the existence of any other dimension except this one, the one he can see and smell and taste and feel. He is limited to the things he can see himself doing, and anything beyond that is verboten territory and they start insulting and totally changing the subject when they hit the wall.

So far, not one person has even passed the preliminary testing.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
So far, not one person has even passed the preliminary testing.

My questions.

What constitutes paranormal?

And who gets to judge?

Going from the hypothetical to the real....

Vote for your favorite actual 9/11 Truther comment of 2007:

forums.randi.org...

I appreciate the post and your illustrative example.

You've always been a reasonable guy (making an assumption there, apologies if I am wrong) and I see what you are saying.

If you combine my opinion with $1 you have a cup of coffee. Having said that, here it is =) :

I don't see the Jref guys as being rude for rudeness sake. They don't tolerate what they see as nonsense. ATS's 'play nice' rules give a voice to everyone, no matter how...........stretched that voice may be. Nothing wrong with that. We have our rules; they have theirs.

If you come at the Jref'ers with weak sauce, you're gonna get slammed and made fun of. Personally, I don't think this is 'bad', per se. If you (the royal you, not literally you) want to be taken seriously, be serious.

I see a lot of the complaining directed at Jref as the equivalent of taking your big, red ball and going home because you don't like the referees. I also think they are quite effective. To me, this is evidenced of the number of attacks the member base seems to 'enjoy' over here. You wouldn't waste time slamming them here, if you thought you would have a leg to stand on there. Nor, would you seek to ridicule them personally if they weren't striking some cord within you. Again, the royal you.

Like I said, I totally get the point of your post and see what your saying. To my eyes, I see people getting positively slammed over there, then coming back here and recasting what happened in the most favorable light and looking for validation among friends.

The difference is, ATS (to it's detriment) entertains anything no matter how absurd. Here, truthers are given a forum that encourages them to postulate, speculate and convince themselves of facts that aren't there. Over there, they tolerate none of that.

My last point is this: truthers are loosing in the court of public opinion.

Proof? This thread.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

So far, not one person has even passed the preliminary testing.

Exactly what preliminary testing was that?

I have noted none of your opposition side go off into the paranormal concerning 9/11/2001. If you think differently, which thesis/theses went off in that direction? Are you certain there is not a reality reason someone is theorizing using information you might believe to be paranormal, but in reality is not?

Originally posted by jthomas
Going from the hypothetical to the real....

Vote for your favorite actual 9/11 Truther comment of 2007:

forums.randi.org...

I'm going to make a list of "debunker" comments for 2008. Anyone who has any already, please let me know. I can garantee that there will be more fallacies than in that list.

Originally posted by Conspiriology
How does one drill a hole in desire? Is desire a gas liquid or solid?

and you out of hand disregard the possibility it could be plasma? tisk tisk

truther: As soon as I saw those building fall I knew it was COntrolled demolitions but I wasnt sure so I researched it and I removed all doubt.

DEbunker Response:



Truther: I am not an idiot and cannot be convinced to believe really stupid explanations for the most obvious.


Debunker:



lol...jk.

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar


I appreciate the post and your illustrative example.

If you combine my opinion with $1 you have a cup of coffee. Having said that, here it is =) :Like I said, I totally get the point of your post and see what your saying. To my eyes, I see people getting positively slammed over there, then coming back here and recasting what happened in the most favorable light and looking for validation among friends.

The difference is, ATS (to it's detriment) entertains anything no matter how absurd. Here, truthers are given a forum that encourages them to postulate, speculate and convince themselves of facts that aren't there. Over there, they tolerate none of that.

My last point is this: truthers are loosing in the court of public opinion.

Proof? This thread.

*Ouch!* lol

You've always been a reasonable guy (making an assumption there, apologies if I am wrong) and I see what you are saying.

I've been a conservative Republican all my life, I am college educated and a 6 year U.S. Navy Veteran having served on the U.S.S Saratoga CV-60 Forrestal class, carrier task force 6th fleet, Nucleus Fire Party and worked extensively with UDT (before they were merged with S.E.A.L.'s) I know what jet fuel (JP-5) is and used to have to tolerate the taste of it in our drinking water much of the time I was aboard ship. I know what it is to fight fires using aqueous film forming foam after a Jet plane crashes into steel bulkheads with ordnance on its wings. I have been around the world twice and although I was born at night, it wasn't last night and I didn't come down on the last drop of rain. Albeit true, that doesn't make me an expert about 911 nor does it make me a debunker of any sort but it does give me a perspective frame of experiential referance I will not ignore.

I make no assertions as to how the towers fell, moreover I have not had that many debates in that regard but have posted several thoughts here and there. I have been a skeptic and debunked a few outrageous assertions made about 911 on this forum and have also been an advocate for a new forensic investigation when I thougt one was still technically feasible. The example I gave in the OP is not one I personally share in regard to the opinions of either the truther or the debunker and I resist being pigeon holed into such a label.

I was merely illustrating how we language ourselves into a lack of deeper understanding where one side transliterates data while another translates it with the key phrase in the OP being "what they REALLY wanted" underscore "REALLY" . I had even gone as far as making a disclaimer that in fact this was not to be taken seriously. Again I see translations in interpreting my intent to avoid any incriminations seem to be overlooked much like the many truthers central messages are at Jref.

My last point is this: truthers are loosing in the court of public opinion.

Mmmm That all depends on which poll you are looking at and frankly,, I had a hell of a time finding one to corroborate that.

Scientific Poll: 84% Say 9/11 Is A Cover Up

Zogby Poll: Over 70 Million American Adults Support New 9/11 ...2006

ZOGBY POLL: Official Release - 92% of Americans ...2008

36 percent believe feds conspired in 9/11 : National-World ...

42 percent of US citizens doubtful about official

Scientific Poll: 84% Say 9/11 Is A Cover Up

www.google.com...

Even when I tried searches where I framed the question in favor of your supposition www.google.com... h

Now for the reason I left Jref forum never to return, having been a member there for years about the time Jay Howard started a thread called "metatheory" if memory serves, I had been getting pvt messages where I was accepted into a clique of sorts. I was given quite a lengthy explanation regarding the "civic" duty debunkers had in ending the fallacious conspiracy theories of truthers with a very well thought out plan. The objective? To "attack truthers credibility with extreme prejudice" and to accelerate this agenda, was given a list of forums along with some example starting threads and additional posts.

After reading the information I realized what they were asking me to do is start memberships at various forums, then start these embellished therums or to be more specific, to start these absolutely, utter ridiculous threads and posts, posing a truther. each week we were to be given another list. They would be easy to keep up with as the number mounted because they were so easily debunked was their logic.

I forwarded my message to several of the mods hoping to stop what I saw as down right repugnant. Of those mods I forwarded too, only one responded saying what people do outside Jref is not their business with a off the record warning that I would be wise not to post the messages or most likely would be banned and that I should appreciate the "heads up" on that if I valued my membership.

Value it? It made me sick. I mentioned this to "Gravy" and "Beachnut" right after being sent the mssages as those two names were in the clique.

The response by both was a patent beachnut and gravy full force flaming reprisal where my post was deleted. I posted it again and again, it was deleted.

I never mention this to people much because I have no proof but I am telling YOU this because it is MY reason for coming here to ATS.

It is also my reason I have NO respect for Jref forum and have a prejudice not for skeptics but for jref debunkers. I know this (ATS) forum was one of their biggest targets also.

I had not been to this thread in quite a while and was surprised to see so many new posts. I was also not surprised by the removal of what seemed ( as I didn't get to read them) to have been the vitriolic comments of debunkers whose angst aggression has been dealt with by the kind of forum moderators whose standard of excellence is responisble professionalism.

It is the kind JREF forum will never measure up to in this writers opinion.

After seeing what I have seen going on there,,

I really don't see how anyone,

can blame me

Sincerely,

- Con
PS; I like my coffee black 2 sugars.






















[edit on 26-2-2008 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar


I appreciate the post and your illustrative example.

If you combine my opinion with $1 you have a cup of coffee.

all i want to know is this....where u getting coffee for a buck?

all kidding aside. its no secret im skeptical of most 911 CT's but that doesnt mean that i dismiss them out of hand when i read them. as a matter of fact even the ones i consider pretty out there have a lot of pretty good research to support them.

i consider myself an "open minded skeptic" but in the end i have to go with what i know in some areas of the debate.

but thats just me. doesnt mean im not open to new ideas id just like some gaps filled in.

reply to post by Conspiriology


Too bad you didn't play double agent with them ... giving heads up to mods here of their topic attacks. Publicly notifying would have had the chance of you getting outed by special private messages with a key topic to search for that wasn't on others lists.

Well, welcome. There are people who are decent on both sides, and people who are extreme on both sides.

People should be able to realize that ulterior motives are what drives things to be done sometimes, and not what one would think in a sugar-coated vision of the world.

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
reply to post by Conspiriology

 

Too bad you didn't play double agent with them ... giving heads up to mods here of their topic attacks. Publicly notifying would have had the chance of you getting outed by special private messages with a key topic to search for that wasn't on others lists.

Yeah that would have been VERY CLEVER indeed however,, playing games like that isn't my style and I got better things to do.

I just can't help but think about how damn elaborate that whole thing was and wonder everytime I see a really whacked out CT thread, I got to tell ya I have my doubts anymore .

I mean it was a lot to read and both times they were sent by members who were brand new that day but seemed to know everyones elses email addys and instant message names msn, yahoo iM etc.

I mentioned it to skeptic overlord once a long time ago and he had mentioned his own suspicions about certain 911 activists not being on the up and up in the same way so to speak.

Since losing the posts button,, I haven't been back to that thread. I have always leaned on the side of skeptics when it came to general intelligence and always relied on them to keep CT's honest but after seeing alll that,, I kinda drifted away from that entire argument.

The last post I made in a 911 thread damocles was in it and I believe above par was too as I recall they both treated me with respect. I only offered an analogy that seemd to get quite a stir.

I think everyone should be treated with a measure of respect, maybe I'm old fashioned that way I dunno.

Just how I think

- Con
PS: btw,, I absolutley love your high contrast avatar










[edit on 26-2-2008 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by Griff
I'm going to make a list of "debunker" comments for 2008. Anyone who has any already, please let me know. I can garantee that there will be more fallacies than in that list.

Hey Griff you could start with the one I use as my sig.

I believe the Capt. was speaking for pretty much all the de-bunkers.

[Mod Edit]

Go CaptainObvious! We miss ya buddy...




[Mod Edit: Generalizing comment removed. Please focus your discussion on the topic and issues, not your opinion of those expressing theories of ideas related to 9/11. Thank you - Jak]

[edit on 26/2/08 by JAK]