Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Dealing with 9/11 Madness (argumentum ad hominem veritas)

page: 20
100
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
I vote BoneZ to be new mod on the 9/11 forums.. he seems to know what he is talking about and is right about how the forums get a crackdown and then it goes away after a week because of lack of moderation..

I have stopped going into the 9/11 forum because there is nothing useful there for me to look at, a bunch of people talking crap on someone else is not getting anything done.. Most posts end like this...

Oh well..




posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoor
That is where you are incorrect, they ARE part of the "truth" movement.

Really? Can you post a link to a 9/11 truth research organization that supports the above theories? There aren't that many 9/11 truth movement research organizations, so it shouldn't be that hard. I know for a fact that the following don't support the above theories;

  • Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
  • Scientists for 9/11 Truth
  • Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice
  • Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
  • Pilots for 9/11 Truth
  • Loose Change
  • 9/11 Blogger
  • Journal of 9/11 Studies
  • International Center for 9/11 Studies

    That's just off the top of my head. The above research organizations make up the majority of the research in the 9/11 truth movement. None of them support the above theories, and most all of them have banned the discussion of the above theories.



    Originally posted by spoor
    You do not get to say what conspiracy theories you accept in the "truth" movement

    I don't have to. The research organizations of the truth movement have decided what they will and will not support. The above organizations have made it publicly clear that they will not support the theories I have mentioned earlier. And most of that is outlined in my thread:

    DEW/Energy Weapons? Holograms? TV Fakery? No Planes at the WTC? -- A 9/11 Disinfo Campaign



    Originally posted by spoor
    Who gets to decide that conspiracy theories like explosives being used, or thermite is ok to be part of the truth movement, but equally silly conspiracy tyeories like mini nukes are not?

    That would be all of the research organizations in the 9/11 truth movement, and the people that support them.



    Originally posted by spoor
    Do you really think that people claiming explosives were used are better than those claiming cgi was used?

    Yes. There is abundant evidence of explosives. There is zero evidence for CGI, and that "theory" was debunked years ago and proven to be deliberate disinformation. And that is one of the reasons why the discussion of it is banned everywhere in the 9/11 truth movement, and finally here on ATS as well.



    Originally posted by spoor
    Who banned them? Was a meeting held, you showed your membership card of the "truth" movement then a vote was taken?

    The research organizations have banned the discussion of the above theories as I outlined in my thread above. They decide what they will and will not support. And the rest of the 9/11 truth movement that supports the above organizations obviously agree with that assessment.



    Originally posted by spoor
    But they are, as you do not get to decide which conspiracy theory is acceptable.

    But they are not because you will not be able to provide one 9/11 truth organization that supports those theories.


    *** Edit to add: Anybody that isn't a 9/11 researcher or part of the 9/11 truth movement doesn't get to decide that all ridiculous 9/11 conspiracy theories are automatically part of the 9/11 truth movement. The research organizations within the 9/11 truth movement have made it clear what theories they will and will not support.

    If you're not an avid 9/11 researcher or 9/11 "truther", I would ask anyone not to lump all ridiculous 9/11 theories in with the truth movement. The above listed organizations do not support them, therefore they are not part of the truth movement.





    edit on 3-9-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



  • posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:00 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by _BoneZ_
    There aren't that many 9/11 truth movement research organizations,


    You do not have to be a member of a "9/11 truth movement research organization" (organisations set up to make certain people money) to be a member of the "truth" movement


    and most all of them have banned the discussion of the above theories.


    because they interfere with their own theories, and reduce their money making potential!


    . The research organizations of the truth movement have decided what they will and will not support.


    they do not get to decide what conspiracy theories are part of the "truth" movement


    There is abundant evidence of explosives. There is zero evidence for CGI,


    there is as much evidence for explosives being used as there is for CGI being used...


    And that is one of the reasons why the discussion of it is banned everywhere in the 9/11 truth movement, and finally here on ATS as well.


    Please show where it has been banned here

    It seems the "truth" movement wants to be a exclusive club where they censor people who do not believe their theories and have their own silly conspiracy theories. (probably because they are frightened that they may scare away people buying their DVD's etc


    If you're not an avid 9/11 researcher or 9/11 "truther", I would ask anyone not to lump all ridiculous 9/11 theories in with the truth movement.


    But the 9/11 "truth" movement already has ridiculous conspiracy theories, so more makes no difference at all

    It appears the 9/11 "truth" movement wants to censor people that may interfere with their money making activities. www.ae911truth.net...
    edit on 3-9-2011 by spoor because: (no reason given)



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:09 PM
    link   
    edit on 3/9/11 by felonius because: (no reason given)



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:10 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by spoor
    Please show where it has been banned here

    Take a look in the HOAX bin sometime.




    Originally posted by spoor
    But the 9/11 "truth" movement already has ridiculous conspiracy theories, so more makes no difference at all.

    Thank you for your opinion.



    Originally posted by spoor
    (organisations set up to make certain people money) ...
    because they interfere with their own theories, and reduce their money making potential! ...
    probably because they are frightened that they may scare away people buying their DVD's etc

    I take offense to your accusation that 9/11 researchers are "in it for the money". I have never made a single penny off of my 9/11 research. That's in spite of the fact that some of my research was used by CNN for a story. And some of that same research was published in a book. YouTube also offered me a way to make money off of one of my 9/11 videos because it was so popular.

    I'm not in it for any money. I'm researching for truth and justice. Nothing more, nothing less. And because of your uncivil accusation, this conversation ends here.




    edit on 3-9-2011 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:11 PM
    link   
    reply to post by felonius
     


    DRG,




    Didnt you know buildings are always falling?


    Screws fall out all the time. The worlds an imperfect place LOL!

    Right there with ya sister.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:22 PM
    link   
    Fresh Idea !!!

    Have two 9/11 forums: the existing one governed by the Terms and Conditions . . . and a new "anything goes" 9/11 forum where you can talk about whatever theory you like under conditions similar to the ones that existed prior to the T&C coming into effect, in other words, lots of screetching, all caps posts and moderate bad language and innuendos with unlimited slander of other posers, er, hosers, I mean posters, allowed.

    The new forum would require a special log in. Anyone who consistently makes a monkey of themselves in the existing forum would be banned to the new forum, which would be called the 9/11 Zoo.

    They would have to apply for reinstatement to the existing forum if they wanted back in, but the membership at large could post in the Zoo if they felt like it.

    What do the "mighty men of renown" think?



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:27 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by spoor
    It appears the 9/11 "truth" movement wants to censor people that may interfere with their money making activities. www.ae911truth.net...

    Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is a recognized and legal non-profit, charitable organization. They sell items and take donations for the operation of the website and to pay a couple/few employees, and for other operating expenses. Most non-profit organizations do just that. Most of the people associated with AE911T are volunteers.

    Furthermore, the non-profit laws state that non-profit organizations can make profits as long as those profits are used for the organization. If you feel that AE911T is not operating within the non-profit laws of the U.S., I suggest you make a formal complaint to the IRS.

    Other than that, your accusations are pointless and baseless.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:31 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by DragonriderGal

    I always quote those I am responding to. I hate it when someone just post something cryptic and I can't figure out who it's meant for.

    And well, what I've found when googling collapsing buildings were a number of sites that said that fire hasn't ever made a building collapse completely and neatly into it's own footprint except on 9-11. And that the only building collapses on record that do that are planned demolitions. Not even earthquakes can bring them straight down, although they can collapse them. Funny how we got such differing results, eh? So I'm guessing it is all in what you google, how you google it, and then how you interpret the information you receive.

    And sometimes people just get over reactive, both in their responses and in what seems to 'insult' them. Sometimes I may state an opinion about someone's behavior and they act like I called them some horrible name. So some of it is playing, I think, to try to win sympathy from other readers. But hey, that too, is just my opinion.


    You make good points. I would always think about the unique circumstances of the towers, but I don't think we could prove it in a succinct way without citing laws of physics and integrating math into these discussions. Plus, this thread specifically would not be the place for it. Anyway, I hope to see you making points in the other discussions here. It's fairly easy to talk to you, and it's a nice change from what I'm used to seeing.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:48 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by felonius

    Didnt you know buildings are always falling?


    Screws fall out all the time. The worlds an imperfect place LOL!

    Right there with ya sister.


    Yes indeed they are always falling, pesky things! It is very amazing how different the information can be that we get when we google the reasons though, eh?
    Makes you wonder about google too. How does IT choose what information/websites you'll be pointed towards...



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 07:56 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by ipsedixit
    Fresh Idea !!!

    Have two 9/11 forums: the existing one governed by the Terms and Conditions . . . and a new "anything goes" 9/11 forum where you can talk about whatever theory you like under conditions similar to the ones that existed prior to the T&C coming into effect, in other words, lots of screetching, all caps posts and moderate bad language and innuendos with unlimited slander of other posers, er, hosers, I mean posters, allowed.

    The new forum would require a special log in. Anyone who consistently makes a monkey of themselves in the existing forum would be banned to the new forum, which would be called the 9/11 Zoo.

    They would have to apply for reinstatement to the existing forum if they wanted back in, but the membership at large could post in the Zoo if they felt like it.

    What do the "mighty men of renown" think?


    Hey, great idea! If you go there, prepare to have your ducks in a row and your skin nice and thick. Everyone for him or herself, and damned the torpedos! Full speed ahead!

    Might be kind of refreshing actually. Not having to pussy foot around, walking on eggshells for fear you'll insult some poor little poser.. er ... hoser...er ... poster's feelings (which he's got laying all around like a octopus's tentacles ready to snag some unwary fish or someone stating an opinion about him he doesn't like).

    That way, if you can't stand the heat, stay outta the kitchen aka Zoo.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 08:04 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by Varemia
    You make good points. I would always think about the unique circumstances of the towers, but I don't think we could prove it in a succinct way without citing laws of physics and integrating math into these discussions. Plus, this thread specifically would not be the place for it. Anyway, I hope to see you making points in the other discussions here. It's fairly easy to talk to you, and it's a nice change from what I'm used to seeing.


    Hey thanks Varemia!

    Yah, here isn't the place to discuss what probably happened that day. I only brought it up because I was showing how my search results was so much different than the original poster's search results. I think it's important to note that sort of thing. Maybe part of the problem is that we aren't all searching for or finding the same thing, but we're trying to make the answers fit into the same box anyway.

    And always, I work to make my posts easy to read and understand. I could use big intellectual/technical sounding words if I want, but why? My intention is always to effectively communicate my position and what I believe and why in a clear and complete way. I appreciate it when someone picks up on that.
    Thanks!



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 08:09 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by ThichHeaded
    I vote BoneZ to be new mod on the 9/11 forums

    Thanks for that vote of confidence. However, I've had my share of scuffles with a couple members in my time here and that sort of stuff seems to be held against you forever. That will automatically cancel any chance of me ever being a mod here. Much appreciated though.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 08:23 PM
    link   
    Terminal Velocity

    Reading through the latest remarks, I think it's reasonably clear that the overwhelming majority of members agree that the tone of the forum needs improvement and that trolls need to be banished. I share both sentiments.

    There is also a great deal of skepticism with respect to whether that will actually happen and how long it will last. I share that skepticism as well.

    And I don't think there can be any doubt that regardless of opinions on the subject, most members don't want to see this forum shut down. I don't either.

    So really, with a few exceptions, I think most of us are on the same page. What remains now is to act on that.

    As many have pointed out, us mods can't do everything by ourselves. That's true. We need your help.

    You can help by:

    1. Honoring the terms & conditions by posting on topic and observing common standards of courtesy.

    2. ALERTing posts (using the drop-down menu found beneath each avatar) that violate the above.

    3. Not responding to problem behavior with problem behavior. Be a force for good.

    It will then be up to us take action based on our best judgment. We go to great pains to avoid banning members who make honest mistakes or have an attitude attack once in a while, but once we're convinced someone is either here to troll or lacks the self-control needed to be a member, terminating the account is quite easy to do.

    Banning a few trolls is not enough, however.

    What is really going to decide the fate of this forum will be the behavior of the members who participate. Decisions involving ATS forums are not founded on notions of collective punishment, but on pragmatic grounds and a general sense of whether a forum or subject is suited for ATS.

    I can only speak for myself, but I think the subject of 9/11 is very much the sort of thing that belongs on ATS, and won't take kindly to anyone who thinks it's acceptable or amusing to interfere with that or undermine the efforts of the staff to keep things civil.

    Threats are not my vocation. I will simply say that I think this forum deserves to be protected so that ATSers can feel comfortable discussing the subject here, and will act accordingly.

    I hope you can agree, and will do the same.







    N.B. While the 9/11 forum is the subject of this thread, name-calling, trolling and other forums of disruptive behavior are prohibited site-wide. Members who observe such problems are invited to ALERT them rather than complain about them in general. Some handy references:

    Ad Hominem Attacks And You
    Trolling, And What To Do About It
    If You Have Been Post Banned...
    Why Me?

    tl;dr version: Be excellent to one another.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 08:40 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by _BoneZ_
    Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is a recognized and legal non-profit, charitable organization. They sell items and take donations for the operation of the website and to pay a couple/few employees


    Yes, we have all seen the quality "research" that they do



    I am sure Gage deserves to be paid for that high quality "research"



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 08:42 PM
    link   
    Um, folks: topic please.

    Thanks.



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 09:23 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by ipsedixit
    Fresh Idea !!!

    Have two 9/11 forums: the existing one governed by the Terms and Conditions . . . and a new "anything goes" 9/11 forum where you can talk about whatever theory you like under conditions similar to the ones that existed prior to the T&C coming into effect, in other words, lots of screetching, all caps posts and moderate bad language and innuendos with unlimited slander of other posers, er, hosers, I mean posters, allowed.

    The new forum would require a special log in. Anyone who consistently makes a monkey of themselves in the existing forum would be banned to the new forum, which would be called the 9/11 Zoo.

    They would have to apply for reinstatement to the existing forum if they wanted back in, but the membership at large could post in the Zoo if they felt like it.

    What do the "mighty men of renown" think?





    What a great idea!

    If we get bored, we can see how "the other half" live!!!

    Sort of like putting a goldfish in with a crab! Watch the mayhem!



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 09:24 PM
    link   
    All I see here is, usually on the individual down low posters, grouping together against the owner of this forum. I understand the intentions of those posters who only wish to defend us "truthers", but attacking Skeptic for trying to enforce the rule of law, and better yet the rules that already exist on the books (no personal attacks rule) I think is wrong. Look, I have ran a message board, and yes there are profits, but those profits come with alot of time, effort, stress and hard work in order to make this forum what it is. Give him a break my friends. Can you imagine how many issues these good folks deal with week in and week out?

    That's what is so funny about that label that you guys have accepted from your yes men. People who believe that 9/11 was an inside job have bent over to that label that the sheoplized robots gave us. Yes, I am one of you. However, I have never bent over to that title, and neither should any of you. I consider myslef a realist. No, not a "birther", and certainly not a "truther", but a realist. Who cares what some android poster labels you as. None of us should have ever accepted that label to begin with, but alot of us did.

    I think that Skeptic did single out the so-called "truthers" a little more on this issue, but that was only because we were more vocal at this point in time in regards to the 9/11 thread. I have not even posted in it here as of yet if I believe I am correct, but nevertheless that seems to be his position. I have no idea because I have only followed the thread recently. I have been stuck in political threads and elenin threads lately.

    I just believe that we should put ourselves in the people who moderate this forums shoes before we throw them on a stake and ignite the fire. After all, Without ATS, you would surely be treated much worse in most forums. This for sure, you will not get such mercy or understanding from most of the other yes man, water pale carrying mods out there in Cyberspace.

    Hell, Many posters have personally attacked the owner of this forum and have not even been banned. Take a long walk around the android media controlled internet and you will have no choice but to realize how tolerant these good folks here actually are. I understand if you felt that you were treated wrong, but all I am saying is put yourself in their shoes. They give out way more warnings than they do bans around here. That's the truth my friends.

    Just my advice, and no I am not Phage, or his brown nosers (wipe your noses off, you know who you are).Thank god for that. Take a grain of salt when your post or thread is deleted because it's not personal. Trust me, I know from experience. They have no choice but to enforce the rule of law here or we could never have such a great forum to discuss things in.

    Listen, This is how the payed yes men silence us. This is how they divide us. These guys here who run ATS are not our enemies, whatever your beliefs are. These folks are our best friends in regards to the various subjects and alternative discussions that we are allowed to debate here. To both sides, and this is not an Obama lecture. Just stop personally attacking eachother in whatever thread, that's it. Wake up and stand together my friends. While we are all at it, Read between the lies brothers and sisters, read between the lies. Best wishes. ~SheopleNation
    edit on 3-9-2011 by SheopleNation because: TypO



    posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 10:33 PM
    link   
     


    off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


     

    Mod note: Let's not use this thread as an outlet for personal grudges. Thanks. -- Majic

    edit on 9/3/2011 by Majic because: (no reason given)



    posted on Sep, 4 2011 @ 03:32 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
    ...the majority of the problems in the 9/11 forum originate with "Truthers" and overly-aggressive conspiracy proponents.


    I'm sorry but that's complete bollocks. Most of your "truthers", as you seem determined to call them, busted their butts to bring that forum into fruition. WE gave you one of the best compendiums on the 9-11 topic on the entire internet, and all we got in return was a friggin deluge of new members calling themselves debunkers that were full of insults and stereotyping. I've been here long enough to see the absolute and downward spiral of that particular forum and I refuse to accept your contention that the 'truthers' are to carry the majority of the blame.

    I remember the first time I saw the word 'twofer' getting thrown around on here, when I saw that crap being allowed, I quit posting in the 9-11 forum and apparently I wasn't the only one. If you want to know where all that quality material we were posting went, hell man, we got sick of the insults. There was alot talk between us about where this forum was going and alot of us saw the trend and decided it wasn't worth the effort, ATS just didn't have our back anymore and what your seeing now is a direct result of it.

    Edit:
    www.abovetopsecret.com...
    This is a great example of what I'm talking about, it's not showing up in the search function at all (:flame
    but there's alot of time and research in those kinds of threads just for someone to come along and sling mud on. It's not frustrating, it's pathetic.
    edit on 4-9-2011 by twitchy because: (no reason given)





    new topics

    top topics



     
    100
    << 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

    log in

    join