Dealing with 9/11 Madness (argumentum ad hominem veritas), page 23


Pages: <<  20    21    22    23    24    25    26  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 100 times


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 12:32 AM by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Jim Fetzer, the founder of
Scholars for 9/11 Truth (one of the first such factions), has been pushing those very concepts right here on ATS.

I'm well aware of that. Jim Fetzer was not the only founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Fetzer founded S911T with Steven Jones. When Fetzer wouldn't let go of his ridiculous "theories", they decided to part ways and Dr. Jones (and others) founded Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice.

Jim Fetzer, his work, and his "faction" are not supported anywhere in the 9/11 truth movement. Just as Judy Wood's and Simon Shack's "work" is not supported anywhere in the 9/11 truth movement.

It's funny that Fetzer's thread is in the HOAX bin along with the tv fakery/no planer threads, but yet there are still those that try to link them to the 9/11 truth movement, despite them and their "work" not being supported anywhere in the 9/11 truth movement.

It's the continuous, concerted effort to make 9/11 truthers look like "nutjobs" and "loonies" when we're associated with such ridiculous theories that are proven disinformation and hoaxes.



reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 11:04 AM by dillweed
reply to post by NightGypsy

I've been warned too many times about things that to me me are asinine. I cannot understand why people who obviously don't want any further investigation are protected. Have I been petty? Of course. But, watching this group of debunkers do nothing but attempt to derail every single topic related to 9/11 makes me mad as hell. Just the mere fact that they are here every day posting in their condescending manner makes me question your position on this.


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 12:33 PM by NightGypsy
reply to post by spoor





That is where you are incorrect, they ARE part of the "truth" movement. You do not get to say what conspiracy theories you accept in the "truth" movement, they are all part of that movement. 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?


Of course YOU want them to be part of the "truth movement" because they give you your ammo to warrant calling the rest of us "wackos."

Now I am going to use a very high level of restraint and leave it at that.


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 12:34 PM by patternfinder
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by dillweed
I've been warned too many times about things that to me me are asinine.

I've looked at your removed posts, and all are warranted.


I cannot understand why people who obviously don't want any further investigation are protected.

No specific opinion is ever being protected... merely that of an environment where participants can anticipate a civil debate.


But, watching this group of debunkers do nothing but attempt to derail every single topic related to 9/11 makes me mad as hell.

Why?

Firstly, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Secondly, "debunking" one particular 9/11 conspiracy theory is not automatic evidence that someone supports the "official story" or is against additional investigation.

Thirdly, if we desire to be ethical conspiracy theorists with a strong desire to see our conspiracies proven to be fact, we need debunkers to put our theories to the test so that we may reject what fails and focus on what works.


while i agree with you, there still is the slippery slope of non progress when the same OSers come in and say the same exact thing every single time....next thing you know the thread is tainted and not even worth reading any longer.......I see both sides of the coin, i even understand that the business of releasing information is almost perpetual and non stop, because of the new people who are joining the ranks and are going through the different levels of learning that we all went through...so, it seems redundant, often, and that's fine, but, when you have the same people that are stuck in the same gear over and over and over again, it makes it rough.....i guess we need to learn how to just dismiss their foolishness with silence, but, the new people to a thread will always fall victim to these rascals...........an endless cycle.....


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 01:03 PM by NightGypsy
reply to post by dillweed





I've been warned too many times about things that to me me are asinine. I cannot understand why people who obviously don't want any further investigation are protected. Have I been petty? Of course. But, watching this group of debunkers do nothing but attempt to derail every single topic related to 9/11 makes me mad as hell. Just the mere fact that they are here every day posting in their condescending manner makes me question your position on this.


Hi, dillweed.....

I completely concur, and although I voiced the same concerns that you have, I also can see how this is would be a very hard situation to mediate in a manner that allows freedom of speech, yet that doesn't result in the threads degenerating to the level of some of the other forum websites such as GLP. (Sorry for mentioning it by name, but they are a good example).

This is the ONLY conspiracy website I visit, and it's for the simple reason that a lot of abusive behavior is not tolerated. But I have to admit, the 9/11 forums test my tolerance level, and sometimes it's hard to behave....lol


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 01:06 PM by NightGypsy
reply to post by SkepticOverlord





Perhaps if you stopped the derogatory implications by calling people "OSers" we'd see some type of trend toward civility.


??????? What about "Truthers?" Even YOU use that one.


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 01:15 PM by NightGypsy
reply to post by spoor





One could argue that those that push conspiracy theories are the real paid shills, being paid by Muslims to deflect people attacking the radical Muslims who actually caused 9/11.


Yeah, "one" could argue that........

My guess is they probably don't argue that because there are so many holes in the government's story that it gives the conspiracy theories validity.


reply posted on 5-9-2011 @ 01:27 PM by patternfinder
Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to
post by SkepticOverlord





Perhaps if you stopped the derogatory implications by calling people "OSers" we'd see some type of trend toward civility.


??????? What about "Truthers?" Even YOU use that one.



here's a case in point....



quote by SkepticOverloard

There shouldn't be any labels at all. Somewhere between the full "Official Story" and the most extreme idea put forth by "Truthers" the actual truth lies. And it's going to contain aspect of both the "official story" and "conspiracy theories."


how are we supposed to identify someone who believes in the official story and someone who doesn't if we have no labels? it makes as much since as supermarkets taking all the labels off their products so that each manufacturer's brand gets a fair shake. labels are here for a reason....to discern differences that relate to animate or inanimate objects......i don't mind being called a truther, it fits quite well......we have to remember also, that as much positive as there is in the world, there is exactly the same amount of negative, each is just distributed differently.....we have to take the good with the bad.....
edit on 5-9-2011 by patternfinder because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  20    21    22    23    24    25    26  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why the Pentagon?
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags
NEVER FORGET 9-11….Maybe we SHOULD forget.
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Personal Theory on The Twin Towers Plane Pilots
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Note from trapped workers surfaces 10 years after 9/11
  Posted 1 days ago with 6 member flags
Where were you when the world stopped turning...
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags