Front on and correct. Bin Laden admited to the attack. Publiclly and proudly.

While I will not write anything bad about my CIC I can all but agree with the comment about GW.

Michael
Peace through superior firepower.

Debunking the De-bunkers http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm

QuickSabre wrote:
This is what the threads about;

Can you watch this all and still have no doubt? http://blip.tv/file/306082/
OMG - Jamie's right. Life is too short to waste it listening to some blithering idiot prattle on about his wacky conspiracy theory. 'University of Manitoba' - that explains it. Those Canadians are only too happy to believe anything that goes against America. Go figure.

I think a better question is: "Can you watch all this?" Answer: NO! Too boring!

Hmmmm...so much wrong and stupid about this post. But as an amlumni of University of Manitoba and a proud Canadian I am not about to comment on your ridiculous, erroneous and generally ignorant generalizations.

What I will say it is because of American's like yourself that comment on forums (and other media) that Canadians like myself may judge Americans a little harshly. When all you see is crap you tend to believe that all that the country produces is crap.

Enjoy your freedom of speech but sometimes it may not hurt to actually think before you send your mental diarrhea splattering all over the internet.

To believe anything said in that link you have to be really credulous with a faith akin to religious dogma!

Burying your head and hiding from 'real' science to believe the anecdotal evidence of a conspiracy theorist is madness.

As a sceptic I am always called closed minded, because I believe empirical rather than anecdotal evidence.

How can I possibly argue against anecdotal evidence, after all creationism is battling theory of evolution exactly the same way.

The bible is the truth because God wrote it, God exists because the bible say so, therefore creationism is true, God exists, The bible proves how we were created and the 9/11 conspiracy is true because omebody wrote it on the internet.

We all know if its on the net, it must be true, because it says so.

Why do you suppose not even wikipedia allows 9/11 conspiracies on there?

Think about it, reason it through.

Please read my blog on 9/11 and let this rest. http://britishsceptic.blogspot.com/2008/09/911-conspiracy-may-never-desist.html

regards,

Den.

Firstly Den,
could I suggest that you post an intro thread.
Joining a forum just to bash away on one topic at the behest of someone else might be deemed 'trolling'

Brit Sceptic wrote:
To believe anything said in that link you have to be really credulous with a faith akin to religious dogma!

Burying your head and hiding from 'real' science to believe the anecdotal evidence of a conspiracy theorist is madness.
If anything, from what I've read, the only ones coming up with 'real' scientific evidence wpuld seem to be those you label as conspiracy theorists.



We all know if its on the net, it must be true, because it says so.
Sarcasm noted.
So we can't take anything that you write seriously either?

Why do you suppose not even wikipedia allows 9/11 conspiracies on there?
Let me guess...... a conspiracy?

Think about it, reason it through.

Please read my blog on 9/11 and let this rest. http://britishsceptic.blogspot.com/2008/09/911-conspiracy-may-never-desist.html

regards,

Den.
This can never rest.
I'll have a look at what you have to say though.

I'll leave you with this though Den.
See if you can identify the author;

"I am making this statement as an act of wilful defiance of military authority, because I believe that the War is being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it. I am a soldier, convinced that I am acting on behalf of soldiers. I believe that this War, on which I entered as a war of defence and liberation, has now become a war of aggression and conquest. I believe that the purpose for which I and my fellow soldiers entered upon this war should have been so clearly stated as to have made it impossible to change them, and that, had this been done, the objects which actuated us would now be attainable by negotiation. I have seen and endured the sufferings of the troops, and I can no longer be a party to prolong these sufferings for ends which I believe to be evil and unjust. I am not protesting against the conduct of the war, but against the political errors and insincerities for which the fighting men are being sacrificed. On behalf of those who are suffering now I make this protest against the deception which is being practised on them; also I believe that I may help to destroy the callous complacency with which the majority of those at home regard the contrivance of agonies which they do not, and which they have not sufficient imagination to realize".

Know your history.

HEHE I disagree with you so you accuse me of trolling, maybe you feel threatened?

I run my own forum and I moderate for Geoff Thompson's forum, perhaps you feel he is a troll also.

I try to correct pseudoscience wherever possible, if you find truth hard to stomach then perhaps you should find a forum that agrees with you, if I am trolling I await a warning from Admin and explanation of how telling truth is trolling.

Anyow you still cannot answer how a government can cover up hundreds, perhaps thousands of witnesses to the event of 9/11

I do not expect you to believe anything I say, I said that in my first post!

I do expect people to accept evidence of basic physics, eyewitness accounts, wreckage.

Again show me empirical evidence that proves a conspiracy, explain how the American overnment have silenced all the conspirators.

Regurgitating anecdotes from delusional minds and ignoring empirical evidence as well as accusing me of trolling, does not an argument win.

Again I do not expect you to believe me but I do question your motivation for ignoring evidence and supporting lies. I question what you could possibly gain by supporting pseudoscience and stirring up hornets nest.

I am neutral and simply follow evidence, again you have shown nothing that refutes my statements but when talking to troofers this is the natural response. To them truth does not matter as long as their agendas are accepted.

Again if my views are not wanted here I welcome admin booting me off the forum, deleting my posts and only allowing a one sided argument to prevail.

Thankyou,

Den.

Brit Sceptic wrote:
HEHE I disagree with you so you accuse me of trolling, maybe you feel threatened?
As I have not put forward my own point of view, I do not see how you can claim that I disagree with you.

I run my own forum and I moderate for Geoff Thompson's forum, perhaps you feel he is a troll also.
I run my own forums too.
Does being a mod on GT's forum somehow legitimise you.
Jamie is a mod on Cyberkwoon, does that legitimise him too?

I try to correct pseudoscience wherever possible, if you find truth hard to stomach then perhaps you should find a forum that agrees with you, if I am trolling I await a warning from Admin and explanation of how telling truth is trolling.
Personally, I'm awaiting your correction of psuedoscience with interest.
I haven't seen any of it yet.

Anyow you still cannot answer how a government can cover up hundreds, perhaps thousands of witnesses to the event of 9/11I don't recall being asked the question, nor suggesting that I had that answer.





Again I do not expect you to believe me but I do question your motivation for ignoring evidence and supporting lies. I question what you could possibly gain by supporting pseudoscience and stirring up hornets nest.
That's a highly defensive line of reasoning on your part.
Why should I believe you?
In what way do I support psuedoscience and/or 'stir up a hornets nest'?

I am neutral
Err, I think your stance is pretty clear.


and simply follow evidence, again you have shown nothing that refutes my statements but when talking to troofers this is the natural response. To them truth does not matter as long as their agendas are accepted.
Truth be told, you have offered nothing new.
e.g. your comments about the collapse of the towers due to combustion of aerofuel were dismissed in the earlist part of the first clip posted here.
This, in a building that was designed to withstand impact from a nigh on identical aircraft.

Again if my views are not wanted here I welcome admin booting me off the forum, deleting my posts and only allowing a one sided argument to prevail.

Thankyou,

Den.
Nobody has said anything about your views not being wanted, but there is no arguement coming from any other direction.
As was already pointed out, this thread merely asks the question, which was " Can you have no doubt?"

Now, clearly, you DO have doubt, otherwise you wouldn't be going to so much trouble with your posts and blog etc.

Methinks, you doth protest too much!

Hi mule,

the reason I quoted I am mod and admin i to point out to you that I do know what trolling is and I have zero tolerance towards it. You assumed I did not know what it is and assumed I was trolling, the admin here do not assume that so have your argument with them.

I also feel ad hominem attacks do not help matters.

You tell me to know my history, I tell you to know your scientific method.

You have no stance, hopefully you have someone waiting to remove spelks from your posterior.

My stance is scientific method and evidence.

Show me evidence that contradicts the scientific evidence I can change my stance in heartbeat.

I show bias against conspiracy theory of 9/11 because it is work of fiction, 7 years on and still nothing to refute the evidence that Osama Bin Laden committed the atrocities and still people like yourself, with no stance, post the conspiracy theories on forums which simply helps to lend credence to them.

Also I may not have asked you specifically how the cover up was possible, it was a statement in a previous thread and as there is still no evidence to explain that one point alone my stance is conspuiracy theory 9/11 is a vicious, malicious lie perpetrated by people with nopthing better to do than trample over the emotions of families of the victims.

Unlike people that have no stance I am proud to have a stance, a scientific method based stance that fights against the maliciousness of this world.

Similar to the rumour the jews were tipped off, proven blatant lie by yet another conspirator. These people are evil incarnate and if there is a hell
I sincerely hope they burn there for an eternity.

I hate giving evidence because it can so easiliy be twisted and lots of evidence has been supplied but heres another piece: http://skepdic.com/refuge/bunk27.html

regards,

Den.

Brit Sceptic wrote:
Hi mule,

the reason I quoted I am mod and admin i to point out to you that I do know what trolling is and I have zero tolerance towards it. You assumed I did not know what it is
Nope

and assumed I was trolling, the admin here do not assume that so have your argument with them.
Nope.
I suggested you post an intro, which as an Admin and Mod yourself, you should know to be the norm and good form.

I also feel ad hominem attacks do not help matters.Feel free not to use them then.

You tell me to know my history, I tell you to know your scientific method.
You seem to be perplexed by the author, so allow me to help.
It was Siegfried Sassoon from the first world war.
What scientific method is it that you wish me to display knowledge of?

You have no stance, hopefully you have someone waiting to remove spelks from your posterior.
?

My stance is scientific method and evidence.
So what are your scientific qualifications?



I show bias against conspiracy theory of 9/11 because it is work of fiction, 7 years on and still nothing to refute the evidence that Osama Bin Laden committed the atrocities and still people like yourself, with no stance, post the conspiracy theories on forums which simply helps to lend credence to them.
Codswallop.

Also I may not have asked you specifically how the cover up was possible, it was a statement in a previous thread and as there is still no evidence to explain that one point alone my stance is conspuiracy theory 9/11 is a vicious, malicious lie perpetrated by people with nopthing better to do than trample over the emotions of families of the victims.
You do realise that the reverse is also true?
If there is any ring of truth to what you deem conspiracy theory, then it is you who disrespect the victims.

Unlike people that have no stance I am proud to have a stance, a scientific method based stance that fights against the maliciousness of this world.
Give yourself a chocolate medal.
What are your scientific qualifications again?

Hi mule

Quote Mule:
If you are unwilling or unable to answer questions put to you, then how can you dismiss people who ask the questions you do not?
Does this not make you a sheep!

So ther you go Mule is a sheep! Or are you going to answer the question of how the American government can cover up this conspiracy as you put it and how did they silence all those witnesses the last 7 years?

In your own words mule if you cannot answer that question, you my friend are a sheep!

as my final say on the matter which is based purely on the fact you have again gone ad hominem route rather than sticking to the original debate and completely ignored every piece of evidence I listed,

Please do look at the evidence, learn how to research, thats my job!

Learn the sources you use in comparisn to my sources.

Look for credibility instead of expecting credulity from others.

The evidence speaks for it self, I do not need to debate you any further as you have commited so many logical fallacies, a major one attacking me rather than the evidence supplied.

I will allow others to look clearly at the evidence I have supplied and come to their own conclusion.

My time is money and is better spent researching reliable sources from credible and respected sources than attempting to play ad hominem games with a person that has not even the courage of their own convictons.

Its funny that every time I debate a person as soon as they see evidence they cannot refute they resort to saying @I have no stance' then look to destroy my character

Sorry but as I always say 'That is something I left in the playground'.

If you ever feel you can give a credible explanation of how 9/11 was a conspiracy theory feel free to show the world the evidence and Drag Bush through the courts.

However as I feel after 7 years of BS no one has found any credible evidence supporting this view and I strongly believe no one will unless they find a way of breaking fundamentl laws of physics (Check my evidence) then my job here is done.

Anyone that still has the credulity to believe in conspiracy theories of this ilk, IE people that attack me rather than my evidence , are very welcome to their opinions.

I have received worse and no doubt will again, it comes with the territory when you expose flaws in peoples logic.

It is a shame because I felt we could have had an intellectual debate based on evidence, I shall continue looking for someone that can.

Be well,

Den.

It didn't take long to find you out did it.

You say you are coming at the topic from a scientific standpoint, but when asked just what scientific expertise you have, you throw your toys out of the pram, because you have none.

I think Geoff Thompson needs better mods.

Hi Sheep,

notice you still ignore my questions

Argument from incredulity

ad hominem

Non Sequitur

Be well,

Den.