Friday, August 11, 2006

A Great Argument Against the Conspiracy

Regnad Kcin (try it backwards) at the JREF Forums:

Considering what alternative-9/11-conspiracy theorists propose would be one of the most complex undertakings of its kind -- not only to plan, but to implement, and continue to cover-up -- evidence and proof should be dropping from the trees like over-ripe apples. That it isn't might tell you something.

Yep. This is why they are reduced to lying about the cellphones/Airfones, about Wally Miller, about Marvin Bush, about how the towers looked like controlled demolition.

21 Comments:

At 11 August, 2006 10:50, Blogger Damian P. said...

Absence of evidence, of course, is proof of just how well the conspirators covered their tracks. (Yeah, they slipped up by posting their top-secret plan for world domination, Rebuilding America's Defences, on the internet, but whadda ya gonna do?)

 
At 11 August, 2006 10:51, Blogger CHF said...

Top 4 arguments against a conspiracy

1) lack of concrete proof. CTers rely mostly on pointing out things that are (in their uneducated opinions) fishy about the official story - hense the nonsence about cell phones, passenger manifiests etc. What gets lost in this flurry of "holes" is that CTers have NO solid proof in favour of their theories.

2) lack of expert endorsement. The fact that no structural engineers IN THE WHOLE WORLD agree with the controlled demo theory should be a tip off that something doesn't add up for the CTers. Needing the likes of Fetzer, Jones and Wood to bolster their case is another.

3) lack of whistleblowers. Clinton can't hide a blowjob, Bush can't hide WMD distortions (don't you think he would have planted some?) and the CIA leaks like a sieve. Yet NO 9/11 conspirators have spilled the beans. Hmmmm....

4) Conspiacy theories can't agree on anything! If the "truth" was as obvious as they claim it is then why can't CTers come to some agreement on what it is? They can't agree on what hit the Pentagon, what hit the WTC, what happened to flight 93, where the passengers are or whether the whole thing was pulled off by Arab mercenaries, Bush, or the Jews. In the mind of CTers this simply proves what freethinkers they are; when it fact it simply serves as a glowing example of just how messed up they are. They regularly accuse eachother of being "agents" for crying out loud!

 
At 11 August, 2006 12:15, Blogger Homer Simpson said...

Sorry to go off topic...but I joined the loose change forum today, kept my comments civil and simply asked for evidence of some of their claims. I've now been banned until 2009. And since I've been banned they've asked me to address several points knowing full well I can't.

Anyone care to address this in this thread (it took 1 hour before a poll appeared questioning whether I was an agent).

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=10289

I didn't think it was possible for people to be this stupid. I get shocked every day.

 
At 11 August, 2006 12:45, Blogger James B. said...

This is routine. Pat and I signed on to their forum, and commented on a thread about this blog. We were banned the next day.

 
At 11 August, 2006 13:17, Blogger Dog Town said...

I lasted less than 20 min.,for posting 2 links to Gravy's Debunk.
I was IP banned on the spot,no see ya later, no noth'en.I want a badge DAMNIT!

Tee hee heee!

 
At 11 August, 2006 13:25, Blogger Pat said...

I'm back on, James, but I was talking back and forth with Dylan, so I think the mods were afraid to kick me off. Your suspension is probably over too. Homer, I went over there but they've locked that particular topic. It does note that you've been "suspended".

 
At 11 August, 2006 14:33, Blogger default.xbe said...

ive been suspended a few times there too, most recently for asking what they woudl think if they got their second investgation and it confirmed the first

naturally i got a bunch of rhetoric about peopel who disagree with them being wrong (not in so many words, but you know how they are)

i asked for evidence as to why their supported are so much smarter than anyone else, the next morning i was suspended and the thread removed

feel free to come by the SLC forums, screwloosechange.xbehome.com and discuss whatever you like

 
At 11 August, 2006 16:36, Blogger nesNYC said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 11 August, 2006 16:38, Blogger nesNYC said...

Considering what alternative-9/11-conspiracy theorists propose would be one of the most complex undertakings of its kind -- not only to plan, but to implement, and continue to cover-up -- evidence and proof should be dropping from the trees like over-ripe apples. That it isn't might tell you something.

Only in the world of the "skeptic" official BS believers is it possible for "19" hijackers to do this deed and then not possible for a small and well organized crime group within the government to do the same. Like I've been saying before, blind patriotism, lack of sophistication or simply stupidity prevents these people from seeing just beyond the lies.

 
At 11 August, 2006 17:31, Blogger default.xbe said...

Only in the world of the "skeptic" official BS believers is it possible for "19" hijackers to do this deed and then not possible for a small and well organized crime group within the government to do the same. Like I've been saying before, blind patriotism, lack of sophistication or simply stupidity prevents these people from seeing just beyond the lies.

see the problem is no one in the conspiracy camp claims the govt simply flew planes into the buildings same as the terrorists, they concoct a much more complex scenario involving demolition explosives, thermite cutting sideways through steel, buildings falling faster than the laws of gravity allow, missiles cloaked as planes, remote takeover of commercial aircraft, and paying off of every credible expert who could blow the lid off their little caper

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:22, Blogger James B. said...

Only in the world of the "skeptic" official BS believers is it possible for "19" hijackers to do this deed and then not possible for a small and well organized crime group within the government to do the same.

Nobody says it would be impossible for them to do it, keeping their connection to it quiet afterwards is another matter indeed.

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:34, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Nesnyc;

The problem with your argument, is that what each group is alleged to have done are completely different.

To believe the terrorists did it, is to believe that 19 Al-Qaeda trained terrorists, moved to the USA, learned how to fly, then hijacked 4 planes and flew them into targets.

To believe the govt et al did it, is to believe that the govt brought down 4 jets full of people, then put drone aircraft back int he air, then secretly killed all the people or moved them into a massive witness protection plan somewhere. menawhile, the drone jets are then via a delayed remote control system, are flown into WTC 1, and WTC2 both of which have been previously loaded with explosives, well in advance, in particular, well loaded in the just the floors picked to be struck. ANother dron eplaen is flown out over shanksville and dumped for no reason, wilst a cruise missile is then blasted into the pentagon. ALl of this done by a handful, with no whistleblowers...

See, looking at it, it is much easier to believe the first scenario, and Occam's razor would say so..

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:36, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

It would seem to me, the easiest thing to do, would be to just simply plant the explosives in the basement, and then the Petagon, then just blow them up, within 15 minutes of each other. Govt could blame it on terrorists, and we would all have been just as mad, and supported the war just as much, and it would have been alot simpler for the govt dont ya think...

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:45, Blogger TeeSeeJay said...

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. Look at "Bigfoot" -- no evidence exists that Bigfoot is real, but that is not proof that Bigfoot does not exist.

Likewise, a lack of evidence pointing to govt complicity in 9/11 does not prove such complicity does not exist.

However, it comes down to the burden of proof, and in a classic reversal, the CTers attempt to shift this burden backward onto the mainstream. The burden is on them to produce evidence that supports their claims, but instead they demand evidence that disproves them. It's fairly trivial to produce this evidence, as the same evidence that allows the mainstream view of the 9/11 to persist as such is often the antidote to 9/11 denial claims.

Unfortunately for rational thinkers, the CTers take a page or several from the Evolution Denial movement and just pretend this evidence doesn't exist, no matter how many times you present it.

How many times have I seen the "small isolated WTC7 fires" claim thrown around with absolutely no reversal?

Oh, but they play a fair game over at the LC forums. They make a good show of being open-minded and allowing one CTer to debunk another -- but it's as if they consciously or unconsiously lob slow pitches straight across the plate for one another, as in this fictional exchange:

[Truther 1] I hear aliens did 9/11!

[Truther 2] No, friend, no evidence of aliens existing is to be found.

[Truther 1] Ah, thanks for setting me straight, brother. At least we agree there were no planes.

[Truther 2] You're right. No evidence exists supporting aircraft, either.

[Truther 1] God damn we're open minded.

[Truther 2] Hold on, gotta ban a skeptic.

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:52, Blogger default.xbe said...

Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. Look at "Bigfoot" -- no evidence exists that Bigfoot is real, but that is not proof that Bigfoot does not exist.

this basically relates to the idea that you can never prove a negative, you can never prove that bigfoot does NOT exist

however, as time goes on and more people go "bigfoot hunting" and turn up no evidence it becomes and less and less likely that such a creature can exist without leaving any evidence

same goes for govt involvement, as time goes on and no evidence is uncovered it becomes less and less likely that such evidence exists

 
At 11 August, 2006 18:53, Blogger default.xbe said...

of course CTers turn this around too and claim it proves how deep the "rabbit hole" really goes

 
At 11 August, 2006 21:37, Blogger TeeSeeJay said...

Yes; science -- both in and out of the lab -- is based on the idea of provisional acceptance being granted to the most widely supported hypotheses, which become theories. In absense of counter-evidence, such provisional acceptance approaches -- but never reaches -- "truth".

The treatment of the "official story" or the "conspiracy theories" as dogma paints those on either side of the debate with an unscientific brush.

It's unfortunate that those exhorting us to "keep an open mind" rarely have one of their own.

 
At 11 August, 2006 22:41, Blogger default.xbe said...

The treatment of the "official story" or the "conspiracy theories" as dogma paints those on either side of the debate with an unscientific brush.

It's unfortunate that those exhorting us to "keep an open mind" rarely have one of their own.


yeah, i posted a thread on the LC forums asking what they would do if a second investigation proved them wrong, and even went so far as to say what id do if a second investigation proved me wrong, needless to say i was banned and the thread removed (not before several CTs stated definitively that they were NOT wrong though)

 
At 04 October, 2006 18:02, Blogger R.Lange said...

nesNYC wrote: "Only in the world of the 'skeptic' official BS believers is it possible for '19' hijackers to do this deed and then not possible for a small and well organized crime group within the government to do the same."

The obvious problem with this idea is this:

According to the official account, the "Conspiracy of 19 Hijackers" let's call it, began at some finite time in the past and ended on 9/11.

According to conspiracy theorists, the "Conspiracy of Government" also began at some finite time in the past. This is where things get crazy, though. Hiding the plans isn't the hard part. Hiding the calculated execution of those plans once they're carried out is. On 9/11, according to conspiracy theorists, the government's conspiracy *truly* began. Now they would be burdened with the highly implausible task of keeping their involvement secret for an *indefinite* amount of time.

The 19 hijackers only had to keep their *plans* secret until the act was carried out. After that, it didn't matter who knew.

 
At 09 October, 2006 12:23, Blogger dmayer76 said...

I dont believe much of Loose Change. But I also dont trust the official story. Various interests and agendas have profited way too much for this to have not been something deeper then Muslem anti-American angst.

I personally believe that Al Qaeda and Osama did indeed fly the planes into the Pentaon and the WTC. But it is quite clear that the Bush team had all the neccessary evidence to know somethin bad was gonna happen in the USA using hijacked planes. Not only did they not try to stop it, there is much evidence that they prevented others from trying and even helped it along.

 
At 06 August, 2008 23:21, Blogger Scott said...

http://www.mlgpro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=83713

A thread of mine on the MLG forums (an unlikely place for a forum on thought-provoking discussion, but hey). Probably not as long as the JREF forum one, but argues well against the conspiracy, I think.

One of these weekends, I need to read through and log the counterpoints of the JREF forum post against CTers.

Keep up the good work, guys!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home