Friday, November 24, 2006

Screw Loose Change on the Radio

I had the honor of giving an interview for the SETI Radio Network, which will be running next week on Sirius Sattelite radio, along with interviews with a guy from 911truth.org and a couple of academics.

We hear the arguments from the author of a web site claiming government involvement in 9/11, and from several experts about how plausible this conspiratorial view might be, and why unconventional theories are so quickly embraced. Also, Phil Plait gives the low-down on one of the most looney of conspiracy theories: the claim that astronauts never set foot on the moon. It’s Skeptical Sunday, but don’t take our word for it.

Guests:
Michael Berger, spokesperson for the organization 911Truth.org
James Bennett, author of web blog “screw loose change
Najib Abboud, Associate Principal at Weidlinger Associates, New York
Nicholas Lemann, Dean of the Columbia School of Journalism, New York
Mark Fenster, Associate Professor of Law a the University of Florida, and author of Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture

Phil Plait, astronomer and author of the book and website http://www.badastronomy.com/


It will also be available on the net, which I will probably be listening to, as I don't have sattelite radio. This is only my second radio interview, so I hope I did a decent job. It was one of those cases where immediately after the interview I thought of 20 different things I could have said. I know for sure I was way too easy on the conspiracy theorists, it must have been that Thanksgiving Day spirit.

27 Comments:

At 24 November, 2006 16:56, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Give'em hell James.

TAM

 
At 25 November, 2006 00:37, Blogger ScottSl said...

I'm sure you did great.

 
At 25 November, 2006 06:29, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Repent.

JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both

 
At 25 November, 2006 07:34, Blogger troy said...

BG, jump off a bridge you miserable nutball. Or better yet,just move to another country you America hating paranoid freak.

 
At 25 November, 2006 09:09, Anonymous Anonymous said...

BG, Why should we watch a video from a poet like Peter Dale Scott about 911 and Kennedy?

 
At 25 November, 2006 12:41, Blogger pomeroo said...

Jay, we should watch it because it is absolutely fact-free. It is guaranteed to ignore ALL inconvenient evidence, of which there is a mountain. In short, it meets all of bg's standards.

 
At 25 November, 2006 13:26, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hehehehe, thats what i thought ;)

 
At 25 November, 2006 14:23, Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

Wait - do you mean that we DID land on the moon?

OMIGOD!

And here I thought George W. Bush brought it down with thermate.

My bad.

 
At 25 November, 2006 14:24, Blogger lawchick said...

Terrific. I'm looking forward to hearing it when it is posted online, but I suspect you did a great job, James.

 
At 25 November, 2006 14:41, Blogger shawn said...

BG, there is no question whatsoever that Lee Harvey Oswald acted as a lone gunman in killing JFK. None. At all. It's a fact just as much as gravity keeps you on planet Earth.

 
At 25 November, 2006 17:23, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

Did BG step in it again?

SHOCKING!!

 
At 25 November, 2006 17:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Somehow, I'm guessing no one watched the video that I linked to in Comment #3 on this post?

 
At 25 November, 2006 18:08, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Unlike the CT movement, most of us here not only don't rely on video evidence as the holy grail, but in fact, some of us actual couldnt be bothered.

The 9/11 truth movement is 90% regurgitation of the same old shaite by about 20 or 30 different filmaker wannabes.

TAM

 
At 25 November, 2006 18:31, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are many books about the JFK Assassination and several books about 9/11 which will substantiate the material covered by Peter Dale Scott in the video to which I linked.

If you would like references prior to watching the video, I can review and compile. Or, are you simply being a wanker?

 
At 26 November, 2006 05:04, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

By your definition, I am simply being a wanker.

I have no interest in JFK whatsoever, and as for 9/11, I have all the reliable sources I need. Thanks anyway though.

TAM (the wanker...lol)

 
At 26 November, 2006 11:53, Blogger BoggleHead said...

macrophage, i still want to know why you think keller recanted

 
At 26 November, 2006 13:13, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

She came out and made a public Confession that she had no relationship with Atta, that it was another person at the same flight school she attended. This was backed up by the FBI. What more is there to say.

TAM

 
At 26 November, 2006 13:20, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060910/NEWS/609100466/1007/BUSINESS

TAM

 
At 26 November, 2006 14:53, Blogger shawn said...

There are many books about the JFK Assassination and several books about 9/11 which will substantiate the material covered by Peter Dale Scott in the video to which I linked.

Are there any JFK assassination books that don't make tons of mistakes? I have yet to come across them.

 
At 26 November, 2006 15:39, Blogger BoggleHead said...

what more there is to say is hopsicker's response

http://www.madcowprod.com/10042006.html

 
At 26 November, 2006 15:43, Blogger BoggleHead said...

also, the FBI overlooked four months of phone records

that's what else there is to say

also, keller had long been saying she was pressured to change her story

she's just a stripper in her early 20s

she didn't come up with this story craving attention, it's not a flattering claim anyway

 
At 26 November, 2006 17:45, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

she's just a stripper in her early 20s

she didn't come up with this story craving attention, it's not a flattering claim anyway


LOL yes we all know that strippers dont crave attention!!

 
At 26 November, 2006 18:27, Blogger Alex said...

Who really gives a flying fuck about whether a stripper did or didn't date a hijacker? What are we, back in high school?

This is CT tactic #973. "Bring up totally irrelevant mini-conspiracies in order to confuse the issue."

The logic goes something like: "If I mention strippers, flights schools, germany, and a small island in the south pacific all in the same sentence, I can keep people from trying to debunk the really important parts of the CT."

 
At 26 November, 2006 23:04, Blogger BoggleHead said...

someone explain to me how to get sexual validation and male attention from claiming to have dated a islamicist suicide hijacker

i think we can dismiss anybody who tries to psychologically profile strippers in general as behaving this way

 
At 27 November, 2006 06:09, Blogger BoggleHead said...

alex, that is not the point by a longshot

 
At 27 November, 2006 08:26, Blogger Manny said...

alex, that is not the point by a longshot

That's absolutely the point. Who cares if her story is true? Assume it is -- what does it mean? It could mean that Atta was taqfir. It could mean that he was secretly less observant than he told his superiors (surely you can think of parallels among other apparently pious people). It could mean that he believed that he was paradise-bound in a few hours so why not indulge in sins which would otherwise cost him spiritually. It could mean any of a number of things, none of which are inconsistent with the established fact that Mohammad Atta and his confederates hijacked an aircraft and flew it into the World Trade Center.

 
At 27 November, 2006 14:48, Blogger Triterope said...

someone explain to me how to get sexual validation and male attention from claiming to have dated a islamicist suicide hijacker

Something like this, maybe?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home