David Ray Griffin Once Again Shows Why He Is Not a Scientist

scientific method (a method of investigation involving observation and theory to test scientific hypotheses)

Once again David Ray Griffin shows why he is a theologian, not a scientist, as he is proud of the fact that he does not have to propose a hypothesis, or defend anything remotely resembling a coherent argument:

Do you have a personal theory of what really happened on Sept. 11?

No, and I made a big point of not developing such a theory, and even encouraging members of the movement not to do this. Because insofar as there are antagonisms and disputes within the movement, they’re related primarily to those things, where people say, well, here’s what hit the Pentagon, and others say that’s not true. I put my focus on the evidence that the official story is false, and the evidence is so abundant and overwhelming that to make the case you don’t have to prove what really happened and who did it and so on. It’s like if you had a murder trial, and Jones is accused of murder. The defense attorneys can prove that Jones didn’t do it without having a theory about who really did. All you have to do is have a good alibi and lack of evidence and so on. The critics say, you’ve got to have a theory. No, you don’t have to have a theory. When you develop a theory, that’s what the debunkers love. They want to say, “That’s nonsense,” and take attention away from all the evidence we have marshaled to show the official story is false.

You know, to most people the fact that you cannot agree on even the most basic facts would indicate a weakness in your argument and logic, but no, this idiot is content with simply saying, "Don't talk about that, ignore the problems!"