I Take it That is a 'No'
Well I got a response from Kevin Barrett, but all I really found out is that he is nutty as a fruitcake and truthers still do not understandt he meaning of the term "ad hominem", which admittedly is not much of a revelation:
Here's my take.
On May 19, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Kevin Barrett wrote:
These rude, no-credentials, ad-hominem-spewing people seem to have a very high opinion of themselves. Though I guess Mark "I may know more about 9/11 than anyone else in the world" Roberts apparently does have a tour guide license.
"I demand that Griffin and only Griffin show up at X time for Y format blah blah blah."
Sheesh!! If these are the best people the other side can muster, I rest my case.
When I pointed out that we had demanded nothing, merely made a proposal, he continued:
Since ad hominem is the only language you folks undertand, I'll serve you straight up.
Griffin's Ph.D. involves advanced training in critical thinking. You guys need potty training first, and then a whole lot of academic training second. You wouldn't know critical thinking if it took a bite out of your malodorous buttocks.
Find us somebody with a Ph.D and 30 published books - heck, even 20 - and David will debate him. Find an accomplished pilot who isn't too big a coward to use his real name and Rob will debate him. Find me ANYBODY who isn't a no-show coward like you - they don't need to have four advanced degrees like I do, I'll settle for a pompous hack with a tour guide license - and I'll happily stoop to debate them on my shows.
Otherwise, bugger off and get a life.
Ahh yes, being told to get a life from a failed college professor who dresses up in a Guy Fawkes mask and stands on street corners. And now we have apparently established that the untimate credential for studying the events of 9/11, is a theology PhD. Explain that one.