New 9/11 truth documentary among most watched on pbs

[eots]

Though several of them (Make that most) Cross the lines and will believe nearly anything that makes the US Government the bad guy, the truthers are still a breed apart. They think they can change the laws of nature and that thousands of people can keep a secret.......

where do you get this number of thousands ????...let me guess ..you pulled it out of your ass

 

[MisterBeale]

The more interesting thing now would be the psychology behind the belligerent stupidity of the troofers, and how that might differ from the belligerent stupidity of the other conspiracy cult members.

Are troofers a different group than birfers, moon landing deniers, CIA-killed-Kennedy-believers, antivaccers or global warming deniers? What are the differences, what are the similarities? How many belong to several of those conspiracy groups?

What I find more curious is how much more intelligent, curious, educated, aware, open mined, and generally tuned in people that are willing to consider alternative paradigms to establishment history, and how they've genuinely done a better job at scientifically making sense of history than people who've just accepted their compulsory government education and the mass corporate media they've received since birth. What I think is a far more interesting topic of analysis is how the media and the mainstream educational establishment gets away with continuing to condition young minds with fabricated history that has no scientific relation to the facts. What is even more baffling is how such a large percentage of the population continues to buy stories that bare no resemblance to reality. My hypothesis is that this might have something to do with the large volume of psychotropic drug sales, anti-anxiety medications, Valium, anti-stress, sleep medications, etc., along with the fluoride that is dumped into the water.

This might help to alleviate the cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More often than not, those who believe in the establishment paradigm don't bother to drink spring water or distilled water, they are "drinking the water," as it were. They are also content to read the news that is presented to them, watch what they see on TV, or listen to what they hear on the radio with out question the source or the motive behind the stories they hear. They naturally think they are receiving "just the truth." They don't go that extra mile to do the research and look for unbiased data, to look at both side objectively. (objectively is a key word there for you conspiracy theorists out there to, just so you don't fall prey to disinfo or perhaps see conspiracies where there are, in fact, none at all.)

But do you mamooth? And how about you SFC Ollie? Ever do any research? And what about the conspiracy theorists that have your own favorite theories, ever look into the official explanations, or are you happy with your little confirmation bias?

Epistemology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is, you have TO READ if you want to be scientific, and if you want the truth. You HAVE TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You certainly can't depend on the non-profit foundations that support academia, media, the scientific and government establishment, because they have their own social engineering agenda.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&feature=plcp]The Science of Truth and Reality - YouTube[/ame]

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
~Noam Chomsky

 

[SFC Ollie]

Though several of them (Make that most) Cross the lines and will believe nearly anything that makes the US Government the bad guy, the truthers are still a breed apart. They think they can change the laws of nature and that thousands of people can keep a secret.......

where do you get this number of thousands ????...let me guess ..you pulled it out of your ass

Gee, how many do you think would have had to be involved in such a huge operation and coverup? From the original planners to the people on the ground picking up the pieces....... Thousands.........

 

[daws101]

Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Architects didn't show up for a 9/11-architecture-conspiracy documentary screening—and the AIA doesn't want its name associated with Trutherism.
By Jeremy Stahl

The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of a thermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization. At the start of his latest film, he explains that he is “a licensed architect of over 20 years and member of the American Institute of Architects.”

Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.

“I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

Gage was once warned by AIA not to spread the misimpression that there is a relationship between the two organizations, after he wrote a letter to Congress stating that more than 100 members of AIA who signed his petition were demanding a new investigation into 9/11.Architects Shy From Trutherism - Architecture - Architect Magazine Page 2 of 3

Architects Shy From Trutherism - Architecture - Architect Magazine Page 2 of 3


The AIA should be concerned that a modern, 47 floor, steel framed building, meeting all the applicable building codes in 1985 collapsed at free-fall acceleration for eight stories, uniform and symmetric across its length and breadth. This, the official story says, was due to a minor fire (by historical standards).

In response, NIST developed 47 building and fire code recommendations and shepherded them through the standards process. Virtually all were related to firefighting like intercoms in the stairwells.

All of those that were related to structures were either not accepted by the appropriate committees or simply codified best practices already in-place throughout the industry. The closest NIST got to a structural code change was "the definition of the primary structural frame to be broadened to include bracing members essential to vertical whether or not they carry gravity loads." None … not one … were relevant to competent structural design and construction designed to prevent a catastrophic, accelerating, progressive collapse of a high-rise steel framed skyscraper.

AIA members should be alarmed that no significant structural building codes emanated from this free-fall building collapse. Either unsafe, easily collapsed buildings are acceptable to AIA members ... or AIA members support the underlying fraudulent and misleading NIST reports ... or AIA members haven’t looked.

still trying to bullshit your way out of it,talk about plagiarizing: below is the whole response to the article, name of the author included WAYNE COSTE!
ARE YOU WAYNE COSTE! IF NOT, you are a plagiarist besides being an ignorant asshat!

WayneCoste 58 days ago"... according to [Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA]: “There is absolutely zero relationship … [between our groups], nor will there ever be in the future.”"

This is curious because the preamble to the AIA's Code of Ethics asserts, "that members of the American Institute of Architects are dedicated to the highest standards of professionalism*, integrity, and competence."

The AIA should be concerned that a modern, 47 floor, steel framed building, meeting all the applicable building codes in 1985 collapsed at free-fall acceleration for eight stories, uniform and symmetric across its length and breadth. This, the official story says, was due to a minor fire (by historical standards).

In response, NIST developed 47 building and fire code recommendations and shepherded them through the standards process. Virtually all were related to firefighting like intercoms in the stairwells.

All of those that were related to structures were either not accepted by the appropriate committees or simply codified best practices already in-place throughout the industry. The closest NIST got to a structural code change was "the definition of the primary structural frame to be broadened to include bracing members essential to vertical whether or not they carry gravity loads." None … not one … were relevant to competent structural design and construction designed to prevent a catastrophic, accelerating, progressive collapse of a high-rise steel framed skyscraper.

AIA members should be alarmed that no significant structural building codes emanated from this free-fall building collapse. Either unsafe, easily collapsed buildings are acceptable to AIA members ... or AIA members support the underlying fraudulent and misleading NIST reports ... or AIA members haven’t looked.

 

[daws101]

The more interesting thing now would be the psychology behind the belligerent stupidity of the troofers, and how that might differ from the belligerent stupidity of the other conspiracy cult members.

Are troofers a different group than birfers, moon landing deniers, CIA-killed-Kennedy-believers, antivaccers or global warming deniers? What are the differences, what are the similarities? How many belong to several of those conspiracy groups?

What I find more curious is how much more intelligent, curious, educated, aware, open mined, and generally tuned in people that are willing to consider alternative paradigms to establishment history, and how they've genuinely done a better job at scientifically making sense of history than people who've just accepted their compulsory government education and the mass corporate media they've received since birth. What I think is a far more interesting topic of analysis is how the media and the mainstream educational establishment gets away with continuing to condition young minds with fabricated history that has no scientific relation to the facts. What is even more baffling is how such a large percentage of the population continues to buy stories that bare no resemblance to reality. My hypothesis is that this might have something to do with the large volume of psychotropic drug sales, anti-anxiety medications, Valium, anti-stress, sleep medications, etc., along with the fluoride that is dumped into the water.

This might help to alleviate the cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More often than not, those who believe in the establishment paradigm don't bother to drink spring water or distilled water, they are "drinking the water," as it were. They are also content to read the news that is presented to them, watch what they see on TV, or listen to what they hear on the radio with out question the source or the motive behind the stories they hear. They naturally think they are receiving "just the truth." They don't go that extra mile to do the research and look for unbiased data, to look at both side objectively. (objectively is a key word there for you conspiracy theorists out there to, just so you don't fall prey to disinfo or perhaps see conspiracies where there are, in fact, none at all.)

But do you mamooth? And how about you SFC Ollie? Ever do any research? And what about the conspiracy theorists that have your own favorite theories, ever look into the official explanations, or are you happy with your little confirmation bias?

Epistemology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is, you have TO READ if you want to be scientific, and if you want the truth. You HAVE TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You certainly can't depend on the non-profit foundations that support academia, media, the scientific and government establishment, because they have their own social engineering agenda.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&feature=plcp]The Science of Truth and Reality - YouTube[/ame]

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
~Noam Chomsky

another well spoken crack pot suffering from : A cognitive bias describes a replicable pattern in perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.[1][2][3] Cognitive biases are the result of distortions in the human mind that always lead to the same pattern of poor judgment, often triggered by a particular situation. Identifying "poor judgment," or more precisely, a "deviation in judgment," requires a standard for comparison, i.e. "good judgment". In scientific investigations of cognitive bias, the source of "good judgment" is that of people outside the situation hypothesized to cause the poor judgment, or, if possible, a set of independently verifiable facts. The existence of most of the particular cognitive biases listed below has been verified empirically in psychology experiments.

Cognitive biases are influenced by evolution and natural selection pressure. Some are presumably adaptive and beneficial, for example, because they lead to more effective actions in given contexts or enable faster decisions, when faster decisions are of greater value for reproductive success and survival. Others presumably result from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms, i.e. a general fault in human brain structure, from the misapplication of a mechanism that is adaptive (beneficial) under different circumstances, or simply from noisy mental processes. Despite several decades of effort, no comprehensive theory of what creates these biases has emerged. This is why it is not straightforward to group and categorize them, and this results in what has been called "a grab bag of heuristics and biases, with no quantitative psychological theory describing the underlying processes".[4] A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

 

[eots]

though several of them (make that most) cross the lines and will believe nearly anything that makes the us government the bad guy, the truthers are still a breed apart. They think they can change the laws of nature and that thousands of people can keep a secret.......

where do you get this number of thousands ????...let me guess ..you pulled it out of your ass

gee, how many do you think would have had to be involved in such a huge operation and coverup? From the original planners to the people on the ground picking up the pieces....... Thousands.........

people on the ground picking up pieces ?? What ever are you babbling about ??

 

[eots]

The more interesting thing now would be the psychology behind the belligerent stupidity of the troofers, and how that might differ from the belligerent stupidity of the other conspiracy cult members.

Are troofers a different group than birfers, moon landing deniers, CIA-killed-Kennedy-believers, antivaccers or global warming deniers? What are the differences, what are the similarities? How many belong to several of those conspiracy groups?

What I find more curious is how much more intelligent, curious, educated, aware, open mined, and generally tuned in people that are willing to consider alternative paradigms to establishment history, and how they've genuinely done a better job at scientifically making sense of history than people who've just accepted their compulsory government education and the mass corporate media they've received since birth. What I think is a far more interesting topic of analysis is how the media and the mainstream educational establishment gets away with continuing to condition young minds with fabricated history that has no scientific relation to the facts. What is even more baffling is how such a large percentage of the population continues to buy stories that bare no resemblance to reality. My hypothesis is that this might have something to do with the large volume of psychotropic drug sales, anti-anxiety medications, Valium, anti-stress, sleep medications, etc., along with the fluoride that is dumped into the water.

This might help to alleviate the cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More often than not, those who believe in the establishment paradigm don't bother to drink spring water or distilled water, they are "drinking the water," as it were. They are also content to read the news that is presented to them, watch what they see on TV, or listen to what they hear on the radio with out question the source or the motive behind the stories they hear. They naturally think they are receiving "just the truth." They don't go that extra mile to do the research and look for unbiased data, to look at both side objectively. (objectively is a key word there for you conspiracy theorists out there to, just so you don't fall prey to disinfo or perhaps see conspiracies where there are, in fact, none at all.)

But do you mamooth? And how about you SFC Ollie? Ever do any research? And what about the conspiracy theorists that have your own favorite theories, ever look into the official explanations, or are you happy with your little confirmation bias?

Epistemology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is, you have TO READ if you want to be scientific, and if you want the truth. You HAVE TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You certainly can't depend on the non-profit foundations that support academia, media, the scientific and government establishment, because they have their own social engineering agenda.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&feature=plcp]The Science of Truth and Reality - YouTube[/ame]

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
~Noam Chomsky

another well spoken crack pot suffering from : A cognitive bias describes a replicable pattern in perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.[1][2][3] Cognitive biases are the result of distortions in the human mind that always lead to the same pattern of poor judgment, often triggered by a particular situation. Identifying "poor judgment," or more precisely, a "deviation in judgment," requires a standard for comparison, i.e. "good judgment". In scientific investigations of cognitive bias, the source of "good judgment" is that of people outside the situation hypothesized to cause the poor judgment, or, if possible, a set of independently verifiable facts. The existence of most of the particular cognitive biases listed below has been verified empirically in psychology experiments.

Cognitive biases are influenced by evolution and natural selection pressure. Some are presumably adaptive and beneficial, for example, because they lead to more effective actions in given contexts or enable faster decisions, when faster decisions are of greater value for reproductive success and survival. Others presumably result from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms, i.e. a general fault in human brain structure, from the misapplication of a mechanism that is adaptive (beneficial) under different circumstances, or simply from noisy mental processes. Despite several decades of effort, no comprehensive theory of what creates these biases has emerged. This is why it is not straightforward to group and categorize them, and this results in what has been called "a grab bag of heuristics and biases, with no quantitative psychological theory describing the underlying processes".[4] A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[5]

Stop plagerisng you loser

 

[PredFan]

The most amazing thing about truthers is how practiced they are these days. Their argument is irrational and illogical, but they do it so well that it's impressive sometimes.

 

[daws101]

What I find more curious is how much more intelligent, curious, educated, aware, open mined, and generally tuned in people that are willing to consider alternative paradigms to establishment history, and how they've genuinely done a better job at scientifically making sense of history than people who've just accepted their compulsory government education and the mass corporate media they've received since birth. What I think is a far more interesting topic of analysis is how the media and the mainstream educational establishment gets away with continuing to condition young minds with fabricated history that has no scientific relation to the facts. What is even more baffling is how such a large percentage of the population continues to buy stories that bare no resemblance to reality. My hypothesis is that this might have something to do with the large volume of psychotropic drug sales, anti-anxiety medications, Valium, anti-stress, sleep medications, etc., along with the fluoride that is dumped into the water.

This might help to alleviate the cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More often than not, those who believe in the establishment paradigm don't bother to drink spring water or distilled water, they are "drinking the water," as it were. They are also content to read the news that is presented to them, watch what they see on TV, or listen to what they hear on the radio with out question the source or the motive behind the stories they hear. They naturally think they are receiving "just the truth." They don't go that extra mile to do the research and look for unbiased data, to look at both side objectively. (objectively is a key word there for you conspiracy theorists out there to, just so you don't fall prey to disinfo or perhaps see conspiracies where there are, in fact, none at all.)

But do you mamooth? And how about you SFC Ollie? Ever do any research? And what about the conspiracy theorists that have your own favorite theories, ever look into the official explanations, or are you happy with your little confirmation bias?

Epistemology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is, you have TO READ if you want to be scientific, and if you want the truth. You HAVE TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You certainly can't depend on the non-profit foundations that support academia, media, the scientific and government establishment, because they have their own social engineering agenda.

The Science of Truth and Reality - YouTube

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
~Noam Chomsky

another well spoken crack pot suffering from : A cognitive bias describes a replicable pattern in perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.[1][2][3] Cognitive biases are the result of distortions in the human mind that always lead to the same pattern of poor judgment, often triggered by a particular situation. Identifying "poor judgment," or more precisely, a "deviation in judgment," requires a standard for comparison, i.e. "good judgment". In scientific investigations of cognitive bias, the source of "good judgment" is that of people outside the situation hypothesized to cause the poor judgment, or, if possible, a set of independently verifiable facts. The existence of most of the particular cognitive biases listed below has been verified empirically in psychology experiments.

Cognitive biases are influenced by evolution and natural selection pressure. Some are presumably adaptive and beneficial, for example, because they lead to more effective actions in given contexts or enable faster decisions, when faster decisions are of greater value for reproductive success and survival. Others presumably result from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms, i.e. a general fault in human brain structure, from the misapplication of a mechanism that is adaptive (beneficial) under different circumstances, or simply from noisy mental processes. Despite several decades of effort, no comprehensive theory of what creates these biases has emerged. This is why it is not straightforward to group and categorize them, and this results in what has been called "a grab bag of heuristics and biases, with no quantitative psychological theory describing the underlying processes".[4] A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[5]

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stop plagerisng you loser

it's plagiarizing illiterate asshat!
but thanks for reminding me to credit articles... unlike yourself

 

[daws101]

where do you get this number of thousands ????...let me guess ..you pulled it out of your ass

gee, how many do you think would have had to be involved in such a huge operation and coverup? From the original planners to the people on the ground picking up the pieces....... Thousands.........

people on the ground picking up pieces ?? What ever are you babbling about ??

what don't you understand about From the original planners to the people on the ground picking up the pieces....... Thousands

granted you have some cognative disabilities ...but that's an easy concept..

 

[MisterBeale]

another well spoken crack pot suffering from : A cognitive bias describes a replicable pattern in perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.[1][2][3] Cognitive biases are the result of distortions in the human mind that always lead to the same pattern of poor judgment, often triggered by a particular situation. Identifying "poor judgment," or more precisely, a "deviation in judgment," requires a standard for comparison, i.e. "good judgment". In scientific investigations of cognitive bias, the source of "good judgment" is that of people outside the situation hypothesized to cause the poor judgment, or, if possible, a set of independently verifiable facts. The existence of most of the particular cognitive biases listed below has been verified empirically in psychology experiments.

Cognitive biases are influenced by evolution and natural selection pressure. Some are presumably adaptive and beneficial, for example, because they lead to more effective actions in given contexts or enable faster decisions, when faster decisions are of greater value for reproductive success and survival. Others presumably result from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms, i.e. a general fault in human brain structure, from the misapplication of a mechanism that is adaptive (beneficial) under different circumstances, or simply from noisy mental processes. Despite several decades of effort, no comprehensive theory of what creates these biases has emerged. This is why it is not straightforward to group and categorize them, and this results in what has been called "a grab bag of heuristics and biases, with no quantitative psychological theory describing the underlying processes".[4] A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[5]

I applaud you daws101, you have at least understood the main of thrust of my post and taken the time to do a wee bit of research to alleviate the bit of dissonance you feel to defend your paradigm of reality to the extent that you can. I suspect that your first route of attack was to Google what "cognitive" meant?

Unfortunately, when you plagiarize, it really discredits all your authority when speaking to your knowledge of understanding the argument you are making.

The Psychology of Plagiarism
The Psychology of Plagiarism | Plagiarism Today

The Idiot

Finally some people steal because they are simply stupid. Though, these days, they are commonly bloggers making their first forays into personal publishing, a lot of more mainstream personal sites get caught up in it as well.

Many never intend to take work as their own but simply forget to attribute their sources. Others don’t realize that, if you put no attribution on a piece, people assume it was written by you. Still others are hanging on to misconceptions about copyright law and feel that this type of reuse is how the Internet, especially blogging, is supposed to work.

A lot of times, these plagiarists come from foreign countries where copyright laws aren’t strictly enforced. Others were simply never introduced to them at all. They can also be nearly any age, running any kind of site.

The trick, however, is in spotting them. Most copyright idiots appear to be one of the other kind of plagiarists. Most people who claim to simply be ignorant really are one of the other kinds. There’s simply no way to tell for certain, no litmus test to apply and no means of determining if the plagiarist you’re dealing with is malicious or just truly ignorant, especially when looking at the site.

As such, there’s no way to deal with these plagiarists. They have to be treated simply as if they were one of the other two kinds. It’s a sad fact, but a soft approach, which would undoubtedly be better for handling these cases, would create a great deal of trouble should the plagiarism turn out to be intentional.

I understand that this insignificant colon was probably meant to signify to people on this board that you were quoting from Wikipedia, however, when you are offering a countervailing [sic]your opinion, perhaps you should have put it into some sort of context for us rather than just making it sound like it was your own words rather than just have us Google phrases in it so we can find the original source. It makes you sound terribly disingenuous. What parts in post or in my behavior make you suspect I am suffering from cognitive biases? The Barnum effect? How about Confirmation bias? I find that a lot of people that believe NIST's report and the government's official version of what happened on 911 and the JFK assassination suffer from Confirmation bias, don't you? What about Curse of knowledge? That really bugs me. That is what I was trying to warn the conspiracy theorists on this board about. Me? I frankly think there are large amounts of misinformation purposely put out by clandestine organizations. (But then I have over seven years of University education, and IQ that is only 10 points off of genius, and a family that is heavily into Freemasonry, so I have some experience and knowledge and know clandestine organizations do have a much stronger influence on the compartmentalization of American institutions than most people believe.) What about False-consensus effect? As you can see, the list goes on and on. But you were rather sneaky, and dare I say, deceptive, as you DID NOT LIST YOUR SOURCE FOR ALL THE BOARD TO SEE, DID YOU? So who's position, and who's character do you think they are going to believe? An honest man, or a deceptive one?

What we have here is a classic case of an Ad Hominem fallacy. Rather than seriously take my discussion of how we form our perception of reality from our epistemological references, you accuse me of cognitive bias. While I do not deny that WE ALL are subject to cognitive bias, this argument is lazy to the extreme, fails to address the argument directly, is misdirecting, and diverting the argument. Personal attacks are tactics of the weaker side of a debate and of feebler minds. I wold expect better of one who has the self-motivation to do their own research.

Just in case you are unfamiliar. I'll do the leg work for you.
Description of Ad Hominem
Fallacy: Ad Hominem

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The more interesting thing now would be the psychology behind the belligerent stupidity of the troofers, and how that might differ from the belligerent stupidity of the other conspiracy cult members.

Are troofers a different group than birfers, moon landing deniers, CIA-killed-Kennedy-believers, antivaccers or global warming deniers? What are the differences, what are the similarities? How many belong to several of those conspiracy groups?

says the troll who listens to Dawgshit and Gomer Ollie as well as worshipping the corporate controlled media and our corrupt government institutions which ALL have a history of lying to the american people that strecthes miles long and ignores what architects,engineers,demolition experts,high ranking militay officers and expert pilots say.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The most amazing thing about truthers is how practiced they are these days. Their argument is irrational and illogical, but they do it so well that it's impressive sometimes.

this folks coming from the troll who anytime ANYBODY challenges him to refute facts in the JFK assassination or 9/11, throws insults and runs off.

I know he has me on his ignore list.He did that after I handed his ass to him on a platter that there was never a shread of evidence that Oswald killed kennedy-hee hee,he threw a temper tantrme then when he could not counter my facts and then ran off and has put me on ignore ever since.Hee hee.

He has ME on ignore,but he doesnt have Eots on ignore,but notice how the chickenshit coward hasnt tried to even debunk one of Eots videos? no surprise there,not even the PAID trolls like Gomer Ollie or Dawgshit even try to do that.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The more interesting thing now would be the psychology behind the belligerent stupidity of the troofers, and how that might differ from the belligerent stupidity of the other conspiracy cult members.

Are troofers a different group than birfers, moon landing deniers, CIA-killed-Kennedy-believers, antivaccers or global warming deniers? What are the differences, what are the similarities? How many belong to several of those conspiracy groups?

What I find more curious is how much more intelligent, curious, educated, aware, open mined, and generally tuned in people that are willing to consider alternative paradigms to establishment history, and how they've genuinely done a better job at scientifically making sense of history than people who've just accepted their compulsory government education and the mass corporate media they've received since birth. What I think is a far more interesting topic of analysis is how the media and the mainstream educational establishment gets away with continuing to condition young minds with fabricated history that has no scientific relation to the facts. What is even more baffling is how such a large percentage of the population continues to buy stories that bare no resemblance to reality. My hypothesis is that this might have something to do with the large volume of psychotropic drug sales, anti-anxiety medications, Valium, anti-stress, sleep medications, etc., along with the fluoride that is dumped into the water.

This might help to alleviate the cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More often than not, those who believe in the establishment paradigm don't bother to drink spring water or distilled water, they are "drinking the water," as it were. They are also content to read the news that is presented to them, watch what they see on TV, or listen to what they hear on the radio with out question the source or the motive behind the stories they hear. They naturally think they are receiving "just the truth." They don't go that extra mile to do the research and look for unbiased data, to look at both side objectively. (objectively is a key word there for you conspiracy theorists out there to, just so you don't fall prey to disinfo or perhaps see conspiracies where there are, in fact, none at all.)

But do you mamooth? And how about you SFC Ollie? Ever do any research? And what about the conspiracy theorists that have your own favorite theories, ever look into the official explanations, or are you happy with your little confirmation bias?

Epistemology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The point is, you have TO READ if you want to be scientific, and if you want the truth. You HAVE TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You certainly can't depend on the non-profit foundations that support academia, media, the scientific and government establishment, because they have their own social engineering agenda.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&feature=plcp]The Science of Truth and Reality - YouTube[/ame]

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
~Noam Chomsky

The brainwashed trolls like Predfan and Mammoth who have been taken in and brainwashed by the posts of not only Gomer Ollie and Dawgshit,but the mainstream media,they obviously ditcjed junior high school science classes because they are cluless about the laws of physics.

they also consider credible people like that fireman in that video Eots posted,a crackpot.



their logic is if the media and our government says its true,its automatically the truth.they should start a comedy club.

they also consider these people here nutcases as well.

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[LA RAM FAN]

another well spoken crack pot suffering from : A cognitive bias describes a replicable pattern in perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.[1][2][3] Cognitive biases are the result of distortions in the human mind that always lead to the same pattern of poor judgment, often triggered by a particular situation. Identifying "poor judgment," or more precisely, a "deviation in judgment," requires a standard for comparison, i.e. "good judgment". In scientific investigations of cognitive bias, the source of "good judgment" is that of people outside the situation hypothesized to cause the poor judgment, or, if possible, a set of independently verifiable facts. The existence of most of the particular cognitive biases listed below has been verified empirically in psychology experiments.

Cognitive biases are influenced by evolution and natural selection pressure. Some are presumably adaptive and beneficial, for example, because they lead to more effective actions in given contexts or enable faster decisions, when faster decisions are of greater value for reproductive success and survival. Others presumably result from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms, i.e. a general fault in human brain structure, from the misapplication of a mechanism that is adaptive (beneficial) under different circumstances, or simply from noisy mental processes. Despite several decades of effort, no comprehensive theory of what creates these biases has emerged. This is why it is not straightforward to group and categorize them, and this results in what has been called "a grab bag of heuristics and biases, with no quantitative psychological theory describing the underlying processes".[4] A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[5]

I applaud you daws101, you have at least understood the main of thrust of my post and taken the time to do a wee bit of research to alleviate the bit of dissonance you feel to defend your paradigm of reality to the extent that you can. I suspect that your first route of attack was to Google what "cognitive" meant?

Unfortunately, when you plagiarize, it really discredits all your authority when speaking to your knowledge of understanding the argument you are making.

The Psychology of Plagiarism
The Psychology of Plagiarism | Plagiarism Today

The Idiot

Finally some people steal because they are simply stupid. Though, these days, they are commonly bloggers making their first forays into personal publishing, a lot of more mainstream personal sites get caught up in it as well.

Many never intend to take work as their own but simply forget to attribute their sources. Others don’t realize that, if you put no attribution on a piece, people assume it was written by you. Still others are hanging on to misconceptions about copyright law and feel that this type of reuse is how the Internet, especially blogging, is supposed to work.

A lot of times, these plagiarists come from foreign countries where copyright laws aren’t strictly enforced. Others were simply never introduced to them at all. They can also be nearly any age, running any kind of site.

The trick, however, is in spotting them. Most copyright idiots appear to be one of the other kind of plagiarists. Most people who claim to simply be ignorant really are one of the other kinds. There’s simply no way to tell for certain, no litmus test to apply and no means of determining if the plagiarist you’re dealing with is malicious or just truly ignorant, especially when looking at the site.

As such, there’s no way to deal with these plagiarists. They have to be treated simply as if they were one of the other two kinds. It’s a sad fact, but a soft approach, which would undoubtedly be better for handling these cases, would create a great deal of trouble should the plagiarism turn out to be intentional.

I understand that this insignificant colon was probably meant to signify to people on this board that you were quoting from Wikipedia, however, when you are offering a countervailing [sic]your opinion, perhaps you should have put it into some sort of context for us rather than just making it sound like it was your own words rather than just have us Google phrases in it so we can find the original source. It makes you sound terribly disingenuous. What parts in post or in my behavior make you suspect I am suffering from cognitive biases? The Barnum effect? How about Confirmation bias? I find that a lot of people that believe NIST's report and the government's official version of what happened on 911 and the JFK assassination suffer from Confirmation bias, don't you? What about Curse of knowledge? That really bugs me. That is what I was trying to warn the conspiracy theorists on this board about. Me? I frankly think there are large amounts of misinformation purposely put out by clandestine organizations. (But then I have over seven years of University education, and IQ that is only 10 points off of genius, and a family that is heavily into Freemasonry, so I have some experience and knowledge and know clandestine organizations do have a much stronger influence on the compartmentalization of American institutions than most people believe.) What about False-consensus effect? As you can see, the list goes on and on. But you were rather sneaky, and dare I say, deceptive, as you DID NOT LIST YOUR SOURCE FOR ALL THE BOARD TO SEE, DID YOU? So who's position, and who's character do you think they are going to believe? An honest man, or a deceptive one?

What we have here is a classic case of an Ad Hominem fallacy. Rather than seriously take my discussion of how we form our perception of reality from our epistemological references, you accuse me of cognitive bias. While I do not deny that WE ALL are subject to cognitive bias, this argument is lazy to the extreme, fails to address the argument directly, is misdirecting, and diverting the argument. Personal attacks are tactics of the weaker side of a debate and of feebler minds. I wold expect better of one who has the self-motivation to do their own research.

Just in case you are unfamiliar. I'll do the leg work for you.
Description of Ad Hominem
Fallacy: Ad Hominem

you mean you applaud Dawgshit.

oh and when you says conspiracy theorists,that would be people like Dawgshit,Gomer Ollie,Predfan troll and Mommoth troll.

 

[MisterBeale]

Though several of them (Make that most) Cross the lines and will believe nearly anything that makes the US Government the bad guy, the truthers are still a breed apart. They think they can change the laws of nature and that thousands of people can keep a secret.......

where do you get this number of thousands ????...let me guess ..you pulled it out of your ass

Gee, how many do you think would have had to be involved in such a huge operation and coverup? From the original planners to the people on the ground picking up the pieces....... Thousands.........

I concur. Probably there were hundreds involved in this operation, perhaps thousands. You yourself are a pawn, and I myself am included when we add to the clutter about this foolishness and pay attention to what the media is selling. The media is the problem when they pay attention to the bureaucrats who are the problem when they listen to government "experts" who are the problem when they listen to "high" ranking officials. High ranking officials are the problem when they listen to. . . lol etc. Hell, even "troothers" are part of the paradigm, because they don't even have any idea what happened, or who the planted the original idea that there was probably a conspiracy involved.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5M0xtxQVQ]Bush Addresses the U.N. - tells the world no 911 discussions - YouTube[/ame]

The thing about any social engineering project, is that it doesn't take "thousands" or even "hundreds" of people to understand what is going on. It only takes ten, maybe twenty at the very top to get the ball rolling. They then give orders to their people below them. They do not tell them why these orders are given, they just tell them they must complete their mission, and that it is for the greater good of the nation. When there are orders that must be carried out that might cause thoughts in subordinates that are not in the best interests of the nation, foreign clandestine organizations will be used. (I have a video I could post on that if anyone is truly interested, it's about an hour long.) That is the nature of the security apparatus. These concepts are known as "compartmentalization" and "Multilateral security models."

Security Architecture and Design/Security Models
Security Architecture and Design/Security Models - Wikibooks, open books for an open world

Read more: The Advantages & Disadvantages of a Matrix Organization | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_8299532_advantages-disadvantages-matrix-organization.html#ixzz27Eo6CyP7

Compartmentalization

One of the disadvantages of a matrix organization is that it can lead to over-compartmentalization in a company. As each department focuses more and more on its own tasks, departments may fail to effectively communicate with one another. The overall cohesion of an organization can begin to break down if workers and managers begin to feel more of a commitment to their department than to the overall company. People may lose sight of the larger picture.

Poor Management Compartmentalization
http://www.governing.com/blogs/view/Poor-Management-Compartmentalization.html

Just last month, a local agency (which shall go nameless) couldn't redirect my call and hung up on me three times after telling me that no one was in charge. The truth of the matter was that the agency was temporarily without a director, but for the person on the other end of the line, that settled my question. I had asked for the director, they didn't have one, end of story. My real question -- what I would have asked the director or anyone in charge -- didn't really matter. The operator's call job was to direct calls and this call didn't have a direction, at least not one that the operator could route.

That was the management problem -- no one had explained the agency's purpose or structure to the operator. Nor had anyone familiarized the operator with other related agencies. It turned out that my query actually pertained to another department. But it took several more calls to figure that out.

Simply put, they have used the disadvantages of matrix organization to keep things secret. Would you disagree that there is no organization on earth that is more compartmentalized and more bureaucratic than the United States Federal government? I think that is just about the one thing on the forum that everyone, be it conservative, liberal, libertarian, anarchist, etc. could agree on. No organization is more fragmented, bureaucratic and organized through matrices than government at all levels in the US.

You see, most bureaucrats, intelligence agents, soldiers, etc. are extremely patriotic and well meaning. It isn't a matter of whether or not they would "blow the whistle." It is a matter of whether or not they actually know what is going on and whether they have intelligence clearance about what is going on above pay-grades above their own. They don't. It is an hierarchical pyramidal structure. Take a look at the one dollar bill, see the eye at the top? That should explain everything you need to know about how this operation was carried out. The government of the people is not evil. Don't ever think that. The framers of the Constitution were brilliant men, what they have done has been corrupted over the centuries. The bureaucracy has been manipulated by those who have been put in charge of the bureaucracy. And make no mistake, they haven't gotten there by accident.

Oscar Wilde ~ "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

 

[eots]

Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Architects didn't show up for a 9/11-architecture-conspiracy documentary screening—and the AIA doesn't want its name associated with Trutherism.
By Jeremy Stahl

The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of a thermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.

What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization. At the start of his latest film, he explains that he is “a licensed architect of over 20 years and member of the American Institute of Architects.”

Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.

“I can’t tell you how grateful we were to have been accepted to be here in the boardroom at the national headquarters,” Gage said. “We hope this is the beginning of a very productive relationship.”

Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

Gage was once warned by AIA not to spread the misimpression that there is a relationship between the two organizations, after he wrote a letter to Congress stating that more than 100 members of AIA who signed his petition were demanding a new investigation into 9/11.Architects Shy From Trutherism - Architecture - Architect Magazine Page 2 of 3

Architects Shy From Trutherism - Architecture - Architect Magazine Page 2 of 3


The AIA should be concerned that a modern, 47 floor, steel framed building, meeting all the applicable building codes in 1985 collapsed at free-fall acceleration for eight stories, uniform and symmetric across its length and breadth. This, the official story says, was due to a minor fire (by historical standards).

In response, NIST developed 47 building and fire code recommendations and shepherded them through the standards process. Virtually all were related to firefighting like intercoms in the stairwells.

All of those that were related to structures were either not accepted by the appropriate committees or simply codified best practices already in-place throughout the industry. The closest NIST got to a structural code change was "the definition of the primary structural frame to be broadened to include bracing members essential to vertical whether or not they carry gravity loads." None … not one … were relevant to competent structural design and construction designed to prevent a catastrophic, accelerating, progressive collapse of a high-rise steel framed skyscraper.

AIA members should be alarmed that no significant structural building codes emanated from this free-fall building collapse. Either unsafe, easily collapsed buildings are acceptable to AIA members ... or AIA members support the underlying fraudulent and misleading NIST reports ... or AIA members haven’t looked.

still trying to bullshit your way out of it,talk about plagiarizing: below is the whole response to the article, name of the author included WAYNE COSTE!
ARE YOU WAYNE COSTE! IF NOT, you are a plagiarist besides being an ignorant asshat!

WayneCoste 58 days ago"... according to [Scott Frank, head of media relations for the AIA]: “There is absolutely zero relationship … [between our groups], nor will there ever be in the future.”"

This is curious because the preamble to the AIA's Code of Ethics asserts, "that members of the American Institute of Architects are dedicated to the highest standards of professionalism*, integrity, and competence."

The AIA should be concerned that a modern, 47 floor, steel framed building, meeting all the applicable building codes in 1985 collapsed at free-fall acceleration for eight stories, uniform and symmetric across its length and breadth. This, the official story says, was due to a minor fire (by historical standards).

In response, NIST developed 47 building and fire code recommendations and shepherded them through the standards process. Virtually all were related to firefighting like intercoms in the stairwells.

All of those that were related to structures were either not accepted by the appropriate committees or simply codified best practices already in-place throughout the industry. The closest NIST got to a structural code change was "the definition of the primary structural frame to be broadened to include bracing members essential to vertical whether or not they carry gravity loads." None … not one … were relevant to competent structural design and construction designed to prevent a catastrophic, accelerating, progressive collapse of a high-rise steel framed skyscraper.

AIA members should be alarmed that no significant structural building codes emanated from this free-fall building collapse. Either unsafe, easily collapsed buildings are acceptable to AIA members ... or AIA members support the underlying fraudulent and misleading NIST reports ... or AIA members haven’t looked.

I posted a portion of what he wrote with the appropriate link to the rest
you are pretending otherwise in a flailing attempt excuse your failure to do the same...post links and stop being a plagiarist...end of story..

 

[MisterBeale]

you mean you applaud Dawgshit.

oh and when you says conspiracy theorists,that would be people like Dawgshit,Gomer Ollie,Predfan troll and Mommoth troll.

No actually, he raises a very good point. We all suffer to some degree or another from cognitive bias. I hold no ill will toward those who defend the dominant paradigm as long as they don't engage in Ad hominem personal attacks. If they address the issues and argument you present, and you address the issues and argument they present, then we will all be much closer at arriving at a clearer picture of reality. Perhaps I should not have used the term, "conspiracy theorist," because it has, in popular culture, come to be almost a derogatory term, hasn't it? Indeed I could self identify as one who puts forth what could be classified as such. However, I would prefer to think of them as social engineering projects by the cultural elites.

It is important to be just as skeptical of ones own theories and own paradigms as it is of the dominant paradigms, that is all I was driving at. For instance, you have a link in your signature that references a movie produced by Alex Jones and his infowars establishment, but it is reasonably well known among competent researches that he has link to the Jesuits and the Society of Jesus. The Knights of Malta and the Vatican have had observer status on the UN for far longer than the PLO. Any idea how the superstition of Friday the thirteenth came about?

I've watched that movie. It's intent is to heighten fear and anger among the populace and actually cause the rioting and revolt that the elites WANT, in order to give them an excuse to declare the martial law they have been itching to declare. Are you really that obtuse?

I would suggest that your knowledge of esoterica has some holes in it it and you are prone to cognitive biases as well as I. How about a little Bandwagon effect, Confirmation bias, Omission bias, Recency bias, or Semmelweis reflex for starters?

Now I don't mean this to be a personal attack. I really like your posts, and I think they are very productive. But I don't think negative posts or attacks on posters who are clearly patriotic and who want the best for the nation are really going to endear you to them or want the best for the nation are helpful either, do you?

Alex Jones may be biased, just like the main stream media.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD_vwzjdTi4]9/11 - Missing Links ( full movie ) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[mamooth]

But do you mamooth?

Obviously yes. I've looked at much of the Truther evidence. That's how I know it stinks so badly. I can identify the defective logic it users, the laughably bad physics, the way it relies almost entirely on cherrypicking, the way it wildy violates the razor and common sense

I can explain why Truther arguments stink. And they can't do the reverse. You disagree with them, they ignore the explanation and go off on a rant about you've been brainwashed by the government/media, and how they themselves are the only special ones who are smart enough to see the truth.

That is, they put their paranoia on display. Basically answering part of my question, that a heightened sense of paranoia is one common factor among them.

That leads to the next issue -- how many conspiracy theorists are cannabis users? Given how many of them rage against the "pharmaceutical industry", I'd guess a lot of them. Heightened paranoia is a common side-effect of cannabis usage.

 

[PredFan]

Most watched on PBS?

That means that three people watched it.