New 9/11 truth documentary among most watched on pbs

[eots]

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.

A bunch of empty babble...void of any facts or specifics in regard to 9/11

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.

More of the same, rambling on like some loon...still not a single specific about
9/11

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.

and now the big stinky red herring.....So do you care to explain the how NIST determined that there were no explosives involved in the collapses of the towers and the wtc 7 ?..and why you think their theory is logical and sound

 

[MisterBeale]

Most watched on PBS?

That means that three people watched it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MM61-bZZ4E]muppet show - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

Millions of dollars spent on the truther movement and they still have nothing to take into court.......

Who'd a thunk it???????????????????

 

[eots]

Millions of dollars spent on the truther movement and they still have nothing to take into court.......

Who'd a thunk it???????????????????

still waiting for you to explain how an individual would proceed with court in regards to 9\11

 

[waltky]

China is the only one capable...

... an' if we don't get our financial house in order...

... dey may just reposses the White House.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Millions of dollars spent on the truther movement and they still have nothing to take into court.......

Who'd a thunk it???????????????????

still waiting for you to explain how an individual would proceed with court in regards to 9\11

People and Organizations sue the government all the time............

 

[eots]

millions of dollars spent on the truther movement and they still have nothing to take into court.......

Who'd a thunk it???????????????????

still waiting for you to explain how an individual would proceed with court in regards to 9\11

people and organizations sue the government all the time............

so you are talking about a personal injury claim against an agency ?

 

[SFC Ollie]

still waiting for you to explain how an individual would proceed with court in regards to 9\11

people and organizations sue the government all the time............

so you are talking about a personal injury claim against an agency ?

What have you got proof of?

 

[eots]

people and organizations sue the government all the time............

so you are talking about a personal injury claim against an agency ?

What have you got proof of?

If your personal injury suit involves a claim against a federal, state, local government entity, or a government employee, you will most likely need to follow strict guidelines in bringing a lawsuit, including the requirement that you file a "notice of claim" within as few as 60 days after your injury. This is because governments and their subdivisions are usually entitled to what is known as "immunity" to liability and lawsuits, meaning that they cannot ordinarily be sued without permission.

Injury Claims Against the Government - FindLaw

 

[SFC Ollie]

Yeah, OK......

You got nothing.......

 

[eots]

yeah, ok......

You got nothing.......

actually it is you that has nothing...with your take the government to court babble...

 

[SFC Ollie]

The Government submitted a lot of their evidence in court, and got a conviction..... You cannot disprove that evidence.... If you could then Zacarias Moussaou would be a free man today.......

 

[daws101]

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

"I suspect that your first route of attack was to Google what "cognitive" meant? "

right out of the twoofer hand book! instantly make a false declarative statement about your detractors.... then yammer on endlessly about ot nonsense.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

two farts in a row from the agent trolls.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Excuse me nutjob, do you actually have anything to say worth reading?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

two farts in a row from the agent trolls.

another one just now as well at 3:10 pm.

 

[SFC Ollie]

That's what i thought......... Carry on.........

 

[daws101]

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..

still lying ...my fail ure ? lol
I simply forgot ..you. on the other hand had no intention of crediting the author, hoping no one would notice that by some magical means you'd learned to write.
if any one is failing it's you.
any one with any integrity would have corrected the mistake on their own or when reminded...thanks again for the reminder .

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Millions of dollars spent on the truther movement and they still have nothing to take into court.......

Who'd a thunk it???????????????????

still waiting for you to explain how an individual would proceed with court in regards to 9\11

that would never go anywhere.Our congress is bought off and corrupt and infiltrated by the zionists.Here is the proof in the pudding.Listen to the extremely loud ovation congress gives to the israeli prime minister.I guarantee you they would never give the leader of New Zealand a loud standing ovation like that.
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=693

Because of 9/11 and how Obama has expanded the assault on the constitution and our civil liberties that were taken away on 9/11 because of the patriot act,its no wonder congress has earned that 7% approval rating from the american people,the lowest EVER in its history.

 

[daws101]

But do you mamooth?

A bunch of empty babble...void of any facts or specifics in regard to 9/11





More of the same, rambling on like some loon...still not a single specific about
9/11

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.

and now the big stinky red herring.....So do you care to explain the how NIST determined that there were no explosives involved in the collapses of the towers and the wtc 7 ?..and why you think their theory is logical and sound

bahahahahahahahahaha!
all your questions have been ask and answered.
YOU WILL NOT ACCEPT THEM AS FACT.. INSTEAD YOU AND PEOPLE LIKE YOU HAVE BUILTA FANTASY OF LIES, PSEUDOSCIENCE AND DENIAL.