Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-20 of 20 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Sep 27, 2007 1:51:00 PM PDT
Well, as I suspected, Griffin is up to his old illogical tricks again. It seems someone who has read the "Debuking" book by Griffin has confirmed my earlier suspicions about his latest work trying to debunk those who have already debunked 911 wild conspiracy theories.

http://www.911myths.com/drg_nist_review_1_1.pdf

LOL...now of course there will always be those people who go by that old saying, "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up," but for those of us who like to base our views on solid and credible facts, we'll go with the vast majority of experts and others who don't distort information and take people out of context to "prove" what they believe.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 4, 2008 5:53:55 PM PST
Kameelyun says:
And now introducing... Debunking IV: The Next Generation... ;-)

A critical review (though still in progress) of Mackey's response to Griffin:

http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/mackey/

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 4, 2008 6:05:09 PM PST
LOL...as if anything from 911research has credibility on the topic. Jim Hoffman's credibility is suspect (a SOFTWARE engineeer). Just because someone can "respond" to an argument does not mean the response is valid.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 4, 2008 6:53:25 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2008 2:40:41 PM PST
Kameelyun says:
Well, judging from your website, you are a religious nut, a zealot, a fanatic... so explains your endless appeal to authority instead of actually looking at the material in question.

As Leonardo da Vinci so aptly states: "Whoever in a discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but rather memory."

You did let one truth slip out: "Just because someone can "respond" to an argument does not mean the response is valid." This would be entirely true of Ryan Mackey's paper. You probably didn't even read Mackey's paper just like you didn't read Hoffman's response to it; you just found out that Mackey wrote a rebuttal to Griffin, and so, in your juvenile desire to "win," you just slapped his PDF here for all to see. "Debunkers have answered Griffin; we win!!!" Not going to work, buddy.

Oh, by the way, to turn your tactics on you, Mackey is not an architect or demolition expert. So why should I read what he has to say (even though I have)?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 4, 2008 7:24:42 PM PST
LOL...religious nut...now ain't that special...ignorance, that is. The fact that you could even make such a ridiculous, infantile and silly claim as that shows exactly why you are a 911 wild con-spiracy believer.

Do you KNOW if I read Hoffman's work? No. You don't. You are assuming. Do you know if I read Mackey? No. You 'probably' don't know what you're talking about, as most 911 con-spiracy believers don't.

Time and again you guys get your heads handed to you on a plater, and you still want to believe the earth is flat. Be my guest. LOL.

And your attempt to "turn" any tactics on me simply won't work. You could use a good course in logical reasoning, as there is nothing wrong with an appropriate appeal to authority if YOU are not one yourself.

Mackey does not have to be an architect or demolition "expert" to make valid claims in those areas IF a) it can be shown his work is backed up by credible experts in those fields or b) his work references credible experts in the relevant fields.

As I have mentioned before, Griffin has an agenda and commits more logical errors than Richard Dawkins talking about God...LOL. So, the bottom line is that the facts say that we "win," and when you guys get some, perhaps you might "win" over more converts to your con-spiracy nonsense. But most people are on to the silly claims of con-spiracy theorists and don't take them seriously...thank GOD.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 4, 2008 7:54:36 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Mar 19, 2009 12:31:02 AM PDT
Kameelyun says:
"LOL...religious nut...now ain't that special...ignorance, that is."

Well, you believe in this dude who broke the laws of physics by walking on water. And turning water into wine as if he were waving a magic wand. And the James Randi in me wants empirical proof that your dude came back to life and ascended into heaven. But... your beliefs there would explain why you believe in modern "magic" - such as what happened to the WTC on 9/11 if you believe the official story. You probably even sit in your pew in church, squinting your eyes as you pray... "I have faith, I have faith, I have faith... that Jesus really DID break the laws of physics and walk on water!"

I won't make any secret of it, it's times like this I can barely contain my seething disdain for such right wing, Bush-supporting, homophobic, bigoted religious zealot nuts like yourself who pontificate about the evils of homosexuality, and other such regressive viewpoints, then have the gaul to come onto topics like these and pretend to speak for science. You complete and utter charlatan.

Maybe I'm assuming you haven't read Hoffman or Mackey but I KNOW you haven't read Griffin's D911D because you've said so. Charlatan.

Proof your cult of "Christianity" is a sham:
zeitgeistmovie.com

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2008 4:55:36 AM PST
liverleef says:
You may want to download version 2.0 of Ryan Mackey's paper. All of the complaints raised by Mr Ryan have been addressed.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2008 11:51:20 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 7, 2008 11:53:08 AM PST
Kameelyun says:
Ah, Ryan Mackey, scientist-for-hire. :D

The only ones who think he's credible are the loyal JREFers.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 8, 2008 10:25:24 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 8, 2008 10:29:18 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 8, 2008 10:32:46 AM PST
Addressing complaints does not mean you do it in such a way to answer them credibly. Anyone can "address" something. But how scientifically credible the address is remains to be seen. Flat-earthers "address" the complaint that the earth is round, but needless to say their claims are silly, just like 911 "truthers."

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2008 8:25:43 PM PST
Kameelyun says:
"First of all, the "dude" that allegedly broke the laws of physics actually made the laws."

Show me your proof. :D

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 5, 2009 2:47:02 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 5, 2009 2:48:11 AM PST
Daniels, Have you read "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" by Professor Griffin?

Jose M. Paulino
Author of "The War on Terror Fraud"

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 5, 2009 9:18:24 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 18, 2009 6:20:11 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Mar 18, 2009 6:20:33 PM PDT]

Posted on Apr 10, 2009 12:33:31 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 10, 2009 12:36:36 PM PDT
Kameelyun says:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
http://911blogger.com/node/19761

Traces of Explosives in 9/11 Dust, Scientists Say
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705295677/Traces-of-explosives-in-911-dust-scientists-say.html?pg=1

And lately two important groups have developed:

Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth
mp911truth.ORG

and

Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth
pl911truth.COM

And if you missed it, in 2008 we saw the advent of FireFightersFor911Truth.org. Now the Fox TV series "Rescue Me," firefighter Franco Rivera (played by Daniel Sunjata) espouses the case that 9/11 was an inside job. This has caused one columnist to write the following article "Heated Controversy: Do Firefighters Believe 9/11 Conspiracy Theories?" Might be worth a look to all:
http://www.slate.com/id/2215703/

Posted on Apr 17, 2009 1:36:58 PM PDT
liverleef says:
Ever heard of firehouse.com? Its the internet discussion forum for firefighters. It has over 60,000 members. What do they think of firefighters for 911truth?

http://forums.firehouse.com/showthread.php?t=107457

Posted on Apr 17, 2009 9:15:35 PM PDT
Kameelyun says:
Ah, Mr. Shill Liver appears right on cue.

I've seen the thread and much of it hinges on a couple FDNY folks who despise 9/11 truth... I haven't gone back to the thread but I don't think I saw any mention there of FDNY firefighter John Schroeder who supports 9/11 truth...

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 18, 2009 6:34:20 PM PDT
liverleef says:
well there are nearly 200 posts in that thread and nearly all of them consist of everyday firemen ridiculing firefighters for truth. As far as John Schroeder, since he represents a tiny fraction of the first responders on 911 and an even smaller fraction of firefighters in general they likely thought him inconsequential. But hey if you want to believe that .0001% of professionals believing this stuff is somehow meaningful then I guess go ahead and believe whatever you want.

Posted on Apr 22, 2009 2:47:49 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 26, 2009 11:51:31 PM PDT
Kameelyun says:
Hey Daniels, last night I did watch "The God Who Wasn't There" and yes I did indeed like it!

And liverleef, I know you know about the many people in history who have held a minority, even hated/ridiculed position at one time, merely for history to vindicate them over the passage of time. Ultimately truth is not a popularity contest; only the foible nature of the human condition wants to make it so. On that firehouse thread, virtually all of the firefighters who ridicule FF911T use precisely that: ridicule. The truther firefighters who posted on there tried to use civility, reason and discourse, and were met with hateful, and frankly incorrect, answers, such as: "NIST has debunked all this nonsense. Go away." And, I might like to add: these same "patriotic" firefighters were very likely among the 69% of brainwashed Americans who on the eve of the Iraq invasion in 2003 believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11. They no doubt believed bombing Baghdad was payback for their "fallen brothers" in the twin towers. Remember 69% of the country believed those lies, according to scientific polls.

Edited to add: I regard firefighters in general, while good people in most other senses, to be right next to the military and law enforcement when it comes to a sort of blind nationalist style patriotism, along with belief in the corresponding "myth of american exceptionalism" whereby US officials, though perhaps somewhat corrupt and even prone to lying, would never knowingly participate in something so evil. It is declassified that the Gulf of Tonkin story was a lie; the entire Vietnam War was based on that lie. Yet when I did some 9/11 truthing in the streets, one disgusted man said to me "Don't even f'ing talk to me, I'm a Viet Nam Veteran!" Clearly the man is in such denial he believes that war's cause was just. I have no doubt that many firefighters are prone to this same mentality with regard to 9/11 and American history in general.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 28, 2013 11:40:04 AM PDT
Brian Good says:
liverleef, what do they say in that forum about FDNY Chief Ray Downey? Chief Downey was one of the premier building collapse experts in the country, and when he saw WTC2 come down he said that there must have been explosives up in the building because the collapse was "too even".
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  6
Total posts:  20
Initial post:  Sep 27, 2007
Latest post:  Aug 28, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory
Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory by David Ray Griffin (Paperback - May 1, 2007)
4.1 out of 5 stars   (113)