Quote:
Who? Me? What?
Get your **** together man. Also throw a falsifiable thesis at me.
|
So you are not concerned about your compliance with your Government simply due to your failure to question everything they do?
Quote:
|
So, it seems like what you're referring to is a satirical piece that cleverly sets the official story w/r/t 9/11 against the idea that it in and of itself is a conspiracy theory.
|
What are you waffling about? You have no evidence it's a theory.
Quote:
]Now, the problem with this line of reasoning works like this:
1)
I've yet to make a single positive claim. Personally, I have no major personal opinions with regards to who did 9/11. Now, as I have no preconceptions to cloud my judgement, and I intend to keep an open mind, so it should be pretty easy to convince me that what you're saying is true, provided that your argument has a leg to stand on. You seem pretty sure of yourself here, so it shouldn't be too hard to articulate a coherent, logical, un-fallacious argument. Oh, but first a falsifiable thesis would be nice, so that I know what we're talking about.
|
So You'll join us all in calling for a new inquiry then. Or are you accepting the Government's story without question?
Yes come and join us. That's you, me and the Chairman of the 911 Commission Tom Kean
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadChannel
Due to that fact that I have not made a single positive claim, and am a blank canvas to this issue, I have no burden of proof on me. I do not hold a positive belief in the "official story" (or boxcutter theory or whatever), becaue I have yet to do the research.
|
But you are questioning me Chum instead of the people you should be questioning. This is compliance by remaining silent. So how do you justify blowing the arms and legs off kids. Show me your evidence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadChannel
However, lacking evidence that something is untrue, or that a mutually exclusive alternative to that thing is true (as is the case here) is not evidence for that something. You're still going to need to provide irrefutable evidence, and a coherent argument that meets the previously stated criteria, to convince me. Oh, and a falsifiable thesis would sure be great so I know what we're actually talking about.
|
So tell me the FACT that two of the aircraft were flying (one over Pittsburgh) 25 minutes AFTER they had supposedly crashed. Explain that one to me please? pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRMED-911-AIRCRAFT-AIRBORNE-LONG-AFTER-CRASH.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadChannel
EDIT:
Yeah, posts inside the introductions section and the lounge don't count towards total post count.
|
Don't care anymore. Not long for this forum anyway.
PS
Hope your day is being made.