How can ANYBODY take the 9/11 truth movement seriously?

[TZ]

I was perusing the conspiracy room (bored I guess) and came accross the absolute poppycock that the WTC was destroyed by small nuclear devices!! Ugh, of course no real "proof" just bald statements. How can people even start to believe this kind of nonsense?
Seriously, its why I don't usually bother arguing with people even if I don't entirely believe everything the 9/11 comission found (although, I am fairly satisfied with MOST of the findings).
I thought the freaks in the Health Scare forum were bad..but I think this "truth movement" (and I hate that name, its made truth a synonym for "crazy pseudoscientific conspiracy theories") are worse.
Yes, I know Bush and Co. have done bad things..but this is truly, truly, truly the lunatic fringe.:wow:

[cosmik debris]

1. I have a theory (or is it an hypothesis?)

I believe that some people are incapable of saying "I don't know."

I also believe that some people are incapable of saying "I don't believe you."

Adding these two phrases to one's vocabulary can change your life.

Without these phrases, life is a confusing mish-mash of incoherent, conflicting ideas from which one MUST choose. And a bunch of people make lousy choices.

[jberryhill]

27. Very good point....

"So if <phenomenon> was not caused by <loony theory>, then explain to me what DID cause it, if you are so smart?"

Some folks do have a hard time with "I don't know".

[regularguy]

48. Very good post. So true! NT

[lizerdbits]

2. Anyone who thinks

that the US government is that organized need psychiatric help. That's what is mind boggling to me about that whole movement. All that planning and flawless execution by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT? :spray:

[CanSocDem]

3. You all seem to lack 'personal' experience....

...of government and Corporate America lying to you.

Those of us who are over 55yrs. have lot's of experience and it is ALL personal.

It began with the social and cultural myths of the 50's that weren't believable by the late 60's. Medicine, auto-manufacturing, food production and foreign policy were all found to have more PRIVATE interests than PUBLIC interest.

If you can't comprehend the significance of this, 'private' interests will have their way with you.

Have fun, kiddies.....


.

[TZ]

4. Umm actually I have plenty of experience with it

I can tell bullshit from the govt and corporates when I hear it (because I've dealt with it personally)
I also can tell bullshit conspiracy theories too. And anyone who thinks that nuclear devices went off in NY knows NOTHING about physics.
So tell me, having my boss at NIH fired because of personal agendas not qualify me. I'll match your personal experiences ANYDAY.
You are talking to someone who is blacklisted at NIH because of this nonsense. I know whats what.

[CanSocDem]

5. Maybe enough to get here....

...but from your posts, I see someone still heavily burdened by What Should Be..., other than What Is.

"And anyone who thinks that nuclear devices went off in NY knows NOTHING about physics."

And anyone who thinks this is important to the 'conspiracy theory' doesn't know the theory.


.

[TZ]

9. I do know the theories

and most of them are so laughably impossible that the whole movement is discredited. No planes? When I know people who saw the planes and who were within miles of the Pentagon when it happened. Please. And why anyone thinks CHIMPY is intelligent enough to pull this off is just mental, as lizerbits said.

[LeftishBrit]

6. I have plenty of experience of my - British - government lying to me, thanks....

and know elderly people who left America due to McCarthyism - if that wasn't a lie, I don't know what was!

Most Brits tend to assume that politicians are lying, until proved otherwise, which is probably a healthy assumption. ('How can you tell when politicians are lying?' 'Their lips are moving!')

However, just because your government is lying to you, doesn't mean that everyone who opposes it is telling the truth. I've posted a few times about a Polish acquaintance who left Poland in the 80s, when it was still part of the Soviet bloc. He had lots of experience of the Soviet propaganda machine and its lies, and initially thought that EVERYTHING that Pravda opposed must be good, including Reagan, Thatcher and McCarthyism. Eventually, he realized this wasn't the case. Similarly, just because the Bush government and Fox News are liars, doesn't mean that everything opposed to them is truthful or good.

[cosmik debris]

7. Some of us old geezers

Have learned to tell the difference between truth and fiction.

That seems to have escaped you.

[mr blur]

10. Shame you haven't been around long enough to learn what the apostrophe is for.

Or is that not of any importance in your reality?

How do you manage to put up with sharing the planet with all these people who are so much less enlightened than you?

[Random_Australian]

13. Note: Australia has a long-standing tradition of having no respect for those in power.

And I very much enjoy bieng part of it.

If you think for one second I trust any of them, it's probably because you have prior ideas about what skeptics are, or why we believe what we do. What am I saying? There's no probably - you straight out said the reason we don't believe the twoofers is because we believe what lying, scum-sucking weasel-minded bastards tell us.

I don't even respect high offices. I'm not going to believe something on their say-so.


Little Johnny Howard and that fucker Tony Tosspot,
Little Johnny Howard and that fucker Tony Tosspot,
Little Johnny Howard and that fucker Tony Tosspot,
they aint got power no mo-o-o-re.

Time for some more politicians! They are currently sucking a bit less, sort of.

[TZ]

19. ...

:applause:
BTW--love the little ditty, thats hilarious!
Of course you are a soon to be enabler as you are learning--horrors...chemistry and physics..everybody knows those sciences are much more evil than teh biologists....:rofl:

[madinmaryland]

8. Oh come on TnS!! It is common knowledge that the WTC was blown up

on the direction of Rudy 9ui!!iani!!1!! He realized he needed a theme to run for president!!

Rudy's sentences: a noun, a verb, and 9/11!!1!!

:rofl:

[CanSocDem]

11. I'll bet you also believe that Bush was elected....

...twice!?!?


Of course, there's no evidence to suggest otherwise.


.

[TZ]

12. Once again, you fail to understand me.

No I don't really think Bush was "elected". Certainly NOT in 2000, and 2004 is a bit questionable.
Skepticism doesn't mean ignorant--it means judging things based on evidence not on bullshit beliefs. And there is plenty of evidence of fraud in 2000 and certainly some in 2004 (not quite as evident)
Seriously don't you have anything better to do than disrupt this forum?

[CanSocDem]

14. "Disrupt..."????

"...this forum?"

Because I disagree with YOU....and your friends???? And no, I don't 'have anything better to do'....

I came to DU looking for intelligent discussion on political issues that didn't get bogged down defining 'the public interest'. I found that there were all sorts of topics being discussed and, in many, the public interest was obscured. Your diatribes against alternative medicine are a case in point. You have pointed out, time and again, that you are employed by the medical industry.

If you understood the nature of a public health system you wouldn't be so quick to slam every anti-western medicine idea that comes along.

Even if you have a BSc in nursing, it doesn't mean a thing against thousands of years of chinese medicine or a bush tribes' medicine man and his knowledge of plants.

Your medical system and its' vaunted science isn't serving the public interest unless everybody has access.

And you sound like an enabler.


.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. "an enabler"?

An enabler of what? Note that your answer may end up proving the point of 'disrupting this group'.

[CanSocDem]

16. ...'enabling' a for-profit medical system (eom)

[TZ]

17. I've worked for non-profits too.

How is that an enabler? I've been at war with my own insurance company. I would love non-profit health care. So would most of the people I work with. BTW, I'm not agaisnt all non-western treatments..just the crap that DOES NOT WORK. Look at things like shark cartiledge, coral calcium, tiger bone treatments etc..that not only have no effect but are damaging to the environment because some OLD WIVES TALE says they work.
There is scientific evidence for a few things..flaxseeds, echinacea, zinc,some forms of acupuncture. I can get behind that. But magic crystals and tinkerbell theories of biology. Sorry.
And yes, you are disrupting this forum. Or did you not read the statement posted at the top?

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. And 'alternative medicine' isn't for-profit?

Oh, please. They charge you money for things like distilled water.

[CanSocDem]

20. 'alternative' is a broad term...

.......but mostly, with Americans, I use it to mean NOT FOR PROFIT. The things like "distilled water" and the other 'magic cures' mentioned are usually for sale.

But understand this......I'm all for the PUBLIC Interest. I'm more or less against anything that doesn't serve the 'public' interest. Your medical system is just one of the institutions that endures because of its' unique ability to market a kind of cultural elitism.


.

[TZ]

21. You realize that my company and many biomedical companies

Are actually HQ'd or based in Europe where they have SOCIALIZED health care? So creating drugs to help patients in Europe and Australia are agaisnt the public interest?

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. you're the 1st person I've ever known use it to mean "not for profit"

Everyone else uses it to mean methods outside the mainstream of the western medical profession - acupuncture, homoeopathy, herbal medicine, Chinese medicine, reflexology and so on. I really can't see how you've got from there to 'not for profit'.

"My" medical system, by the way, is the British one; state-owned hospitals, and paid for through taxation. In fact, if you look at the regulars in the skeptics group, you find a high proportion of British people, compared with the rest of DU.

[CanSocDem]

28. the alternative to US medicine is free....

That's the point I was trying to make. A society that markets 'health' is not serving the public interest.

"Your" medical system is protected from the multi-media onslaught that bleeds over from the Dr.Feelgood Traveling Medicine Show aka the USA.

Hopefully you will understand when I say that Americans are wrong to suggest that their health is being compromised by the availability of alternative therapies.

If not, I await your sentence.....


.

[TZ]

29. Their health IS being compromised by some of these "alternative therapies"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11640868/
http://www.bestlifeonline.com/cms/publish/health-fitness/The_Vitamin_Trap.shtml
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile
http://www.cancer.gov/cancer_information/doc.aspx?viewid=4AABA6FA-8A2E-4BF7-941F-7DC416B41233
http://www.skepdic.com/shark.html
Alternative medicine is a HUGE money making industry...Advertised JUST AS MUCH as pharmaceuticals and is TOTALLY unregulated by the FDA. So this is better for people? I think NOT. At least in Europe they tend to frown on paying for treatments that DON'T WORK.

[CanSocDem]

30. Conventional medicine also makes HUGE money...

...and what do you have to show for it???

Rampant ill health and financial insecurity. Corporate enabling that does nothing more than keep the line moving.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080701.wlevans01/BNStory/specialScienceandHealth/home

"That the investigators used an "alternative" intervention such as acupuncture is also curious. The system in which I work rewards high-tech diagnostics and interventions that have proven results. We complain that many alternative interventions are not proven, but we lose sight of the value they place on communication. Alternative medicine has a long tradition of explaining illness within a larger holistic and sometimes cultural framework."

From an article written by a conventional doctor on the effects of face-to-face interaction with patients.


.

[TZ]

31. We still have one of the longest lifespans IN THE WORLD

And its regulated. And if you don't know about the amazing things medical science is doing..You aren't paying attention.
Amazing how much disease and death has been reduced or eliminated; Small Pox? gone Polio? gone in this country.
Cancer death rates decreasing. Typhus, Typhoid? Not really common in this country. Leprosy? Not a problem anymore..treatable with antibiotics. The Plague..treated with anti-biotics. HIV is now more of a chronic illness and NOT a death sentence.
Tell me WHAT diseases alternative medicine has rid us of? Cause I can't think of any.
Funny how people like you like to look backwards..It worked in the past and I don't trust any of those new fangled inventions! Its an odd viewpoint to find in progressives.
BTW--the best interaction I had with a doc, was my guy at Mayo and he did NOT tell me that if I just pray, chant, meditate or consult with a magic crystal I would be okay!
I also have LOTS of face to face interaction with my other doctors thank you. To say only "alternative" docs give total treatment is a flat out lie.

[WoodrowFan]

32. WHAT diseases alternative medicine has rid us of?

Tell me WHAT diseases alternative medicine has rid us of? Cause I can't think of any.

Too heavy a wallet among the gullible??

[varkam]

35. Didn't you read upthread? It's not for profit.

:rofl:

[WoodrowFan]

36. silly person

silly person, they only empty the suckers, I mean the patients' wallets out of concern for their backs carrying all those heavy greenbacks around. Saints they are, truly saints.

[jberryhill]

38. delete

wrong spot.

[jberryhill]

39. Scurvy?

Do limes count?

[salvorhardin]

40. Actually...

James Lind, a surgeon in the British Royal Navy (and considered the father of naval hygiene), conducted the first clinical trial proving citrus fruits effectively prevented scurvy in 1747. Although many herbal cures were known (based on knowledge gleaned from natives going back to the early 17th C.), none were able to be used aboard ship. And even though Lind wasn't the first to suggest citrus fruit as a cure for scurvy, he was the first to prove it. So I'd say science wins by proving, and improving, "ancient wisdom".

[jberryhill]

41. Yes, but it wasn't until...

...they came up with "alternative limes" that had been exposed to refracted moonlight through healing crystals that the thing really took off.

[salvorhardin]

42. Doh!

Blinded by my own damn Western Newtonian-mechanistic worldview again!

Which reminds me... Anyone remember this goody?

Deconstructing The Evidence-Based Discourse In Health Sciences: Truth, Power And Fascism
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Pharmacology/dc-bits/holmes-deconstruction-ebhc-06.pdf

[NoodleBoy]

37. PWNED!

turtlensue just pwned you pretty hard, son.

you might want to lay down for a little.

[varkam]

34. Not for profit? That's just fucking loony.

Altie-med is a big cash business, baby. Quacks and charlatans aren't doing it out of the good of their heart - hence the reason they become quacks and charlatans.

[semillama]

25. Sir, I'll need you to step away from the keyboard

http://www.marriedtothesea.com

[mr blur]

26. I have no idea why you bother, but -

[LeftishBrit]

23. Of course there is evidence...

The evidence is pretty strong that Gore won in 2000.

There isn't conclusive evidence IMO as to who won in 2004 (which is not really how an election should be left!); and it is certain that no one got a 'mandate'.

I don't see how you get from one to the other. If a leader is no good, or was not legitimately elected, that doesn't mean that he/she is guilty of EVERY possible crime. That's like the Right going from the undoubted fact that Saddam was a violent and murderous dictator to assuming that he had WMD and must have had something to do with 9-11.

[TZ]

24. yep!

:thumbsup:

[varkam]

33. Fail.

[WoodrowFan]

43. they are also shameless liars

What pisses me off about the troofers is that they are shameless liars. It doesn't matter how many times the lie has been debunked (there were no airplane parts at the Pentagon!) or how stupid the comment (fell faster than freefall!) they continue to spread them. They are as bad as freepers which is why any MIHOPer gets a free lifetime pass to my ignore list.

[Orrex]

45. I don't even understand what the "fell faster than freefall" thing is supposed to prove?

Was there some kind of heavy-gravity generator in the basement of the WTC?

[WoodrowFan]

46. my understanding

I never got that as well. I guess the folks who planted explosives must have attached little rocket engines to the debris to make it fall faster. :eyes:

[Orrex]

47. Or maybe it's an implosion bomb?

George Bush is one crafty devil all right.

[realisticphish]

49. it created a tiny black hole

which took out support beams, then vanished into nothingness. Crafty, indeed

[Orrex]

50. Whoa! It makes total sense now--follow me:

The artificial black hole drags the building down faster than free fall, explaining the time-anomaly seen on the tape.

The black hole itself vanishes after the event, leaving no trace, no evidence, and no way to point the finger at Bush.

Later, Charlie Sheen famously notes in the media that the collapse looked just like a controlled demolition, in his well informed opinion. Well, in Sheen's film The Arrival, the stealthy aliens did indeed use an artificial singularity device to suck up debris and evidence.

That clinches it--Sheen is the point man for cracking this conspiracy. And at last we have an explanation for Denise Richard's psychotic behavior on her insipid E! show--her mind cracked under the strain of knowing!!!!1!1!

[TZ]

51. You know if you posted that in the 9/11 forum

I think there would be a lot of people who would totally believe that! Orrex, I think you have a future in writing er, discussing conspiracy theories....

[Orrex]

52. I admit to a form of cowardice

Sure, I could post something like that in the 911 Forum, but I just can't bear to think what discussions might result from it.

The problem with being nominally sane is that, no matter how crazy your idea, it's not even a crazy person's least crazy idea.

[onager]

44. Flight 800 was sort of a warm-up

That was the 747 that blew up over Long Island in 1996. There are lots of similarities between the 9/11 and Flight 800 CTs. Including the tendency for one lone goofball to pull a theory out of his ass, post it to the internet, and watch it spread.

Remember this nonsense?

One of the first widely reported criticisms of the official investigation was by Pierre Salinger, who on November 7, 1996, held a press conference in Cannes, France. He stated he had proof that TWA 800 was shot down by friendly fire, and the incident was being covered up by the government.

Salinger said "he was basing the claims on information he saw in a document given to him six weeks ago by someone in French Intelligence with close contacts to U.S. officials", but refused to name his source. CNN quickly found Salinger's document to be "a widely accessible e-mail letter that has been circulating for at least six weeks on the Internet's World Wide Web." Salinger's evidence was actually an e-mail from Richard Russell, a retired airline pilot. (From the Wikipedia entry)

My favorite Flight 800 theory: Evil Bill Clinton did it. Because 2 former Arkansas State Troopers were on the plane, heading for Paris to tell all to the French press. ("Gawdamn, Jethro, I wonder if this-here Chocolate Pain hurts much?")

That theory was debunked pretty quickly. But that means somebody took the theory seriously enough to debunk it. I think that worries me as much as anything else.

The NY TIMES Magazine did a good analysis of how the Flight 800 CT's spread so quickly on the net:

"How a Quack Becomes a Canard" by Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen

http://www.jonathanvankin.com/twa.html

[HamdenRice]

53. France's Le Monde does

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x678886

Incidentally, the reporter for this story was later charged with violating France's version of the official secrets act -- which, ironically, confirmed the authenticity of the intelligence documents the story was based on!

[TZ]

54. OOOh. Thats REALLY impressive!

Just like our media knows soo much about science and technology they can't even do a simple story without getting basic facts wrong.
Yeah sure. Why don't you cite Englands Daily Mail, and Faux News and the National Enquirer while your at it. Thats sure to impress!!
I'm sure that reporter was an intelligence expert and could accurately interpret what he was reading too...:sarcasm:
Sorry, but I don't take any countries MSM too serious these days--the people they employ are more interested in hysterical sensationalism, than actual facts..even papers that used to be reputable like the Washington Post fall into the same trap.

[HamdenRice]

55. So Le Monde is wrong because...

the evidence it presented in the story violates your pre-established belief system?

Does that mean you're still allowed to call yourself a "skeptic"?

Your epistemlogical system, sounds, kind of, more like, well you know ...

Btw, Guillaume Dasquié, the author of the piece, is indeed an expert on national security and intelligence for Le Monde, which as you must know already, is one of France's most prestigious newspapers.

[HamdenRice]

56. Btw

while your at it | while you're at it

I don't take any countries MSM too serious | I don't take any country's MSM too seriously

[realisticphish]

57. spelling correction?

ha ha, what is this? spelling correction in a debate makes you look like a jackass, dude.

anyway, the fact that some paper in france published this doesn't make it true any more than something published in the WaPo is automatically true. All countries have biased papers, if in fact any are NOT, and it is no more logical to assume that something is true because it SUPPORTS your belief.