• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Skeptics For 911 Truth

scooby

Muse
S
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
700
I'm toying with the idea of forming a new group, Skeptics For 911 Truth, closely affiliated with Scholars For 911 Truth and Justice and related groups. Anyone thought of doing something like this?
I'm trying to think of a good design for a banner.
 
Will there be cake and ice cream at the skeptic party? Or will it be more a wine and cheese kind of affair?

Can we have a slogan too? I mean the Truthers have "9/11 was an inside job!", we should have one too right?

How about:
-"There may be one or two questions about intelligence culpability re terrorism!"

-"9/11 was a confusing day for everyone!"

-"Strawmen ate my sister!"
 
Brainache said:
Will there be cake and ice cream at the skeptic party? Or will it be more a wine and cheese kind of affair?

Can we have a slogan too? I mean the Truthers have "9/11 was an inside job!", we should have one too right?

How about:
-"There may be one or two questions about intelligence culpability re terrorism!"

-"9/11 was a confusing day for everyone!"

-"Strawmen ate my sister!"
Click to expand...

MORE PEOPLE WILL COME IF YOU HAVE PUNCH AND PIE!!!!!

(Sorry it was the avatar.)
 
How about naming it 'People who believe 911 was an inside job regardless of what you tell us'

Why form a group? makes you feel more official? More like a special investigative team? the words 'try' and 'hard' come to mind.

You can beat around the bush (no pun intended) as much as you like in the forum, never officially towing the CTist line, but I can see your not interested in 'truth' your interested in some alternate reality you believe exists and you will never dare apply the same 'scientific method' you claim you have to that reality.

Your not a skeptic, stop lying. If want to play grown ups, go enroll at uni or college and study hard
 
scooby said:
I'm toying with the idea of forming a new group, Skeptics For 911 Truth, closely affiliated with Scholars For 911 Truth and Justice and related groups. Anyone thought of doing something like this?
I'm trying to think of a good design for a banner.
Click to expand...

Why not just tell the truth!

Skeptics with false junk for 9/11 Lies

Skeptics present 9/11 Fiction

9/11 Skeptics with no facts

Real dumb guys without a clue for 9/11 fraud

Idiots rUS for 9/11

Tall Tales of 9/11, no brains required

Terminally stupid ideas on 9/11

So if you are telling lies be truthful. The most ironic title is "9/11 truth movement". The scholars for truth is ironic and should read Nut Cases who make up lies on 9/11.

Loose Change is the only group that does not have a liars title. Dylan made a fiction film, he said so. Dylan did the film in hopes of picking up Loose Change from idiots who do not know better. Many of us have fallen for nut case ideas or fraud.
 
hellaeon said:
How about naming it 'People who believe 911 was an inside job regardless of what you tell us'

Why form a group? makes you feel more official? More like a special investigative team? the words 'try' and 'hard' come to mind.

You can beat around the bush (no pun intended) as much as you like in the forum, never officially towing the CTist line, but I can see your not interested in 'truth' your interested in some alternate reality you believe exists and you will never dare apply the same 'scientific method' you claim you have to that reality.

Your not a skeptic, stop lying. If want to play grown ups, go enroll at uni or college and study hard
Click to expand...

No we want something short and punchy.

Forgetting the 'truth' for a minute, lets just talk about the official story - you see so much uncertainty when you look at the official explanation of that day. It makes me skeptical and I think as much of it should be removed as possible before I start deducing anything. Too many 'known unknowns' as they say.

So I'm not so much for 911 Truth, as against 911 Uncertainty.
Maybe this angle is the uniter?
 
Huh? I thought all scientific knowledge was provisional. Scientists are never 100% certain about anything. They always say stuff like: "the most probable solution to this is...." or "We can use this model to predict something to a high degree of probability..." or "the results of this experiment would tend to suggest..." The findings are always subject to later discoveries which may bring new facts to light.

There is always at least some degree of doubt. As far as I understand it, that is what science is all about. Of course that doesn't mean that we can then say "See they don't know what they are talking about!" It just means that they acknowledge the possibility of error even when it is only a remote possibility.
 
scooby said:
No we want something short and punchy.

Forgetting the 'truth' for a minute, lets just talk about the official story - you see so much uncertainty when you look at the official explanation of that day. It makes me skeptical and I think as much of it should be removed as possible before I start deducing anything. Too many 'known unknowns' as they say.

So I'm not so much for 911 Truth, as against 911 Uncertainty.
Maybe this angle is the uniter?
Click to expand...


9/11 Nuts and Dolts

9/11 Challenged Thinkers

9/11 Physics Phlunkies

9/11 No Planes, No Brains
 
Brainache said:
Huh? I thought all scientific knowledge was provisional...
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's not a scientific issue, more a police matter to be honest - call it judicial or maybe civic? Either way you're transferring onus from govt to academia. I believe this is a flawed approach.

No it's certainly not a black box logical problem, it's a data collection issue.
It's not schroedingers cat - "is he?/isn't he?", and so on. We can open this box. We can get more data.

We can get our hands on the cat and legally torture it to get answers now.
Post Patriot Act - just imagine how enriched the data pool would become if we cast our new powers of investigation back through the social archive of that day?
 
It's about time somebody investigated 9/11!

I'm actually shocked no one has done that before now. It'll be nice to finally have some data on the subject.
 
scooby said:
Yeah but it's not a scientific issue, more a police matter to be honest - call it judicial or maybe civic? Either way you're transferring onus from govt to academia. I believe this is a flawed approach.

No it's certainly not a black box logical problem, it's a data collection issue.
It's not schroedingers cat - "is he?/isn't he?", and so on. We can open this box. We can get more data.

We can get our hands on the cat and legally torture it to get answers now.
Post Patriot Act - just imagine how enriched the data pool would become if we cast our new powers of investigation back through the social archive of that day?
Click to expand...

This is it, based on your post, it has to be, I present,

9/11 Nuts and Dolts
 
Last edited:
scooby said:
[You] see so much uncertainty when you look at the official explanation of that day.
Click to expand...

Uncertainty in which official explanation? Among the 'official' explanations are testimony and research from:

FBI
NIST
SEC
FEMA
FDNY
Port Authority
9/11 Commission
NORAD
NEADS
FAA
GTE

That's not even an exhaustive list of 'official' contributors to our understanding of what happened on 9/11. In contrast, here's a list of professional organisations who have endorsed 'truther' alternatives:

<insert sound of crickets chirping here>

Hmmm--rather little uncertainty.
 
scooby said:
We can get our hands on the cat and legally torture it to get answers now.
Post Patriot Act - just imagine how enriched the data pool would become if we cast our new powers of investigation back through the social archive of that day?
Click to expand...

"Casting your new powers?" I take it this newfound activity of yours, being a Warrior for Trooth, is intended to take the place of your Dungeons & Dragons habit?

I believe David Wong said it best, with this mild adaptation:

David Wong said:
...Let me tell you the problem with kids like you. You don't wanna get answers. You don't wanna make the world a better place. You wanna be in a secret club. You wanna walk among adoring fans with a ****in' starlet on your arm. You ain't got nothin' to say to the world. For you, the "movement," it's just a means to an end. Limousines and cocaine, right?
Click to expand...

Whatever, pal. Go have your fun. Just try not to lose sight of the fact that this was a real event, with real victims, and not simply an opportunity for you to pretend that you're cool. Mmm'kay?
 
scooby said:
I'm toying with the idea of forming a new group, Skeptics For 911 Truth, closely affiliated with Scholars For 911 Truth and Justice and related groups. Anyone thought of doing something like this?
I'm trying to think of a good design for a banner.
Click to expand...

Are you bored?
 
Brainache said:
Will there be cake and ice cream at the skeptic party? Or will it be more a wine and cheese kind of affair?

Can we have a slogan too? I mean the Truthers have "9/11 was an inside job!", we should have one too right?

How about:
-"There may be one or two questions about intelligence culpability re terrorism!"

-"9/11 was a confusing day for everyone!"

-"Strawmen ate my sister!"
Click to expand...


C'mon are you guys already losing your faith?

In "Dubya and the holy goat" and "Ali baba Osama and the 19 hijackers"

I know these stories are sacred for you guys. You BELIEVE in them.

We sceptics on the other do not believe in them. It takes too much gullibility for that for our rational and sceptical minds. In short we don't have the stomach.

A slogan? What about a country choir singing "Stand by your Bush"?
 
Last edited:
stilicho said:
Uncertainty in which official explanation? Among the 'official' explanations are testimony and research from:

FBI
NIST
SEC
FEMA
FDNY
Port Authority
9/11 Commission
NORAD
NEADS
FAA
GTE

That's not even an exhaustive list of 'official' contributors to our understanding of what happened on 9/11. In contrast, here's a list of professional organisations who have endorsed 'truther' alternatives:

<insert sound of crickets chirping here>

Hmmm--rather little uncertainty.
Click to expand...

Hey you forgot to list all the professional organizations who are supporters of the truth movement.

I can do better than that!

OOPS, you did not forget, it is Zero!

Zero. So they could be the "9/11 Zeros"
 
I bet Oliver could come up with a good design for your banner.

How about Dilbert wearing an Inside Job T-shirt?
 
pagan said:
C'mon are you guys already losing your faith?

In "Dubya and the holy goat" and "Ali baba Osama and the 19 hijackers"

I know these stories are sacred for you guys. You BELIEVE in them.

We sceptics on the other do not believe in them. It takes too much gullibility for that for our rational and sceptical minds. In short we don't have the stomach.

A slogan? What about a country choir singing "Stand by your Bush"?
Click to expand...

Yeah, "Black Ops: Codename Wetwork and the Hushabombs" makes much more sense.

Now then, where ever did you get the idea that we all like Bush? I know in your lil mind that makes it easier, but a huge number of us don't (some are even Republicans:eye-poppi) We just don't fall for spooky music and bushy eyebrows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom