|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
 Posted - 10/18/2006 : 12:35:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Why can't the images be altered?
quote:
I never said they couldn't be. Never implied it, either.
Then what's your point about the underlying assumption I supposedly had?
quote:
And that's not proof that I would ask that question.
quote:
You didn't ask for proof that you would ask that question, you asked for evidence that I predicted the question. I provided such evidence, and rather than admit it, you moved the goalposts.
But I asked "How do you know the photos you saw weren't altered with a program like Photoshop?"
Then you said "Wonderful. I predicted this exact question." But for your evidence, you offered "WOE be to those poor sheeple who are fooled by the Feds into thinking that photographs of airplane wreckage at the Pentagon have not been Photoshoppethed!
Now your evidence isn't even a question, let alone exactly like I wrote--I don't mention the government (federal or otherwise) or sheeple at all. So what gives?
|
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
 |
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 12:40:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
But you have no idea if the evidence that it must be done "some other way" is true.
quote:
I don't? Interesting: your objection implies that everything about the construction of the towers is up for grabs, that nobody knows how they were really put together. Which, of course, would mean that Ross' analysis is completely worthless, too.
No, my objection implies that you and/or filthy might not know all there is to know about explosives--and, therefore, not really know if it had to have been done some other way.
quote:
And it's not up to me to determine how it was done.
quote:
If you don't know how it was done, then how could you possibly provide evidence that it was done?
If I found a car in my office, I might not know exactly how it got in there, but I would have evidence for it being there... |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 12:42:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
No. Just seeing a car go down the street would be enough.
Only if you already know what a 'car' is and how to 'drive' it. You're obviously making assumptions about driving that you admit you can't make about explosive demolitions, and so your analogy fails miserably.
Why would one need any knowledge of how to drive to suggest one method is faster than another? |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/18/2006 : 12:55:03 [Permalink]
|
I do not know all there is to know about explosives, and never will, and never claimed to, but I know one hell of a lot more than most folks.
Here's an interesting, historical factoid: Alfred Nobel invented dynamite and revolutionized demolitions. But his biggest contribution to the field was not dynamite, which would have been developed anyway, but the blasting cap. New mixes of explosives are put forth all the time, practically anyway, but the blasting cap, beyond some fancy ways to fire it, has remained basically the same.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:01:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Then what's your point about the underlying assumption I supposedly had?
Why would you ask the question otherwise?quote:
But I asked "How do you know the photos you saw weren't altered with a program like Photoshop?"
Then you said "Wonderful. I predicted this exact question." But for your evidence, you offered "WOE be to those poor sheeple who are fooled by the Feds into thinking that photographs of airplane wreckage at the Pentagon have not been Photoshoppethed!
Now your evidence isn't even a question, let alone exactly like I wrote--I don't mention the government (federal or otherwise) or sheeple at all. So what gives?
Ah, I see what your objection is, and you're playing the idiom card now. Got it.
Where is that evidence you said you'd be presenting? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:11:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
No, my objection implies that you and/or filthy might not know all there is to know about explosives--and, therefore, not really know if it had to have been done some other way.
Nobody knows all there is to know about anything, so what you're really saying is that you think we don't know enough. But you haven't demonstrated any particular faults.quote:
If I found a car in my office, I might not know exactly how it got in there, but I would have evidence for it being there...
But you don't have an existential claim like "there is a car in my office." All you've possibly got is after the event, like pools of molten metal, which relies upon an indirect inference of cause and effect ("there was a car in my office."). In order to say, "these observations are the effects of explosives being used to bring the buildings down," you've got to be able to show how those observations would be the result of explosives.
(Explosives, of course, wouldn't be expected to cause pools of molten metal weeks after the collapses, anyway. That's a thermite claim.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:11:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
I do not know all there is to know about explosives, and never will, and never claimed to, but I know one hell of a lot more than most folks.
Thanks filthy. Let's everyone give filthy a hand here. Com' on, give it up for filthy cuz he knows more about something than most people!
It still doesn't mean that you know it would have to be done some other way. Or that some other way is impossible.
quote:
Here's an interesting, historical factoid: Alfred Nobel invented dynamite and revolutionized demolitions. But his biggest contribution to the field was not dynamite, which would have been developed anyway, but the blasting cap. New mixes of explosives are put forth all the time, practically anyway, but the blasting cap, beyond some fancy ways to fire it, has remained basically the same.
Yes, my kid did a history report on Nobel in 5th grade. He developed dynamite after a relative was blown to pieces working with nitro. He started the Nobel Prize for Peace to try to counter the dreaful use of his products to kill people in wars. All very interesting. Was there a point you had in mind or just wanting to dazzle us with your explosive history knowledge? |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
| Edited by - ergo123 on 10/18/2006 13:44:18 |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:15:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Explosives, of course, wouldn't be expected to cause pools of molten metal weeks after the collapses, anyway. That's a thermite claim.
 |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:23:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Explosives, of course, wouldn't be expected to cause pools of molten metal weeks after the collapses, anyway. That's a thermite claim.
Let's all give ergo a big round of applause here, for completely ignoring the points in a post, and instead spending time giving the ol' rolleyes to an unimportant aside!
And where is that evidence you spoke of? How's that coming along? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/18/2006 : 13:26:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
I do not know all there is to know about explosives, and never will, and never claimed to, but I know one hell of a lot more than most folks.
Thanks filthy. Let's everyone give filthy a hand here. Com' on, give it up for filthy cuz he knows more about something than most people!
It still doesn't mean that you know it would have to be done some other way. Or that some other way is impossible.
quote:
Here's an interesting, historical factoid: Alfred Nobel invented dynamite and revolutionized demolitions. But his biggest contribution to the field was not dynamite, which would have been developed anyway, but the blasting cap. New mixes of explosives are put forth all the time, practically anyway, but the blasting cap, beyond some fancy ways to fire it, has remained basically the same.
Yes, my kid did a history report on Nobel in 5th grade. He developed dynamite after a relative was blown to pieces working with nitro. He started the Nobel Prize for Peace to try to counter the dreaful use of his products to kill people in wars. All very interesting. Was there a point you had in mind or just wanting to dazzle us with your explosive history knowledge?
[/quote]
Formating's still a little fucked up, but thank you, thank you for the applause!
Have you opened the links yet? You will find them a lot more productive than wasting your time on juvenile sarcasm, something riddled through your writings. This one is of particular interest. Link....
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 14:06:47 [Permalink]
|
Geeze ergo, how about something of substance? You are turning out to be a lot less fun than you started. Clearly you are a troll (and not a very good one) who is trying to get a rise out of people by insulting them - but at least you acted like you were going somewhere with your rants. But now all you are giving us are maybe this happened or might it be this, or you can't prove this didn't happen. Don't you have ANY evidence or is it all 'non-tradtional data' (IE stuff you feel is right)?
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
| Edited by - furshur on 10/18/2006 14:07:38 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 17:25:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
ergo123:
But I did read it. But it had no relevance to this thread. Aside from illustrating gaping holes of understanding on your part (you guys should seriously consider changing the name of this fotum to Semantic Friends Network--you get so hung up on particular words you can't see the wood for the trees), it sheds no light on the emotional attachments you have to the official conspiracy theory.
In response to this:
quote:
ergo123:
In my experience, though, people like you who need an answer will latch on to one no matter how outrageous it is, just to have the answer. Then they go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to convince themselves they are open to other ideas--when really they want to stick to the one they originally believed.
quote:
Me:
You are absolutely clueless in your assessment of “people like me.” But I have an idea. Read this. While the subject matter is not appropriate to this thread, it should give you a window into how I think. If, after reading the linked essay, you still think the above quote fits me, that would be an indication that you are unable to absorb any evidence contrary to your preconceived beliefs in any meaningful way. In short, it would mean that you are projecting again…
I told you that it has no relevance to this thread. What it has relevance to is your style of argumentation, in this thread and all your other threads as well. You leveled an accusation at people like me in your ongoing effort to place people like me in a box of your own making and then attacked the box. (Close-minded.) You said, “…people like you who need an answer will latch on to one no matter how outrageous it is, just to have the answer.” That article clearly debunks this claim about people like me. Or did you miss the point of the article? It makes it much easier for you to deal when you can pigeonhole us doesn't it?
When you make generalizations like that, you are telling us way more about you than about people like us…
quote:
Me again:
If, after reading the linked essay, you still think the above quote fits me, that would be an indication that you are unable to absorb any evidence contrary to your preconceived beliefs in any meaningful way. In short, it would mean that you are projecting again…
So there it is.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 18:49:12 [Permalink]
|
| Kil: maybe you linked a different article than you meant to... |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
 Posted - 10/18/2006 : 19:08:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Kil: maybe you linked a different article than you meant to...
It was the correct article. You missed my point. I said it was a window into the way I think which is opposite to the way you think I think…
You make that mistake with most of the skeptics here because you don't understand critical thinking.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
ergo123
BANNED
USA
810 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 19:14:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Originally posted by ergo123
Kil: maybe you linked a different article than you meant to...
It was the correct article. You missed my point. I said it was a window into the way I think which is opposite to the way you think I think…
You make that mistake with most of the skeptics here because you don't understand critical thinking.
No, I think you've missed the point on how I think you think. You also seem to be under the delusion that you are completely consistent in how you think... |
No witty quotes. I think for myself. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Just to be clear (part 2)
