[RenegadeRick]

People who even listen to those conspiracy theories are simply
s!

Here is an editorial published in the Chicago Tribune. I'll take the time to bold the ad hominem attacks for you, and italicaize the straw men. Obviously, some will end up with both.

9/11 conspiracies are a crying shame
Dennis Byrne, a Chicago-area writer and consultant
Published August 28, 2006


The fifth anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, is two weeks away, but the screeching from the conspiracy monkey house already is upon us.

The "9-11 truth squads" are planning a three-day gala in New York City to inform the world that Sept. 11 was a "catalyst" designed to set in motion a "global domination project" by overthrowing the American government, says NY911Truth.org. Which would be true, if you were talking about a plot by Islamic fascists. But they say it was by President Bush himself, "as a pretext for the current Middle East aggression."

The organizers of the conspiracy jamboree urge "all movements for transformational progress" to converge on Gotham thusly: "If we want to put an end to war, use our treasury for productive purposes domestically, restore our Constitution, have a law-abiding government, create cooperative rather than antagonistic relationships with the rest of the world, heal our environment and be the creators of our own destiny, understanding 9/11 is required," say these "truth" activists.

The blogosphere is buzzing with the things they want us to understand.

Start at 911research.wtc7.net and follow the links into paranoia hell.

Among other things, airliners didn't crash into the Pentagon (it was an American missile) or the World Trade Center, and even if they did, they didn't cause the towers to collapse--it was the result of "controlled demolition charges" placed by Bush agents in the buildings before they were struck. That the named hijackers were not the hijackers, if, that is, the planes actually were hijacked or even existed.

Most incredibly, this intricate plot was pulled off by the world's most stupid head of state, George W. Bush.

Such theories require extensive fabrications to back them up, such as the assertion that the towers collapsed at free-fall speed (false), and that one floor falling on top of another couldn't possibly "pancake" the buildings (actually it was scores of floors collapsing on each floor).

The conspiracy nimrods, of course, won't be there alone. Mainstream media nimrods also will attend in great numbers. TV anchors will solemnly speak of "disturbing new questions" about Sept. 11 and break to interviews with charla-tans, incompetents, nut cases and the gullible, all united as fools.

And they'll all be playing to the many Americans who take it seriously. More than a third suspect that federal officials either took part in or knowingly took no action to stop the Sept. 11 attacks, according to a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll. The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans believe the bit about how secretly planted explosives collapsed the twin towers.

Conspiracy documents are a hot read on college campuses and in Europe.

Loonies come in all shapes, from the conservative Paul Craig Roberts (Ronald Reagan's supply-side guy) to, well, so many on the left. That's because the conspiracy theory resonates with their psychotic hatred of Bush, whom they can easily believe would engineer a deadly attack on Americans.

Of course, by this theory, W. also engineered the attacks on the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the U.S. Embassies in Africa and the Navy warship, the USS Cole. All while he was a slobbering drunk.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair also is alleged to be a part of the plot against America, just as he, the U.S., Israel and Rupert Murdoch's media empire have now supposedly cooked up the plot to blow up American-bound airliners.

The self-described "9-11 truth community" will try to appear reasonable by calling for an "independent" investigation"--which means that the committees still sniffing out the conspirators in the JFK assassination will have to clear out of the hearing room for the next four decades.

No expert investigation, such as one by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, will be "independent" enough to suit them. Not that the professional engineering groups shouldn't be more forceful in rebuttal. I suppose they fear that speaking out would give the wackos credibility.

But it is silence that gives them credibility.

Failing a unified debunking by professionals, Popular Mechanics magazine took up the challenge. Popular Mechanics doesn't have the proper cache, so the theorists will ridicule or ignore its work, even though it's the most extensive rebuttal I've yet seen. Judge for yourself at http://popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html.

Unless you believe that the magazine, too, is in cahoots with Bush.

----------

Comment: http://dennisbyrne.blogspot.com

So why use ad hominem and straw man attacks? Oh yeah, because you don't have any facts to support your position.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
- Arthur Schopenhauer

 

[rockwool]

Its a good piece of journalism that. Very objective and informative.

Ridiculing the opposing side will defenetily scare a lot of people that are not familiar with either of what the unofficial side has to say, nor the simple form of psychological manipulation ridiculing your opponent is, to get people to react subliminal to conspiratorial arguments.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

i have to say a few things.
first, assuming the burden of proof is on the other side is a mistake, based on your own version is not exactly right.

2nd, what hasnt been proven TRUE, doesnt have to be proven FALSE in order NOT to be regarded as invalid.

3rd, a lot of the arguments i´ve read and heard are based on engineering knowledge way outside the realm of the average person (and probably outside the domain of most of those who push them at blog level). incomplete knowledge of certain topic plus a pre-existant bias can lead to very arguable claims, and massive repetition can lead to ad popullum fallacies.

lastly, its not only about the knowledge domain. its also about the logistics, the method and the access to real world hard data and formal proof based on 1st hand physical propietary evidence.

theorists would have to comply with a few of those before they expect to be taken as seriously as they expect.
and no, a few videos (specially when the majority of expert opinion isnt supportive, although am not saying that´d be enough proof for its own sake) and texts arent enough.

 

[RenegadeRick]

i have to say a few things.
first, assuming the burden of proof is on the other side is a mistake, based on your own version is not exactly right.

This is a web forum, not a court of law. I have not posed any theory as to what happened on 9/11. The only thing I know for sure is that I don't know the whole story. The burden of proof is an issue, but I don't think this is an us vs. them scenario. I think that through cooperation and a public debate the truth might be discovered. Of course, I must be to think this could ever happen.

2nd, what hasnt been proven TRUE, doesnt have to be proven FALSE in order NOT to be regarded as invalid.

Even though your statement is a bit convoluted, I agree with it 100%. Simply because something has not been proven true does not mean that it is false. The converse is also true. Just because something has not been proven false does not make it true. This is why I believe an honest and open discussion might help find the truth. ? Yeah I know.

3rd, a lot of the arguments i´ve read and heard are based on engineering knowledge way outside the realm of the average person (and probably outside the domain of most of those who push them at blog level).

I am not an engineer, but I did score in the 99th percentile for science on the ACT. I can read a periodic table of elements and identify the melting point of iron (steel) on it. I can tell you with absolute certainty that jet fuel and office materials could not melt steel. So could most anyone with a high school education or lacking that, access to Google.

incomplete knowledge of certain topic plus a pre-existant bias can lead to very arguable claims

that could be easily countered by a knowledgable expert.

and massive repetition can lead to ad popullum fallacies.

The "official" theory is the ad populum fallacy. The majority of Americans believe this to be true. To quote from the article linked above:

And they'll all be playing to the many Americans who take it seriously. More than a third suspect that federal officials either took part in or knowingly took no action to stop the Sept. 11 attacks, according to a Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll. The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans believe the bit about how secretly planted explosives collapsed the twin towers

So certainly less than 50% believe this load of conspiracy poop. How can this be an Ad Populum fallacy?

lastly, its not only about the knowledge domain. its also about the logistics, the method and the access to real world hard data and formal proof based on 1st hand physical propietary evidence.

theorists would have to comply with a few of those before they expect to be taken as seriously as they expect.
and no, a few videos (specially when the majority of expert opinion isnt supportive, although am not saying that´d be enough proof for its own sake) and texts arent enough.

Your statements are a catch-22. Evidence has been supressed and therefore the conspiracy 's theories are invalid? If there is evidence, present it and back it up. If there are indeed proofs of the "official" theory let's hear them.

 

[BurlyShirley]

If there is evidence, present it and back it up. If there are indeed proofs of the "official" theory let's hear them.

You're f***ing and everyone who believes this crap is too. Why would anyone in a position to reveal such evidence validate your lunacy by doing so?

You're out of your freaking gord, psycho.

 

[Changleen]

You're f***ing and everyone who believes this crap is too. Why would anyone in a position to reveal such evidence validate your lunacy by doing so?

You're out of your freaking gord, psycho.

Shut up Shirl and read this:

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2264433&postcount=138

 

[rockwool]

Yeah, we betta watch were we're steppin, walking around claiming that the earth is round. Everybody knows it's flat, and if we don't shut up the Pope's good men is gonna get us, drag us to the dungeons and streach blaspemy out of us.

 

[RenegadeRick]

Why would anyone in a position to reveal such evidence validate your lunacy by doing so?

Because it would finally end the doubt and speculation. Because it would expose the lunatics for the loonies that they are.

I especially enjoyed this part from the linked interview:

CG: I want to know, even if we presume you’re correct that they recovered the DNA of the 19 hijackers from the rubble, where did they get their original DNA with which to match it? Where did they get the original DNA of a bunch of middle-eastern Islamic madmen? Where did they get the DNA? Had they submitted DNA before they, uh…I mean, where the hell did they get it? You’re not even talking sensibly with me.

So wait, which s are s again?

 

[Changleen]

I can tell you with absolute certainty that jet fuel and office materials could not melt steel. So could most anyone with a high school education or lacking that, access to Google.

In the NIST report I posted a few days ago, NIST themselves say the temperatures never got much over 250°C except in a couple of spots, and these never got over 600°C.

 

[rockwool]

"It's been said that all truth passes through three stages; The first stage being denial, the second stage being violent opposision, and the third stage being wide spread acceptance as common knowledge. /.../
One group of people will absolutely deny what they are seeing could possibly be true. The second group of people will be violently opposed to this kind of information being released and they will do everything that they can to discredit the messenger, rather than pay attention to the message. And yet there will probably be a third group of people that will sit back in their chair and say "huh, I'm not surprised, I knew it all along"."
-Dave vonKleist, Talk Radio Host The Power Hour



"Lets never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories, conserning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists them selves, away from the guilty."
-George W Bush (~September 12th 2001)



A rather remarkable thing for dubya to say the day after 9/11, isn't it? Like getting fire extinguisher out just because your kid tripped over his foot and fell, breaking the glass of water he was holding... There is no messenger yet to discredit but he is violently opposed to the messege, who he knows will come, at the same time he is banging into the publics heads, repeating the same way media brainwashing works (like in 1984 where Big Brother repeated it until it rang in everybodys heads and no other thought could come through), who the guilty are. Dubya topped that with his speach "if you're not with us, you are against us" which i percieved as a veiled threat, and suddenly the whole world changed from mocking GWB and disliking US policies in general, to the watercombed noddheads they've always been.

 

[RenegadeRick]

"Lets never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories, conserning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists them selves, away from the guilty."
-George W Bush (~September 12th 2001)

According to whitehouse.gov that speech occurred on November 10, 2001.
While I disagree with the date, I agree that it is pretty early on in the game to be saying such things. At this point I did not even have an idea that the "official" theory might not be true.

Personally, in that first 30 days I had to drive to Manhattan (because all flights had been grounded) to go to funeral services for my uncle who had not even been ID'd through DNA yet, and was pretty much overwhelmed by the whole thing.

 

[rockwool]

I wasn't sertain about that date and I'm not gonna question the WH on that (history has shown not to trust the WH though.. =) ..).

When I saw the buildings cruble to the earth I thought it looked like they were full of explosives. The climate against the administration that was at the time was the reason I emediately thought WTC was rigged. The following days as FBI gathered evidence it confirmed my suspission further. Like that flight manual they found lying around/forgotten. Was it in the hotel? They found some **** in the rental car too, didn't they? Highly trained and motivated agents don't make misstakes like that, dopey dumbasses do. The cessna flight shool instructor who claimed one, or was it some, of them couldn't fly that small plane and found it ridiculous that he/them had manouvered comercial planes the way they had..