A proposal to reduce confusion.

FatFreddy said:
Your playing dumb about the proof doesn't make it go away.
Click to expand...
What makes it not exist in the first place is that you are misusing the word 'proof'.

Your own definition of 'playing dumb' says 'evidence and logical argument'. Those aren't proof.


Not to put too fine a point in it but I was not claiming your arguments were complete bunk, nor did I reject the arguments and evidence. I simply corrected your erroneous use of the word 'proof'. They have not been proven. You overstate your case, and shoot yourself in the foot.
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
What makes it not exist in the first place is that you are misusing the word 'proof'.

Your own definition of 'playing dumb' says 'evidence and logical argument'. Those aren't proof.


Not to put too fine a point in it but I was not claiming your arguments were complete bunk, nor did I reject the arguments and evidence. I simply corrected your erroneous use of the word 'proof'. They have not been proven. You overstate your case, and shoot yourself in the foot.
Click to expand...
No objective thinking person who takes the time to look at it will agree with you.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/a-proposal-to-reduce-confusion.160313/#post-3491703

We may have to start talking about details.
 
If we pretend to agree with him, perhaps he'll go away and find new people to convince.
 
FatFreddy said:
How much of the info that I've posted about these two subjects have you people looked at?
Click to expand...
When you first starting posting I looked a couple and since then I have looked at none. Those couple of post told me all I needed to know about your ability to assess the accuracy of what you link as 'proof'.
 
"No objectional quasi-thinking person who fakes having looked at it will agree with anything other than what they already believe.."
 
FatFreddy said:
Come over to the 9/11 thread and adddress the post I made there. Here's a link to the post.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/interesting-9-11-video.142265/page-20#post-3492637
Click to expand...
You didn't make any point over there. All you did was point to a video. Don't assume that a video that convinced you is going to convince everybody else.

That's the problem with conspiracy advocates. Half the time, I don't think they even understand their own claptrap. They're just parroting catch-phrases.

If you really understand your "theories", you should be able to express them in your own words and not expect a video to do it for you.
 
sideshowbob said:
You didn't make any point over there. All you did was point to a video. Don't assume that a video that convinced you is going to convince everybody else.

That's the problem with conspiracy advocates. Half the time, I don't think they even understand their own claptrap. They're just parroting catch-phrases.

If you really understand your "theories", you should be able to express them in your own words and not expect a video to do it for you.
Click to expand...

Translation:
What's shown in that video is such clear proof that the government planned and carried out the 9/11 attack that if I try to obfuscate it, I'll just look silly.

Evidence is evidence. Who presents it is irrelevant. Please address the argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top