| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bovinerebel
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:03 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 , debunkings and the scientific method. |
 |
|
| newteacher wrote: |
| bovinerebel wrote: |
| newteacher wrote: |
| bovinerebel wrote: |
If you were for science you'd know that some of the 9/11 "conspiracies" have just passed peer review and been published in scientific journals for further critique. What person ,related to science, would dismiss such theories without looking at them ? |
Links? Or are we just supposed to take your word? |
Why not ? If you're against controlled demolition without having done your own research then you take the word of other people who offer no proof.
But despite that , ok....here's a link.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/15081
|
I never said anything about engaging in an argument. I simply asked for you to post some links. If you're going to claim that the science is valid and has been published in 'scientific journals' for peer review then post some evidence of that. A 911blogger site is not a scientific journal. |
It's perfectly evident is you actually visited the webpage that I posted that it not only links directly to the journal , but provides clear instructions and context. Work things out for yourself , you're a big boy now.
Not that you'll read the papers , or have even read NIST's papers. Yet you still seem to feel entitled to offer an opinion . Interesting. Not rational , valid , logical or scientific , but interesting....
It's perfectly simple....state your case or criticise mine. But have the b@lls to make the disclaimer that you really don't know the first thing about what you are arguing about and that your views and opinions are uninformed and based on faith rather than scientific backing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
runlikegump
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Wow...this is a total thrashing of epic proportions.
Bovinerebel : 3 .....mouthbreathers : 0 |
Every mouthbreather here has better writing skills than you. I will hereby submit this contention for peer review. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bovinerebel
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edit.
Last edited by bovinerebel on Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bovinerebel
Joined: 27 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| runlikegump wrote: |
| Quote: |
Wow...this is a total thrashing of epic proportions.
Bovinerebel : 3 .....mouthbreathers : 0 |
Every mouthbreather here has better writing skills than you. I will hereby submit this contention for peer review. |
I dare you. I grind out 80 words a minute of pure gold. I'm not going to double check my writing to ensure it caters to the taste and intellectual shortcomings of the dumb and pedantic. I don't pander to idiots , sorry.
Now do you have anything to say about the actual arguments ? Or doesn't the big picture matter as ensuring you have no typos ?
Tw@t. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
runlikegump
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just a dare? How about a double dog dare?
As exhilarating as this was, I think I'll leave you to your carefully constructed and solidly fortified world of flawless logic. I obviously lack the intellectual wherewithal to begin to plumb the depths of such an empassioned thinker, and so must now return to more mundane and mouthbreathy tasks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oskinny1
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Location: Right behind you!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 , debunkings and the scientific method. |
|
|
| newteacher wrote: |
| hugekebab wrote: |
| bovinerebel wrote: |
| Look at me!!! I read the Internet!! |
Yet another bat shit crazy American. I will add you to my list of American conspiracy theorists vs sane Americans in order to compile a more accurate statistical sample.
Too much American beef. |
I don't think he's American. |
I am pretty sure he's South African so please remove him from your list.
I always thought the mouth breathers were the ones having arguments (seemingly with themselves) on the Internet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newteacher
Joined: 31 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:39 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11 , debunkings and the scientific method. |
|
|
| bovinerebel wrote: |
| newteacher wrote: |
| bovinerebel wrote: |
| newteacher wrote: |
| bovinerebel wrote: |
If you were for science you'd know that some of the 9/11 "conspiracies" have just passed peer review and been published in scientific journals for further critique. What person ,related to science, would dismiss such theories without looking at them ? |
Links? Or are we just supposed to take your word? |
Why not ? If you're against controlled demolition without having done your own research then you take the word of other people who offer no proof.
But despite that , ok....here's a link.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/15081
|
I never said anything about engaging in an argument. I simply asked for you to post some links. If you're going to claim that the science is valid and has been published in 'scientific journals' for peer review then post some evidence of that. A 911blogger site is not a scientific journal. |
It's perfectly evident is you actually visited the webpage that I posted that it not only links directly to the journal , but provides clear instructions and context. Work things out for yourself , you're a big boy now.
Not that you'll read the papers , or have even read NIST's papers. Yet you still seem to feel entitled to offer an opinion . Interesting. Not rational , valid , logical or scientific , but interesting....
It's perfectly simple....state your case or criticise mine. But have the b@lls to make the disclaimer that you really don't know the first thing about what you are arguing about and that your views and opinions are uninformed and based on faith rather than scientific backing. |
I read the article from The Open Civil Engineering Journal. It makes some interesting points, but doesn't really provide any evidence of anything. All it does is ask some interesting questions. I don't disagree with the idea that those questions need to be asked, but the conspiracy theorists certainly haven't actually answered any of those questions anymore than the NIST or FEMA has.
Frankly, I'm inclined to disagree with you because I'd prefer not to be associated with the typical nutjob who cries conspiracy every time someone mentions 911. If you were capable of having a real debate without coming across like an angry teenager who's pissed off because people have opinions that differ from yours, then maybe I'd be more interested in actually listening to your thoughts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
valkyrian2
Mod Team
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nothing more than a flame fest looking for a place to happen and this is NOT the place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
