| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Location: United States
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
No you have not. You are not applying normal standards of skepticism.
This is a perfect example of what the topic of this thread is about.
Most people do not believe the Warren Commissions conclusions and the basis of it- - the Single Bullet THEORY.
The SBT did not happen. It has been disproven.
That is a fact, not a theory.
You my friend , are avoiding my question and what you need to do to stay in this game is address the issue of the central thesis of the Warren Commission Report-- the Single Bullet Theory.
You also need to explain why you are in the overwhelming minority regarding this matter.
Last edited by regicide on Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:41 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
The topic of the thread is "Against Excessive Skepticism"; I fail to see where my posts are misleading, off-topic, or not relevant.
I can see how you might be tempted to divert the thread off-topic, onto your favorite pet theory. But in fact it's been dealt with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Location: United States
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
The topic of the thread is "Against Excessive Skepticism"; I fail to see where my posts are misleading, off-topic, or not relevant.
I can see how you might be tempted to divert the thread off-topic, onto your favorite pet theory. But in fact it's been dealt with. |
How many times do I have to tell you mine is not a theory, the nonsense you believe in is?
I am waiting for your response regarding your unbelievable report that you defend.
I am not diverting the thread as much as I am using this as a perfect example of what the topic is about.
No one said your posts were misleading, off-topic, or not relevant.
You have an amazing ability to divert attention and avoid the topic at hand.
For the benefit of the other members , you can prove your case in another thread. Just do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
cbclark4, thanks for posting this! I read this in Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World several years ago and I've been looking for it ever since. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Location: United States
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Your focus on the Altgen's photo is an example of this:
Confusing association with causation.
The photograph could indeed not mean anything but the SBT is still false.
This is similar to the post-hoc fallacy in that it assumes cause and effect for two variables simply because they are correlated, although the relationship here is not strictly that of one variable following the other in time.
Now MOS address your claim that the Warren Commission is not lying and the Single Bullet theory; the Commissions central claim , which if fails makes the whole report fail, is correct and we can settle this matter once and for all.
Quit diverting attention away from the SBT and tell us why we should believe it when 81% of the American public does not .
In other words , what do you know that most people don't?
We will be waiting.
JMO- - The Moving Goalpost: A method of denial arbitrarily moving the criteria for "proof" or acceptence out of range of whatever evidence currently exists. JMO would pimp you along without the any intention of ever believing anything.
The Altgen's photo is also being used as a Straw Man argument by MOS.
It is impossible to know what was going on in the Agent's minds although many have suspected more than negligence from the very beginning. Therefore , it is easy to argue against that point and MOS keeps drawing attention to that issue and never discussing the SBT- - which he cannot defend. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Funkdafied

Joined: 04 Nov 2007 Location: In Da House
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
MOS, regicide is right on this one. He does not have to provide an alternative senario, though that would be nice. His position is that the SBT is false. You continually fail to address that point. If you want to be taken seriously you need to either a) prove the SBT true or b) admit that it is false. Pick one, and do it.
Im profoundly anti conspiracy theory, and anti conspiracy theorist. That's because Im into logic and reality. And it's for the very same reason I don't believe the SBT, it simply cannot have happened that way.
You've always had my respect on here. I'd very much like to see you come out of this one with dignity and honor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003 Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Funkdafied wrote: |
Im profoundly anti conspiracy theory, and anti conspiracy theorist.
That's because Im into ... logic ... and ... reality. |
No, it's because you're profoundly pro-cover-up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006 Location: Daegu
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
JMO- - The Moving Goalpost: A method of denial arbitrarily moving the criteria for "proof" or acceptence out of range of whatever evidence currently exists. JMO would pimp you along without the any intention of ever believing anything. |
What moving goalpost? The only times I've commented on this thread since it was resurrected was to ask you if you are really a flat earther. Asking a question is not not moving the goalposts, since I never set any goalposts. I simply asked a question that requires only a 'yes' or a 'no'.
So...are you?
Inquiring minds need to know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Funkdafied

Joined: 04 Nov 2007 Location: In Da House
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| Funkdafied wrote: |
Im profoundly anti conspiracy theory, and anti conspiracy theorist.
That's because Im into ... logic ... and ... reality. |
No, it's because you're profoundly pro-cover-up. |
No. It's because I'm profoundly into logic and reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Funkdafied wrote: |
| MOS, regicide is right on this one. He does not have to provide an alternative senario, though that would be nice. His position is that the SBT is false. You continually fail to address that point. If you want to be taken seriously you need to either a) prove the SBT true or b) admit that it is false. Pick one, and do it. |
I do?
Since when is this thread about the Kennedy assassination? The topic of the thread is, "Against Excessive Skepticism". I've been responding to the topic of the thread, with a few minor asides about a discussion that went on ad absurdum several months ago.
I've never "advocated" a single bullet theory nor have I advocated a "multi bullet theory". All I've done - and ever done - is examine the evidence for a conspiracy theory that regicide has repeatedly posted here - that the Secret Service aided and abetted the Kennedy assassination - done my own analysis, and reached my own conclusions. My conclusions are the theory doesn't make sense, it just doesn't hang together. There are alternate, reasonable, explanations for the evidence that he has posted to bolster his theory.
If regicide doesn't want people to look at their evidence and the theories he is presenting, consider it carefully and make up their own minds, then why on earth is he posting it?
Last edited by Manner of Speaking on Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:22 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Funkdafied wrote: |
| MOS, regicide is right on this one. He does not have to provide an alternative senario, though that would be nice. His position is that the SBT is false. You continually fail to address that point. If you want to be taken seriously you need to either a) prove the SBT true or b) admit that it is false. Pick one, and do it. |
| ...but earlier, regicide wrote: |
| What by the way is your reason for defending the government anyway? |
Well while you are at it, Funkdafied, why don't you ask regicide to prove that by having an opinion of my own, all I am doing is "defending the government"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Location: United States
|
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Funkdafied wrote: |
MOS, regicide is right on this one. He does not have to provide an alternative senario, though that would be nice. His position is that the SBT is false. You continually fail to address that point. If you want to be taken seriously you need to either a) prove the SBT true or b) admit that it is false. Pick one, and do it.
Im profoundly anti conspiracy theory, and anti conspiracy theorist. That's because Im into logic and reality. And it's for the very same reason I don't believe the SBT, it simply cannot have happened that way.
You've always had my respect on here. I'd very much like to see you come out of this one with dignity and honor. |
He could do that by letting this thing rest. But he has made the decision not to do that.
MOS-- Prove the SBT is true or admit that it is false or stand down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| regicide wrote: |
| Funkdafied wrote: |
MOS, regicide is right on this one. He does not have to provide an alternative senario, though that would be nice. His position is that the SBT is false. You continually fail to address that point. If you want to be taken seriously you need to either a) prove the SBT true or b) admit that it is false. Pick one, and do it.
Im profoundly anti conspiracy theory, and anti conspiracy theorist. That's because Im into logic and reality. And it's for the very same reason I don't believe the SBT, it simply cannot have happened that way.
You've always had my respect on here. I'd very much like to see you come out of this one with dignity and honor. |
He could do that by letting this thing rest. But he has made the decision not to do that.
MOS-- Prove the SBT is true or admit that it is false or stand down. |
One thread at a time, please. We haven't finished our discussion over here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| when 81% of the American public does not |
I have my own theory about this.
About 98% of that 81% has some vague notion that Oswald didn't act alone, gleaned from half-watched cable TV shows, Oliver Stone movies and reading breaking news headlines from the National Enquirer at the checkout stand.
Has anyone ever done a real survey to find out what people really do believe?
I agree with MoS. He doesn't need to spend time reading up on the single bullet 'theory'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| when 81% of the American public does not |
I have my own theory about this.
About 98% of that 81% has some vague notion that Oswald didn't act alone, gleaned from half-watched cable TV shows, Oliver Stone movies and reading breaking news headlines from the National Enquirer at the checkout stand.
Has anyone ever done a real survey to find out what people really do believe? |
Oliver Stone movies? That 81% figure is from 1965, decades before Stone's movie and a lot of the other crap to which you are referring. What was wrong with the survey? OK, everyone must submit to Ya-ta Boy's survey, just as they must accept his preferred definition of "conspiracy theorist," and not what the words commonly mean in the dictionary. Megalomaniacal much?
And from where do you glean your notions of what happened? So here is yet another chance for you to refuse to answer the question, just what is your notion of what did happen on that fateful day in 1963? I am speaking to Ya-ta Boy here.
It is astounding how many people here are so quick and vehement to knock down another's attempted explanation of the event while never even daring to put forth some reasonable alternative. Apparently they fear they may be the recipient of exactly the same type of nasty crap they have been dishing out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|