|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: DieCommie]
#8810848 - 08/22/08 12:08 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Yea, I just found out now he didn't. Baleeted, anyway.
|
DieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Mr.Al]
#8810882 - 08/22/08 12:14 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Dont contrive not believing troofers as 'defending the government', they are not the same thing at all.
If you want to be taken seriously, first stop anthropomorphizing the government, its not a person its not capable of lying or telling the truth. You may not believe some people in the government, but that is irrelevant because the mainstream explanation and analysis comes from private citizens.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Mr.Al]
#8810884 - 08/22/08 12:14 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr.Al said: Quite frankly it tickles the shit out of me to see supposed "drug users" defend the government... The same government that tells people they don't have the right to do what they will with their own consciousness. They probably will even tell you the J.F.K., M.L.K., and R.F.K. assasinations were not inside jobs... Just bizarre, this defense of the government. Don't worry folks, Uncle Sam always has your best interests in mind!
You believe specks of dust filmed in space are mile-wide alien craft. And as always, bringing up shit that has nothing to do with the thread. None of this is about assassinations.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8810896 - 08/22/08 12:17 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm gonna start a parallel thread about this NIST report in sci & tech. I really don't see what this has to do with politics, other than OP's political agenda of exterminating dissidents.
It's nice to know we have true, homicidal fascists in the Shroomery.
|
dtugg
Druggie



Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 355
Last seen: 8 years, 19 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8810906 - 08/22/08 12:18 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Minstrel said: Thank you, you just proved everything I had suspected about you. I won't waste my time with someone who advocates mass murder, for any reason. But mass murder just because they don't agree with you?
Fucking please. I never said that truthers should be murdered. By put down, I meant that their theories should be put down and they should shut up.
Thank you, you just proved everything I had suspected about you: You really are an idiot.
Edited by dtugg (08/22/08 12:21 PM)
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 6 months, 29 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: dtugg]
#8810950 - 08/22/08 12:28 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
dtugg said:
Quote:
Minstrel said: You really are an idiot.
If you can't control yourself from posting this sort of nonsense, I would invite you to post in OTD instead of here.
Flaming is not allowed in this forum.
|
dtugg
Druggie



Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 355
Last seen: 8 years, 19 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Redstorm]
#8810964 - 08/22/08 12:30 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Oh, but its OK for Minstrel to make up that I advocate the mass murder of truthers even though I said nothing of the sort?
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 6 months, 29 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: dtugg]
#8810983 - 08/22/08 12:33 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I can completely understand how what you said could be construed like that. You said they should be "put down", but is slang for being executed. His transgression was a misunderstanding while yours was a clear case of doing nothing but flaming.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Redstorm]
#8811004 - 08/22/08 12:39 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
'Put down': to kill (animal)
What you said could have many interpretations, and you could indeed mean to kill; it's convenient because the door is open for your denial of that meaning, should you be challenged. You clearly did not originally refer to ideas being 'put down', but rather the 'nutjobs'; the humans. But because they need to be silenced, they might as well be animals, maybe? You are a liar.
Either way, you still agree that people should only voice their opinions if they are in agreement with the government. It's still fascism. Or is it patriotic?
I can never tell these days.
Edited by Minstrel (08/22/08 12:47 PM)
|
dtugg
Druggie



Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 355
Last seen: 8 years, 19 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8811043 - 08/22/08 12:47 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Minstrel said: 'Put down': to kill (animal)
What you said could have many interpretations, and you could indeed mean to kill, and the door is open for your denial of that meaning, should you be challenged. You clearly did not refer to ideas being 'put down', but rather the 'nutjobs'; the humans. You are a liar.
Either way, you still agree that people can only voice their opinions if they are in agreement with the government. Still fascism.
Fuck you dude, you are a piece of shit. People don't always write exactly what they are thinking.
Truthers have every right to voice their retarded opinions. And I have every right to critize them as idiot nutjobs who should shut up. People like you don't seem to grasp that concept.
|
DieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8811058 - 08/22/08 12:50 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I dont know why you keep defaulting to this position of attacking people's ideas that are in 'agreement with the government'. It betrays the fact that you simply hate the government and will support any whackjob theory that discredits it, regardless of proper analysis.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: dtugg]
#8811061 - 08/22/08 12:50 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
So it was a Freudian slip, then?
I never advocated abridging your right to voice your sentiment. You have every right to be as rude and foul as you wish.
|
dtugg
Druggie



Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 355
Last seen: 8 years, 19 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8811079 - 08/22/08 12:54 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Minstrel said: So it was a Freudian slip, then?
I never advocated abridging your right to voice your sentiment. You have every right to be as rude and foul as you wish.
No it was me not writing what I was thinking in a clear enough (to you) fashion. It happens. I promise that I do not advocate killing people just because they are crazy idiots.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: DieCommie]
#8811088 - 08/22/08 12:56 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
That's cuz peer review is largely an empty label hoisted up by folks that try to sound smart or elitist, often enough.
Man, arnt you in school to be a scientist? Peer review, besides being the bomb, is the best check against bad analysis humans have yet invented. Fact is, not one peer review article has ever supported the troofers claims. People are so desperate to demonize the government (because of the pot thing) that they contrive and invent these complicated conspiratorial webs. They add unnecessary and wild assumptions to facilitate their belief that they are victims of the government.
Oddly enough, a little psychology here, troofers and people who feel generally victimized nearly always fall into the class of people who have an external locus of control. LINK
edit- meant to be for reply to john
yep, chemistry mang, atoms and stuff
Peer review probably is the best check against bad analysis/science. I don't know anything about the 9/11 papers and my statement had nothing to do with the merits of any of them.
I'm just saying I get sick of hearing stuff about peer review all the time on boards, the radio, TV, et cet as if it is some special process that a paper must go through before it is meritous. It seems as if its an excuse for folks to either sound smart or not read the paper.
My point is that saying peer review is good is like saying scientists are good. It really depends on what the actual process, or inquirry, is. Peer review can and often/mostly does achieve good filtering of poor claims/methods but its not like someone couldn't figure that stuff out on their own if they are knowledgable about the subject. And if they aren't knowledgeable about the subject than they are just blindly trusting a process they probably don't understand. So I suppose it helps ensure folks not well versed in the paper's area of inquiry aren't misled more than is inevitable, but it is also true that if you couldn't pick out fallacies without peer review, you won't be able to pick them out with it. It also ensures schlock doesn't get printed that wastes folks' time, but then that's what a plain old editor does too.
I guess all I'm saying, poorly probably, is that I get sick of hearing people on the news or on boards, not in this thread really- others, confidently stating that someone's paper or opinion is good or isn't cuz it is or is not peer reviewed without looking at the thing. Peer review surely does improve quality, but it doesn't detect forged results, and its quality is just as much a function of the individuals as is the science.
Just saying trusting peer review, again not that you or anyone else does this- its just a nice filter and quality improvement device, is the same as trusting the scientist. Totally depends on the quality.
You could maybe, guessing I don't know if enough to form a panel actually support these positions, find a bunch of engineers that decide WTC was blown up or whatnot that decide to peer review stuff and allow bad science into journals. While these folks would be proper peers of an engineering paper, the results are still as dependant upon the reviewers as they are upon the authors.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 6 months, 29 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: DieCommie]
#8811096 - 08/22/08 12:58 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: I dont know why you keep defaulting to this position of attacking people's ideas that are in 'agreement with the government'.
Where did he do that? Unless you're not talking to Minstrel, I'm not sure where you got this.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8811125 - 08/22/08 01:04 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
DieCommie said: I dont know why you keep defaulting to this position of attacking people's ideas that are in 'agreement with the government'.
Where did he do that? Unless you're not talking to Minstrel, I'm not sure where you got this.
Thanks Red, at least I know I'm not the only one confused.
Edited by Minstrel (08/22/08 01:07 PM)
|
DieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Redstorm]
#8811133 - 08/22/08 01:06 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
That particular time it was post #8811004. In general thats what I observe... they dont like any idea that doesnt paint the government in a bad light. That is fallacious in my opinion, you have to analyze the claim independently regardless of if it portrays the govt as good or bad.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: DieCommie]
#8811139 - 08/22/08 01:06 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Oddly enough, a little psychology here, troofers and people who feel generally victimized nearly always fall into the class of people who have an external locus of control. LINK
edit- meant to be for reply to john
I can very well see that.
People get really mad, but I think its comforting for alot of folks to feel that others are doing things in the shadows that effect them and their world.
I think it helps people rationalize their failures and makes them feel, paradoxically, more secures.
They are not incompetent or impotent at work/school/life, no, the forces that be are having their way with the world and they are powerless to stop them.
Like the folks that claim the govenrment is involved in every bit of dirty buisness in the world or that claim everything is some conspiracy with corporations and such... I think its comforting to surrender to a boogy man that you can blame for your station in life and your past difficulties.
|
Minstrel
Man of Science



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: johnm214]
#8811154 - 08/22/08 01:10 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Either way, you still agree that people should only voice their opinions if they are in agreement with the government.
You mean this one?
I'm not the one telling anyone to shut up. OP is arguing that I should shut up, because my idea's don't conform to some external authority. I'm not the one on the attack.
If you'll take the time to hear me out, I started looking at 9-11 because I was damned sure I could look at the evidence and debunk the 'conspiracy theorists'. But I had the hardest time rationalizing the offical account.
There is still no shortage of completely bogus theories like pod-planes, or no-planes, or beam weapons or mini-nukes, all stupid and easily debunked. It's these theories that serve to allow you to lump me in to crazies who blame the government for all their problems. I forgive you for your guilt-by-association.
Edited by Minstrel (08/22/08 01:17 PM)
|
dtugg
Druggie



Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 355
Last seen: 8 years, 19 days
|
Re: NIST concludes that WTC7 collapsed due to fires [Re: Minstrel]
#8811162 - 08/22/08 01:12 PM (15 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Minstrel said: EOP is arguing that I should shut up, because my idea's don't conform to some external authority.
More like you should shut up because your "ideas" lack any evidence whatsoever.
"Evidence" for a controlled demo of WTC7 summed up:
Well, it sort of looked like one and no building that tall had collapsed because of fires before. Plus, the government is evil and lies.
Edited by dtugg (08/22/08 01:17 PM)
|
|