Boston bombings

[Apex]

Yes, because how dare one has a different opinion other than the government's hurrrr durrr, go back to your herd.

Here we go with the typical, "you're a sheep, I know everything" type mentality that every single one of you seem to have.

[Happyness]

Oh but, I didn't say you're a sheep, I'll word it differently, go back to your group of people who follow whatever the government feeds them.

 

I am done, won't bother from now on talking with people about governments, religion, politics or whatever.

 

You can consider it what you want "a defeat in war, or a battle won" imagination is too hard.

 

Anyways, errr, I rather not waste time anymore, I wish you luck in life.

[mdr279]

Let me just say this. A lot of the so called 'evidnce' supporting conspiracy theories is based on eye witness accounts. Eye witness accounts are widely inaccurate. Trust me, you would never want to be in court having someone else's word against yours. It is thought that we subconsciously make up scenarios to piece together what we are seeing, in order to make snake of an unbelievable event. Take those few idiots that say the military planes with no windows flew into the towers, for example.

[Apex]

 

Oh but, I didn't say you're a sheep, I'll word it differently, go back to your group of people who follow whatever the government feeds them.

 

 

How about people that care about the truth and don't blame the government instantly with no evidence because it's the "cool thing to do". I could call you a sheep for following everything conspiracy theorists say without examining it rationally. Anyway I'm outta here.

[Happyness]

 

Let me just say this. A lot of the so called 'evidnce' supporting conspiracy theories is based on eye witness accounts. Eye witness accounts are widely inaccurate. Trust me, you would never want to be in court having someone else's word against yours. It is thought that we subconsciously make up scenarios to piece together what we are seeing, in order to make snake of an unbelievable event. Take those few idiots that say the military planes with no windows flew into the towers, for example.

Sure, many of the so called 'evidence' is based on eye witness. But that doesn't make it automatically false, does it?

 

Oh and, "those idiots" are idiots, I mean, it was obviously an airliner that crashed.

 

 

@Death: I didn't blame the government instantly, I re-searched a lot before I made up my decision, however, you seem to think I am doing it because "it's the cool thing to do", nope. I never follow people because I find it stupid to jump into a bandwagon, I re-search into stuff then I make up my mind.

 

With all due respect to you,

 

I will also leave now, I wish you nothing but luck.

[mdr279]

 

Let me just say this. A lot of the so called 'evidnce' supporting conspiracy theories is based on eye witness accounts. Eye witness accounts are widely inaccurate. Trust me, you would never want to be in court having someone else's word against yours. It is thought that we subconsciously make up scenarios to piece together what we are seeing, in order to make snake of an unbelievable event. Take those few idiots that say the military planes with no windows flew into the towers, for example.

Sure, many of the so called 'evidence' is based on eye witness. But that doesn't make it automatically false, does it?

 

Oh and, "those idiots" are idiots, I mean, it was obviously an airliner that crashed.

 

 

@Death: I didn't blame the government instantly, I re-searched a lot before I made up my decision, however, you seem to think I am doing it because "it's the cool thing to do", nope. I never follow people because I find it stupid to jump into a bandwagon, I re-search into stuff then I make up my mind.

 

With all due respect to you,

 

I will also leave now, I wish you nothing but luck.

No, but I like to formulate my views on cold hard evidence, videos that show the natural destruction of the twin towers due to the airliners. Not some hippys' eyewitness accounts who hates the government.

 

http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand...ntification.php

Edited June 28, 2013 by mdr279

[Happyness]

Anyway folks, thanks for teaching me an important lesson on life. , never argue or join a discussion about religion, conspiracies, politics and governments.

[sivispacem]

If you're just here to flame, leave, you're nothing but an ignorant dude.

I do love irony. Someone with no argument, no sources, no information, no prior credit, no clear understanding of any underlying subject and let's be brutally honest, no actual argument, makes an idiotic assertion without any evidence to substantiate it, and then when someone points out how idiotic it is, he claims everyone else is brainwashed. Ladies and gentlemen, a big round of applause for our newest forum imbecile, Happyness!

 

 

You're being ridiculous here. You open a damn topic and then say not to question your views and opinion?! That's just stupidity.

How is that stupid?

Because this is a f*cking forum? Do you even know what a forum is?

 

 

I didn't know one should only make a topic so people can quote the OP and f*ck up his opinions. Is that it?

I'm quite glad you conceded that your belief in the Boston bombing being a conspiracy was an opinion, rather than a fact, though. Though it's still wrong.

 

 

What else do you want me to say? I am basically telling people from the start that I am NOT changing my views to avoid useless posts

Then why the f*ck did you post? No-one gives a sh*t about your poorly formed opinions. Especially if you are so ignorant and pig-headed you refuse to re-evaluate them under any circumstances. That's pretty stupid.

 

 

@Pizza actually there is a reason, the governments just want to blame eastern people for everything

So, that's it? The US government staged the Boston bombings so they could blame Muslims for them? For what purpose? According to you, to blame Muslims. That doesn't sound very logical, sensible or rational, does it? I mean, surely there's some kind of underlying plot- otherwise what would be the point in doing things just so Muslims could get the blame for them? If your going to propose stupid conspiracy theories, at least propose an illogical, absurd end-game for us all to laugh at at their culmination.

 

 

Just watch the video.

If the entire source of information for your discussion is YouTube videos, I cannot see this ending well for you given that just about any of those arguing against you will be capable of producing academic or research papers to counter your views. Sorry, but peer-review work trumps sh*tty internet video every day of the week.

 

 

How should I NOT believe something fishy is going on?

Because you don't have any evidence, or a theory, and a belief without either of these is just pig-ignorant blind faith?

 

 

Yes, because how dare one has a different opinion other than the government's hurrrr durrr, go back to your herd.

You're working through every single generic conspiracy theorist action in record time-

 

1) "I don't want to debate but I'll just dump my poorly formed opinions in public and expect far more intelligent people to say 'oh, I see now'"

2) "Here are some YouTube videos, they prove EVERYTHING"

3) "Anyone who doesn't believe me is ignorant"

 

What next, you're going to call us all "sheeple"? Oh wait, you just did effectively. Why don't you come back when you've figured out, y'know, how to assemble an argument?

 

 

Anyways, errr, I rather not waste time anymore, I wish you luck in life.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

 

Sure, many of the so called 'evidence' is based on eye witness. But that doesn't make it automatically false, does it?

No, but it severely weakens its credibility when actual empirical, measurable evidence contradicts eyewitnesses. Observation by a layman with no grounding or experience is wildly subjective, yet proper analysis of evidence is not. The conclusions which may be drawn from that are, but the analytical process is not. Therefore, "real" evidence will always have more value than what people say they think they observed.

 

 

@Death: I didn't blame the government instantly, I re-searched a lot before I made up my decision

You clearly didn't research very much, or very widely. In fact, it sounds very much to me like you made a decision based on maybe a YouTube video, or that Loose Change drivel, and then decided to "research" it by digging around Jeff Rense's website, or maybe Infowars, to corroborate your ideas. That's not research. That's indoctrination.

 

Therefore, you must have missed this peer-review paper published in Structure Magazine, an academic journal for structural engineers, which discusses in great depth the idea that a single structural point of failure was likely responsible for the collapses of WTC1 and 2. You also must have missed the Popular Mechanics special report debunking numerous conspiracy theories, which was later made into a fully sourced and referenced book. Or, in fact, the really rather excellent Debunking 9/11 which lists and references academic sources, case studies and other merit-worthy information in a gradual, brutal and extremely convincing dissection of the utterly moronic, completely deluded, astonishingly ignorant and quite frankly hilariously stupid conspiracies that surround the event. You might also want to refer to one of our numerous conspiracy theory threads on the forum in which it has been extensively debunked, too.

[The Pizza Delivery Guy]

sivispacem just nailed it.

 

 

 

I just love debates.

[Audiophile]

sivispacem, I bow before you.

 

No one else can word things as eloquently as you can and in response to such drivel.

 

I can't help but laugh at some of these conspiracy theories. Not everything is a f*cking conspiracy.

[Happyness]

Yep, thanks for all the insults, trying to get your point across, one insult at a time.

 

Sure, you made a nice argument right there and I made a sh*tty one, perhaps because I am too lazy. But is it necessary to result to name-calling? I did and I apologized for my mistakes.

 

But you're nothing but a child when you just resume to name calling.

 

"Imbecile", right, thank you. I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

[mdr279]

Sivispacem, You just totally demolished his argument. Nicely done

 

[Happyness]

Mhm, good, good, jump the bandwagon, well done sivispacem, well done.

 

Here, have a .

[Apex]

 

Sivispacem, You just totally demolished his argument. Nicely done

What did I say on the second page?

[mdr279]

Sivispacem, You just totally demolished his argument. Nicely done

What did I say on the second page?

Haha yep, nicely predicted buddy! He's going in my respect list.

[Audiophile]

Yep, thanks for all the insults, trying to get your point across, one insult at a time.

 

Sure, you made a nice argument right there and I made a sh*tty one, perhaps because I am too lazy. But is it necessary to result to name-calling? I did and I apologized for my mistakes.

 

But you're nothing but a child when you just resume to name calling.

 

"Imbecile", right, thank you. I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Shhhhh....no tears...

 

Just dreams now.

 

OT: Honestly tho, what did you expect? You're going up against academic material with youtube videos and what else? Anyone can make up some video on the internet and do so in a way that suits their own bias.

[sivispacem]

 

Yep, thanks for all the insults, trying to get your point across, one insult at a time.

I'll treat your views with the contempt you treat proper debating etiquette, not to mention rationality, common sense and empiricism. That's only fair.

 

 

Sure, you made a nice argument right there

Thank you. Always nice to be appreciated.

 

 

I made a sh*tty one

That you did.

 

 

perhaps because I am too lazy.

I think I speak for everyone when I say we'd rather you did no job at all than a half-arsed one. It's a waste of all of our time trying to explain to you how incomprehensibly stupid it is to post your opinions on a public forum and then categorically refuse to discuss them, or let anyone else discuss them.

 

 

But is it necessary to result to name-calling?

I'm relatively sure that I only directly addressed you once, when I referred to you as "our latest forum imbecile". The rest were insults about your views. Which deserved insulting, by your own admission, because they were lazy and poorly constructed. Which actually, given the length of my post, gives me a lower ratio of insults to legitimate points that you've achieved so far in this thread.

 

It got the point across, didn't it?

 

 

But you're nothing but a child when you just resume to name calling.

I didn't "resume", or even resort, to name-calling. I used one slur against you, based solely on your composure and behaviour in the thread, and it's pretty clear it's a personal opinion. I mean, you couldn't sue me for calling you an imbecile because I've substantiated it, and therefore it's isn't defamation, libel or slander. So is it really name-calling when it can be justified?

 

An example, if you will. say, I called you a goat f*cker. That would be slanderous unless I could reasonably demonstrate that I was grounded in my beliefs that you f*cked goats. If I explained why it was reasonable, sensible and logical for me to make this claim, then I could call you a goat-f*cker all I wanted and it wouldn't in any way be a slanderous act- just a statement of my views based on available evidence and rational analysis. The same is true here.

 

Anyway, that was the prelude to the rest of my response, which actually contained my rebuttals. Think of it as an executive summary.

 

 

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Probably a good think, before you get banned for using homophobic slurs

Edited June 28, 2013 by sivispacem

[Happyness]

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Probably a good think, before you get banned for using homophobic slurs

Homophobic slurs? It is widely accepted that fa**ot is nothing but an insult. (Thus I apologize if any LGBT got offended by my "comment" towards Jeremy Clarkson on that topic).

[mdr279]

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Probably a good think, before you get banned for using homophobic slurs

Homophobic slurs? It is widely accepted that fa**ot is nothing but an insult. (Thus I apologize if any LGBT got offended by my "comment" towards Jeremy Clarkson on that topic).

What? It's widely known that fa**ot means gay. That's why people like you use it as an insult because you probably hate gay people.

[sivispacem]

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Probably a good think, before you get banned for using homophobic slurs

Homophobic slurs? It is widely accepted that fa**ot is nothing but an insult.

No, I'm afraid it's a homophobic slur.

[Happyness]

Gay people can do whatever they want to, I don't care about anyone, gay, lesbian, straight, transsexual. Pathetic f*cks.

[Audiophile]

 

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Probably a good think, before you get banned for using homophobic slurs

Homophobic slurs? It is widely accepted that fa**ot is nothing but an insult. (Thus I apologize if any LGBT got offended by my "comment" towards Jeremy Clarkson on that topic).

Yeah, maybe where you live?

 

But in most of the Western world and on this forum it's seen as a derogatory term that is used to insult. You didn't call him a "fa**ot" to give him a compliment, did you? You called him a "fa**ot" because you wanted to insult him.

 

EDIT: Ah and here it is. As soon as I post I see you above me calling them "pathetic f*cks".

[mdr279]

 

Gay people can do whatever they want to, I don't care about anyone, gay, lesbian, straight, transsexual. Pathetic f*cks.

Um, ok then. Not sure what that has to do with anything here, but ok.

 

And there we are again calling them, 'pathetic f*cks'.

[sivispacem]

Pathetic f*cks.

...And this pretty much vindicates everything I've said about you.

[Mr.Mordecai]

Have you ever seen that episode of South Park, Mystery of the Urinal Duece?

 

Honestly, we won't know what is a conspiracy or not. Could he be right? Yes. But that also means he can be wrong. But if it was a conspiracy, why would the government make it seem so DAMN obvious that anyone with a computer and no time can figure it out?

 

[Exkabewbikadid]

 

I am out of these forums for good. Congratulations.

Good bye, Mr. Pathetic fa**ot Goat f*cker. j/k

 

But seriously though, banned.